$1.65-bn SAR aircraft deal likely to take off during Modi’s Japan visit

[Sergi]

@sancho : i am not buy this only civilian use only BS. I really dont think IN will spend this much amount on something that is restricted in use. If that was the real case purchase whould have been through home department and would have given to CG not IN
There must be something we dont know

 

[sancho]

This is what I heard on this particular systems. Overhaul periods are almost twice of the any other comparable platforms. the Life cycle costs are incredibly low, Failure rates on component levels shows extreme quality engineering, apart from that documentation on calibration of key components along with the process and technician training is being also included in the package.

All good points for the aircraft in general, but unrelated to any role, especially about the support of the CBG.

Cost might look big but there is a good reason for charging that cost on quality....

Quality is good, but the cost must also justify the importance these aircraft would bring for the defence of the country and the fact remains, that SAR is no critical role for the defence, in fact IN would not be in charge for that in India, this role would fall to the coast guard, like it is in many other countries and would we really want to provide ICG with such expensive toys?
If they would include ASW capabilities, it would make more sense, but it doesn't and ASW is clearly more important than SAR for IN. Keep in mind that we could buy roughly 7 or 8 x Boeing P8I's for the same cost of these US2's and which aircraft will bring more capability and importance for Indias defence?

i am not buy this only civilian use only BS. I really dont think IN will spend this much amount on something that is restricted in use. If that was the real case purchase whould have been through home department and would have given to CG not IN
There must be something we dont know

You shouldn't give too much importance to the term, it's just a way around their laws. More important is the fact, that even if we would openly say it's a military aircraft, what difference would it make? Is it a good transport aircraft for normal military cargo roles? No
Is it a combat aircraft with credible attack capability? No
So the terms doesn't matter, since we will transport minor ammount of troops or military cargo with it, to places where normal transport aircrafts can't be used, while it's primary role remains to be the SAR role.
If you look at the deal from a political point of view however, this is a very low risk deal IF Japan want to change it's export laws. It isn't a real arm / weapon like a submarine, frigate, or a tank would be and the "civilian" role will have importance, so the opposition of changing the law based on this sale might be minimal. But that's their side, for us it's important to see what we get in return, because as shown, the aircraft itself has only a minor operational effect on Indias defence at all, nor does it offer any industrial high techs, that India would be interested to get. So unless they also offer other techs unrelated from this aircraft, I don't see much to justify such cost.

 

[Abingdonboy]

capabilities of the a/c are immense, and It will be multi purpose a/c for the CBG support. IN has pushed hard for this a/c and I suspect this flying boat will have quite a few aces up it's sleeve. Roles will range from elint, Airborne command post, supply system etc, with the capability to ferry stores from replenishment ship right upto the cbg if needed.

If that would had any importance for IN, they would had picked the Be 200, because it can carry more spare and supplies as well as passengers, or litters in MEDIVAC roles at higher speeds to and from the CBG. Also it's disadvantages of a longer take off range, wouldn't play a role anymore.
The US 2 on the other side offer good performance in patrolling a large area (at lower speeds), to take off and land at short distances, be it in SAR role or to supply remote Islands in the A&N chain. So these roles might had the main importance, but do they really justify more than $100 million per unit, especially if the actual demand of such aircraft is so low (15 only)?
Compare that to to price and game changing capabilities that a Rafale or a FGFA brings!

Btw, if support of the CBG has any importance for IN, they would also take V22's which now are down at around $70 million a piece, could be refuelled in air and actually land on the carrier itself while they are on the move and not force to stop at least 1 vessel to take over the supply.

The US-2 doesn't just give the ability to emergency supply CBGs but also supply and evacuate personnel from India's Sub fleet. As well as a long range SAR capability India has never had before.


@sancho IMHO the US-2 is the more advanced machine when compared to the Be 200 and will also provide the logistical advantage of having the same engine as the IAF's C-130Js and (potentially the IAF's next transport a/c procurement) the C-27J.

Additionally this criticism of the $100mn price tag is so arbitrary as if the only thing you should be spending $100+ mn apiece on are fighter jets- what about the C-17? That is a transport a/c with no armament to speak of and that costs almost TWICE as much as the US-2.

^^^ This says it all really, doesn't it?

For the Indian context the US-2 is just the best amphibian out there.

@sancho : i am not buy this only civilian use only BS. I really dont think IN will spend this much amount on something that is restricted in use. If that was the real case purchase whould have been through home department and would have given to CG not IN
There must be something we dont know

It's nonsense. The IN is the purchaser- they aren't a civilian organisation they are inherently a MILITARY force. This is just because of the constitutional issues Japan has meaning it has to look at rather creative ways to get around it. The JMSDF recently commissioned a LHD but labelled it a "destroyer". They are changing there ways and getting more aggressive and the whole constitutional matter was even being discussed as to whether they needed it anymore.

The Chinese have been the catalyst for all this and the Japanese President is VERY keen to get close to India and especially Modi- he only follows three people on twitter, his wife, the former Mayor or Tokyo and now Modi. He will do what India wants.

 

[sancho]

The US-2 doesn't just give the ability to emergency supply CBGs but also supply and evacuate personnel from India's Sub fleet. As well as a long range SAR capability India has never had before.

There is nothing special that the US 2 offers, to supply the subfleet with cargo or passengers, that's what any amphibian aircraft could do, especially since no space restrictions would make it more difficult. That's why if that would had any importance, the speed, the payload or the internal size of the Be 200 would make it more suitable.

IMHO the US-2 is the more advanced machine when compared to the Be 200

Possible, but that doesn't make it automatically better in any role / mission. For SAR in the Bay of Bengal, it surely is the better choice. For fast supply of cargo and passengers to support a CBG, it is not.

are fighter jets- what about the C-17? That is a transport a/c with no armament to speak of and that costs almost TWICE as much as the US-2.

They are because they can do things, other aircrafts cant (a Rafale can do deep strikes, LCA can't, the C17 can lift heavy loads to strategic ranges, the C130J can't..., but that doesn't fit to the US 2 in comparison to other amphibian aircrafts, it only can do some things slightly better than the others, that's it!

 

[Abingdonboy]

There is nothing special that the US 2 offers, to supply the subfleet with cargo or passengers, that's what any amphibian aircraft could do, especially since no space restrictions would make it more difficult. That's why if that would had any importance, the speed, the payload or the internal size of the Be 200 would make it more suitable.

Do you not also think it is important the amphibian is also actually able to serve in the majority of the IOR?


This image says a lot:

The Be 200 might be able to carry more and fly faster but if it can't actually land in the IOR's waters then it is a bit pointless is it not sir?


Additionally bigger is not always better is it? This is another An-124 vs C-17 or Mi-26 vs Ch-47 debate.

My two cents- stay as far away from Russian equipment where possible unless they are offering cutting edge tech (FGFA/MKI). India has been burned enough times by their pi$$-poor after sales support, low availability rates and generally poor performance.

A nice overview of what the US-2 offers to the IN:

 

[surya kiran]

There is nothing special that the US 2 offers, to supply the subfleet with cargo or passengers, that's what any amphibian aircraft could do, especially since no space restrictions would make it more difficult. That's why if that would had any importance, the speed, the payload or the internal size of the Be 200 would make it more suitable.



Possible, but that doesn't make it automatically better in any role / mission. For SAR in the Bay of Bengal, it surely is the better choice. For fast supply of cargo and passengers to support a CBG, it is not.

The Be200 cannot operate freely in the IOR. Wave heights are over 1.3 metres, which is the ceiling for the same.

 

[Indo-guy]

It isn't armed but that doesn't make it a civilian plane. It will still be operated by the IN- the military so it is still a military plane. It's like saying the C-17 is for civilian purposes.


I think the price tag is justified, it is an exceptional a/c and will come in very handy for long-range SAR missions, insertion/extraction of SOFs and supplying of India's many island territories.

Comparison with C-17 is absolutely erroneous . By right C-17 is a military transport aircraft and has been purchased for the same purpose as such . In sharp contrast this particular craft is being made available to us under strict ' civilian ' use clause .

Remember Japan is very conscious and particular about its accords and agreements . This is the reason why japan is playing hardball and despite several years we have not succeeded in finalizing nuclear deal with japan.

Don't presume that we will be able to get this craft under ' civilian' pretext and later we can divert it for military purpose .

Besides at the time when number of crucial deal are stalled because lack of funds ..how can we justify spurging our money on so called ' Ice breaker ' deal .

India needs to distribute its resources well . I can't reconcile with purchase of such a costly craft which is not going to be of direct military use especially at such an exorbitant cost .

To just compare we are getting marvelous 4.5 gen fighter crafts like Su35 at 100 million dollar a piece and here we are spending 110 million dollars on this SAR craft ..that too with friend - or - foe recognition system removed .

its a politically significant deal and must be clenched for breaking the ice.

For politically significant deal we are shelling out 110 millin dollar for SAR craft which does not bring any state of the art technology to us ( like Sukhoi or Rafale would bring ) .that too the craft will have to be necessarily limited for civilian purpose ...

Is India in position to splurge this kind of money when number of crucial and immediately needed deals are stalled due to lack of funds just to break ice with japan ?

This ice breaking with Japan is proving too costly for us ....

If you need to spend money to ' buy ' this kind of friendship ...perhaps that friend and that friendship is really not worth it ....

 

[Indo-guy]

For the Indian context the US-2 is just the best amphibian out there.

US 2 may be the best amphibian out there ....did anyone dispute that ?

Here question is about IN priority .

with its submarine fleet dangerously depleted IN has some other immediate priorities that such fancy SAR crafts which can't be of direct military use .

Our resources are too limited ....and all our forces have seen stalling of major deal due to funds crunch . How can you justify such financially exorbitant deal just because the craft is good ?

why do not you think from overall defense preparedness point of view ?

Can we do without these SAR crafts ( forget about what value it will bring ) ?
is it so essential and vital for Indian navy's defense preparedness today ?

You will get your answers .

This is not the question whether craft is good or no .

this is the question about Our immediate priorities ....

It is laughable that when our submarine fleet has depleted so drastically we are planning to buy these expensive crafts with little direct naval utility strictly from war preparedness point of view ....

@sancho : i am not buy this only civilian use only BS. I really dont think IN will spend this much amount on something that is restricted in use. If that was the real case purchase whould have been through home department and would have given to CG not IN
There must be something we dont know

Ok ...let us for a second assume that there is tacit understanding between Japan and India ..that to get around Japanese self imposed restrictions from its post war constitution Japan will allow purchase of this craft under civilian pretext and will subsequently ignore the military use of craft by India .

So what ?

what great advantage this craft is going to bring to Indian navy so that we should purchase it despite its mind boggling bill ?

I just can't understand how some of us have been led astray by great specifications of this craft ....

Question is Indian navy rich enough to do such extravagant shopping when it is facing dangerous erosion of its submarine capability ....?

I personally think this deal should not be consummated for next few years ....till our economy is back on track and we are rich enough to throw this kind of money on these crafts with little direct military utility ....

 

[Indo-guy]

India must never forget that Japan is a close US ally, and the US allies are usually more unpredictable than the US itself. We must not sign any deal without a good offset clause.

Well I agree and disagree with you same time .

Indeed American allies can equally or even more unreliable than US itself ...
Japan is a different ball game altogether .

But although Japan is recently warming up with India because tremendous risk that it is facing with China .

( Majority of Chinese are extremely virulent about Japan and hate them to the core ....If at all china goes to war with some country ..it will be Japan . and for this reason alone Japan has started warming up with India . However Japan is victim of its own history .

It has bound itself in knots in post war constitution to save its monarchy ....

The post war constitutions forbids Japan from making any concessions that India may be expecting ....

Unless japan goes for radical constitutional reforms ( which was Abe's agenda ...which he has failed to fulfill so far ) any significant benefits to India from Japanese military technology is out of bounds for Indian military .

Is not it very telling that despite vying to get Indian aboard Japan has played hard ball in negotiating Civilian nuclear deal and and so far it has not expressed any willingness for any joint ventures with India ?


Japan is a strange country ...although I advocate closer ties with Japan.

Relations with Japan will always be business like ....Japan can never be anybody's buddy .

We can't and shouldn't expect Japan to go out of its ways to accommodate India ...at least so far it has not .

and if I am correct ..it won't

 

[godofwar]

Japan is a strange country ...although I advocate closer ties with Japan.

Relations with Japan will always be business like ....Japan can never be anybody's buddy .

We can't and shouldn't expect Japan to go out of its ways to accommodate India ...at least so far it has not .

and if I am correct ..it won't

Japan's mutual defense treaty with US directly contradicts your point.
They even sanctioned Iran to the detriment of their own national interests at uncle sam's behest.At time when their economy was still reeling from Fukushima I might add.
To give a more recent example, they again toed american line on Ukraine even though they need Russian help if they are to stand upto China in East sea

If China and even India can resist US pressure on a regular basis, so can the Japs.
But they choose to remain in 'murica's good graces instead.

I think this shows they take their commitments very seriously and hence they are understandably reluctant to jump in the bed with anyone, least of all India which has only recently joined the big boys club.

I would also like to add that Indo-Japanese ties have come a full circle since 90s.
Earlier, India was trying its best to woo Japan during early days of "Look East" policy while Japan ignored us and invested in China in the hope that their investments will quell the Chinese anger for Japanese actions in WW 2.

Now its Japan's turn to seduce India to shore up their defense vis a vis the CHinese.
Thier whole strategy will depend on level of Indian participation.
Interesting times ahead.

 

[Indo-guy]

Japan's mutual defense treaty with US directly contradicts your point.
They even sanctioned Iran to the detriment of their own national interests at uncle sam's behest.At time when their economy was still reeling from Fukushima I might add.
To give a more recent example, they again toed american line on Ukraine even though they Russian help if they are to stand upto China in East sea

If China and even India can resist US pressure on a regular basis, so can the Japs.
But they choose to remain in 'murica's good graces instead.

I think this shows they take their commitments very seriously and hence they are understandably reluctant to jump in the bed with anyone, least of all India which has only recently joined the big boys club.

I would also like to add that Indo-Japanese ties have come a full circle since 90s.
Earlier, India was trying its best to woo Japan during early days of "Look East" policy while Japan ignored us and invested in China in the hope that their investments will quell the Chinese anger for Japanese actions in WW 2.

Now its Japan's turn to seduce India to shore up their defense vis a vis the CHinese.
Thier whole strategy will depend on level of Indian participation.
Interesting times ahead.

I am sorry ...you are wrong there .

By buddy ...I meant a close friend .

what do you make of relationship between Japan and America ....?

are they close friends ???

The post world war II Japan 's emperor Hirohito could have been executed for war crimes ...

in order to prevent revolt by average Japanese people who worship Emperor like God ( even today ) ....US spared Japanese monarchy .

The great price for saving monarchy japan paid for the in the form of new constitution it adopted .


please remember nobody can ever have " EQUAL " relationship with USA .

The defence treaty with Japan allowed US to have bases on Japanese islands especially Okinawa...which many Japanese resent ( but they have no option but to relent )..

You must have been totally mislead by so called wording of mutual defence treaty .

US guaranteed defence cover to japan in exchange of bases on Jpanaese soil and Japan's self imposed restrictions on its defence forces .

Japan's relationship with US is much more complex ...and definitely not that of " Buddy "

 

[godofwar]

I am sorry ...you are wrong there .

By buddy ...I meant a close friend .

what do you make of relationship between Japan and America ....?

are they close friends ???



Japan's relationship with US is much more complex ...and definitely not that of " Buddy "

Japan is a close "buddy" of the US, even if the gesture is not fully reciprocated.

And btw whats with your Nehruvian idealistic fascination with equality and morality in diplomatic relationships ?
How can you expect US to cede diplomatic space to a weaker country ?
Does India treat every foreign country equally ?

 

[Indo-guy]

Japan is a close "buddy" of the US, even if the gesture is not fully reciprocated.

It was not a Japan's choice ....It was imposed on Japan .

US as a victor had imposed itself on Japan a servitude .

Japan accepted it ...it has no other choice but to comply ..because it is bound by law to honor its commitment .

Paradoxically ..for Japanese honor is everything .... and for honor of its commitment Japan has accepted this arrangement ( which is dishonorable in every sense )

US on other hand has held Japan in virtual servitude for past 6 decades ...only country which dared to attack its mainland !!!


Japan is ally ...not buddy !

You can call UK as US's buddy ..may be ...but even that relationship is not any sense of equality or mutual feelings that are expected within friends ....

 

[godofwar]

It was not a Japan's choice ....It was imposed on Japan .

US as a victor had imposed itself on Japan a servitude .

Japan accepted it ...it has no other choice but to comply ..because it is bound by law to honor its commitment .

Paradoxically ..for Japanese honor is everything .... and for honor of its commitment Japan has accepted this arrangement ( which is dishonorable in every sense )

US on other hand has held Japan in virtual servitude for past 6 decades ...only country which dared to attack its mainland !!!


Japan is ally ...not buddy !

You can call UK as US's buddy ..may be ...but even that relationship is not any sense of equality or mutual feelings that are expected within friends ....

Its pretty silly to argue whether japan should be called an ally or a buddy of the US, dont you think ?

Concepts like friendship are not applicable to international relations in the traditional sense, else we would have seen countries getting married to each other.

Joking aside, the US is not imposing its will on Japan.
It is ludicrous to suggest US is somehow keeping Japan in servitude.
Infact, it is downright insulting to the intellect of Japanese people.

Both Japan and US feel the relationship is mutually beneficial .The day Japan starts to think the cost benefit ratio is not in its favour, they will scrap whatever arrangement they have with US.
I think the process has already started.

 

[Indo-guy]

Its pretty silly to argue whether japan should be called an ally or a buddy of the US, dont you think ?

US is not imposing its will on Japan.
It is ludicrous to suggest US is somehow keeping Japan in servitude.
Infact, it is downright insulting to the intellect of Japanese people.

Both Japan and US feel the relationship mutually beneficial .The day Japan starts to think the cost benefit ratio is not in its favour, they will scrap whatever arrangement they have with US.
I think the process has already started.

Having had to host American forces on Japanese soil ..which Japanese people itself resent ....but can't get rid of it ...Don't you think that virtually amounts to servitude ?

Forget the semantics ...but look at purely at the facts.

Even if Japan wishes ...can it get rid of US ?

It is for this reason I have always warned of getting too close with US .

Once you get entangled with that country ...it's not easy to get rid off it.

US has always conquest countries and then subsequently subjugated them forever .

( they have to be credited for repeating this feat )

all of the countries that US conquested after disastrous military campaigns ...were turned Pro US ...how is that US has managed to do that repeatedly ....

In that question lies the answers to why US is sole superpower today .

Believe me , despite after unimaginable carnage of Philipino people in " War of Phillipines" ....today Philipinos consider US as the best friend .

Despite humiliating defeat and atomic explosions Japanese today consider US as great ally . why ???

This is not question of intelligence of Japanese people ...this a question of American strategy which has worked almost all the time where in after having won particular country they have always managed to turn into virtually vassal Pro US state ....


Your statement that US is not imposing its will ...is fallacious .

Well US has made itself indispensable ....and have left no real choice to Japan .

I hope you will understand what I am trying to say .

Denial of second choice ...is almost same as coercion into accepting first choice !