Sir, don't mind you comment makes me laugh specially Double crossed U.S -- LOL, is this the reason now U.S is now punishing you for your double cross of the Taliban, haqanni network in afghanistan.
Lets get to the point strainght about your mentioning the term Master -- Can you give some of the reasons and the examples, which makes you think that U.S is the master of the India, and India is not following its independent policies. You must be aware of the fact, that India was the member of NAM, and not the signatory of the CEATO, NATO or Warsaw Pacts.
Quality of US weapons ?? against whom French/European or Russian but what about the cost, the customization options, no fear of spares supply stopped during war and the COST.
Dreams come true for what.
1. F-16 and F-18 -- it might be the dream come true weapon of some countries, but for the country like India, which can buy weapons from any country of the world bar China have the dream of F-16 HE HE give me a break sir, but nobody in In India is interested in F-16. And for F-18 SH, it could only be possible if IAF starts searching for the alternative to the Rafale, and since this is not happening here, so no F-18 either.
2. C-17, C-170 -- Those were for the transportation fleet needs for the IAF and to ease the pressure from the ageing old Soviets AN transport fleet, and one of the important factor, which is the capability to transport artillery to the mountaneous border front, so attach it with the M777 guns deal and that includes the Chinook helli deal also.
3. P-8i -- Since Russian don't have the alternative to the ASR platform such as P-8i, we go for the U.S which is much needed for the anti-Sub role and since there is a threat from the subs of PN and PLAN is growing in the region.
Here is something which you might not know, and I am adding it
Indo- Japan - U.S Fish hook seabed survillence network SOSUS
Well there is no relationship between the comment you are answering, I said it was the Pakistan who is already the signatory of the LSA, BECA, and CISMOA and India signed the deal LEMOA which is different from the LSA, and it gives India equal access to use the U.S bases, and the use of the Bases of India is already mentioned CASE TO CASE, unlike LSA, which gives the U.S to use the Pakistani Bases, but didn't gave Pakistani forces the access to the U.S bases around the world.
I would like to post the comment of an Defence expert PSK
1) The DCNS oriorietary data data, running to 22,400 pages, includes 4,457 pages on underwater sensors, 4,209 pages om above-water sensors, 4,301 pages combat management systems, 493 pages on torpedo launch systems, 6,841 pages on communications systems and 2,138 on navigation systems. This data caters to the Scorpene SSK, Mistral-class LPD & Fremm-class FFGs, & NOT JUST ABOUT SCORPENE SSK ONLY. Hence very few PDF documents have been shared by THE AUSTRALIAN newspaper so far, despite the voluminous data reportably available to it.
2) Secondly, the fact that the data has been redacted indicates that the newspaper first shared it with the Australian ASIS & based upon the latter’s advice, the redaction was done.
3) Now,
how did the data reach the Australian newspaper & why? This is the most interesting part, because it has NOTHING to do with DCNS’ Shortfin Barracuda design (since the RAN will go not with SUBTICS or F-21 HWTs, but with ther CMS from Lockheed Martin & HWTs from Honeywell). Apparently there was a DCNS employee (a retired officer of the French Navy) who was retrenched after the JV between DCNS & NAVANTIA was dissolved in the previous decade, with DCNS then promoting its own CM-2000 Scorpene SSK design & NAVANTIA of Spain promoting its S-80 Scorpene design. The retrenched officer reportedly became a consultant & was actively involved in promoting the S-80 Scorpene SSK for the Indonesian Navy (TNI-AL) & it was the TNI-AL that wanted comparative data for both contenders at that time (especially since neighbouring Malaysia operates two CM-2000 Scorpenes), the S-80, CM-2000, & the Class 209/Type 1400 SSK were being proposed by Daewoo Shipbuilding & Marine Engineering (DSME), before making a final decision. The TNI-AL in December 2011 awarded DSME a US$1.1 billion contract for the construction of the three Class 209/Type 1500 SSKs. At around the samne time, the local Indonesian agent & the retrenched DCNS employee who were promoting the S-80 Scorpene from NAVANTIA probably got in touch with Australian authorities to promote this design for RAN. That’s how the design/performance data package data ended up in Australia & some local Asutralian consultant is the most probable source/supplier of this data to the newspaper. All this will surface in the coming days.
I understand what you are reffering, and you are ignoring the simple fact that it was not leaked from anywhere from the India, and there was no such information to get panic thus, there is nothing which India or IAF could take advantage for the cost of the Rafale, because those informations are not sensitive, rather it is the information which DCDN gave to those parties who are interested in Scorpean Subs to show their technical Specification.
You didn't got my point. To avoid the derailment of the thread, just few keywords
Rafale F3R -- AMCA -- Scorpean --- Nuclear Reactor -- UAE --- M88 engine --- AURA --- nEURON
