LAST CHANCE FOR MORE IAF C-17S

[Abingdonboy]

The IAF should definitely push for more of these, originally they had wanted 16, now it looks like only 5 are available and they should grab them before it is too late. For strategic lift there simply is no better solution and if the IAF fails to capitalise now they are going to pay for it in the long term as the 10 C-17s they have now aren't enough to replace the 20-25 IL-76s so they will have to look at other options in the (probably A400) which will just add more costs.

If production of C-17s is being discontinued, how about spares, overhaul etc? Who's gonna do it?

The IAF signed up for the Boeing global support program which guarantees support for the C-17s throughout the life of the aircraft as well as ensuring 85% availability of the fleet. Just think about that for a moment- this is something the alternatives some are proposing here could NEVER match.

 

[Abingdonboy]

Contract is for 12 C-17s right?

The Indian Air Force (IAF) will buy one more Lockheed Martin C 130J Super Hercules medium-lift aircraft apart from the 12 contracted for to make up for the loss of one plane in an accident in March.

That's for C-130J-30s, different aircraft mate


C-130J-30:

C-17:

 

[Swaha]

That's for C-130J-30s, different aircraft mate


C-130J-30:

C-17:

Lolz...sorry man, my mistake!!

 

[Abingdonboy]

Lolz...sorry man, my mistake!!

No worries chap

 

[janon]

Dr. Vivek Lal who was the Director of Boeing India at that time is a relative of Rajiv Gandhi. He appears to be the grand son of Braj Kumar Nehru, former Ambasedor of India and Nehru's first cousin.

So I suppose 2-2.5 billion $ might have gone into Sonia Gandhi account.

Vivek Lal is now head of Reliance Aerospace

So now we know why the C-17 cost us 2-3 times of what it cost Australia.

If it was through FMS as you said above, then there is very little scope for kickbacks, corruption etc. The whole procedure is extremely transparent, at least with respect to the flow of money. The US govt charges an additional 3% for their trouble, but that is well worth paying, to ensure that we don't lose more than that to corruption. That's one of the benefits of going the FMS route - no middlemen, no kickbacks, not a single unaccounted penny.

And yet, with all that, we are paying more than twice what other countries had to. I know that half a billion dollars from that deal went into the establishment of a high altitude engine test facility. I'm hoping that there were other similar benefits we got, for the amount we paid. If not, it looks like we are paying a ransom. Twice what countries richer than us had to pay.

 

[Cat Shannon]

Not needed in my opinion, I would say save the money. 10 is a good number provided there are other transport planes available for smaller work. Globe master is not always necessary.

If we had been rolling in 10 billion spare cash, then yeah, maybe 2 more. Since we don't, I think we don't need to.

 

[uparyupari]

If it was through FMS as you said above, then there is very little scope for kickbacks, corruption etc. The whole procedure is extremely transparent, at least with respect to the flow of money. The US govt charges an additional 3% for their trouble, but that is well worth paying, to ensure that we don't lose more than that to corruption. That's one of the benefits of going the FMS route - no middlemen, no kickbacks, not a single unaccounted penny.

And yet, with all that, we are paying more than twice what other countries had to. I ow that half a billion dollars from that deal went into the establishment of a high altitude engine test facility. I'm hoping that there were other similar benefits we got, for the amount we paid. If not, it looks like we are paying a ransom. Twice what countries richer than us had to pay.

No corruption is the general idea of FMS and G2G deals, but consider the amount we paid to Boeing for the Aircrafts, it STINKS to high heaven.

CAG report has mentioned the cost of the 10 C-17 as 4.1 Billion $. There is no way we paid 410 million $ per Aircraft without any Kickback.

What is worse is that Boeing cheated us in the offset too by getting approval to building a 1950's vintage transonic wind tunnel facility for 3.5 Mach

L&T has already built a Mach 12 Wind tunnel for ISRO

No way a SCAM of this size can happen without Government approval and involvement. Vivek Lal's congress connection was a dead give away. The funny thing is as soon as BJP came to power, Reliance FIRED Vivek Lal as head of its Aerospace division

For the P-8I the IFF was developed by BEL, but was claimed as Offset ToT by Boeing. Boeing even claimed the "cost" of ToT as the offset even though that is illegal and unethical.

Boeing has now got clearance for setting up a high altitude test facility even though India has stopped work on its aero Engine development.

 

[Cat Shannon]

If it was through FMS as you said above, then there is very little scope for kickbacks, corruption etc. The whole procedure is extremely transparent, at least with respect to the flow of money. The US govt charges an additional 3% for their trouble, but that is well worth paying, to ensure that we don't lose more than that to corruption. That's one of the benefits of going the FMS route - no middlemen, no kickbacks, not a single unaccounted penny.

And yet, with all that, we are paying more than twice what other countries had to. I know that half a billion dollars from that deal went into the establishment of a high altitude engine test facility. I'm hoping that there were other similar benefits we got, for the amount we paid. If not, it looks like we are paying a ransom. Twice what countries richer than us had to pay.

A lil more than twice, by plane value.

Infra was a big part of it too. First time we were using a plane that damn big. And we had intentions of using it everywhere possible. Infra would have been multiplied by 4 to 6 times, compared to a smaller country with smaller land to cover.

 

[janon]

No corruption is the general idea of FMS and G2G deals, but consider the amount we paid to Boeing for the Aircrafts, it STINKS to high heaven.

Yep, that it does. And that's why it's puzzling. But note that nobody has raised a voice of protest against this deal - not even Subrahmanian Swamy, who is so ready to allege corruption at the drop of a hat. Nobody in the opposition at that time, nobody in the BJP led govt now, have even muttered a word against that transaction. That's what is making me wonder if there is more to it than meets the eye.

Another possibility of course is that everybody is in Boeing's pockets, which is not a possibility that I want to believe.

 

[uparyupari]

Yep, that it does. And that's why it's puzzling. But note that nobody has raised a voice of protest against this deal - not even Subrahmanian Swamy, who is so ready to allege corruption at the drop of a hat. Nobody in the opposition at that time, nobody in the BJP led govt now, have even muttered a word against that transaction. That's what is making me wonder if there is more to it than meets the eye.

Another possibility of course is that everybody is in Boeing's pockets, which is not a possibility that I want to believe.

India was rocking under FAR BIGGER SCAMS like CWG (10 billion $), 2G (20 billion $) and COAL gate (40 billion $) that 1-2 Billion $ scame was pushed under the carpet.


Boeing flouted offset guidelines, cost India over Rs 1,500cr

American aircraft manufacturer Boeing has cost Indian taxpayers more than Rs 1,500 crore by violating offset guidelines in its aircraft deals with the Air Force and the Navy. A Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) report on the armed forces tabled in Parliament this week criticises the Ministry of Defence for irregularities in offset dispensation in two deals with Boeing: Rs 875 crore was lost in the case of IAF's (Indian Air Force) C-17 Globemaster aircraft; and Rs 750 crore for Navy's P8i aircraft, totalling to Rs 1,625 cr. Offset is a certain percentage of money in a defence deal that has to be invested back in the buyer country by the seller country in some form or the other.

A $2.2 billion deal for eight naval long range maritime reconnaissance (LRMR) aircraft, P8i, was signed between Indian Navy and Boeing in January 2009. Boeing agreed to provide a direct foreign investment (***) offsets worth Rs 750 crore in the form of safety reliability and air-worthiness seminars, transfer of metallurgy, hydraulic laboratory facilities, aero structures, tools and processes. But these were not accepted as valid offset proposals, as the facilities did not qualify to be declared as offsets according to the Defence Procurement Procedure (DPP). Later, Boeing offered training simulators as offsets, but the Defence Acquisition Council (DAC) said that these P8i simulators would not be considered as offsets. This was again reiterated in February 2011 by the DAC in a meeting. But Boeing claimed that the training simulators it was providing should be considered as offsets. It used the term "in kind" "for ready-built training simulators provided to Indian Offset Partners (IOP)", says the CAG report.

The MoD has told the CAG that the Department of Defence Production had accepted training simulators as offsets. But the CAG refuses to accept this as a reply, reminding the MoD that in December 2010 the ministry had clearly refused this provision. According to the CAG report, "The Ministry's reply does not reckon the fact that the elements of offset once included in the contract are liable to be claimed by the vendor. Moreover, even if the claim by the vendor is not admitted by the Ministry, offset deficit of Rs 750 crore would still remain."

Similarly, Boeing's deal for 10 C-17 Globemaster aircraft had offsets worth Rs 875 crore. The deal was concluded in June 2011. Boeing pitched the setting up of a Transonic Wind Tunnel (TWT) at a Defence Research & Development Organisation laboratory as offsets "in kind". The Defence Acquisition Council allowed this despite the fact that it was not an eligible offset. The decision was taken without the mandatory certification from DOFA — the Defence Offset Facilitation Agency, a single window agency to facilitate and look into offsets by manufacturers. It comes under the Department of Defence Production.

The MoD told the CAG that Boeing's investment to set up a Transonic Wind Tunnel facility was accepted by the DAC. But the CAG report says, "The Ministry's reply is silent on whether specific waiver of the Raksha Mantri (RM) was sought for the breach of the DPP provisions. It is also not acceptable because the DAC in the same meeting had maintained that investment in kind through non-equity route was not permissible for offset and only purchase of goods and services by OEM from IOP would so qualify."

Former Minister of State for Defence M.M. Pallam Raju had said in Parliament in August this year, "Considering the experience with offset since its introduction in 2005 and taking note of issues which have cropped up during implementation, Ministry of Defence had undertaken a comprehensive review of the offset policy and all related issues. The revised offset guidelines approved by the Defence Acquisition Council have come into force from August 1, 2012."

 

[janon]

India was rocking under FAR BIGGER SCAMS like CWG (10 billion $), 2G (20 billion $) and COAL gate (40 billion $) that 1-2 Billion $ scame was pushed under the carpet.


Boeing flouted offset guidelines, cost India over Rs 1,500cr

American aircraft manufacturer Boeing has cost Indian taxpayers more than Rs 1,500 crore by violating offset guidelines in its aircraft deals with the Air Force and the Navy. A Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) report on the armed forces tabled in Parliament this week criticises the Ministry of Defence for irregularities in offset dispensation in two deals with Boeing: Rs 875 crore was lost in the case of IAF's (Indian Air Force) C-17 Globemaster aircraft; and Rs 750 crore for Navy's P8i aircraft, totalling to Rs 1,625 cr. Offset is a certain percentage of money in a defence deal that has to be invested back in the buyer country by the seller country in some form or the other.

A $2.2 billion deal for eight naval long range maritime reconnaissance (LRMR) aircraft, P8i, was signed between Indian Navy and Boeing in January 2009. Boeing agreed to provide a direct foreign investment (***) offsets worth Rs 750 crore in the form of safety reliability and air-worthiness seminars, transfer of metallurgy, hydraulic laboratory facilities, aero structures, tools and processes. But these were not accepted as valid offset proposals, as the facilities did not qualify to be declared as offsets according to the Defence Procurement Procedure (DPP). Later, Boeing offered training simulators as offsets, but the Defence Acquisition Council (DAC) said that these P8i simulators would not be considered as offsets. This was again reiterated in February 2011 by the DAC in a meeting. But Boeing claimed that the training simulators it was providing should be considered as offsets. It used the term "in kind" "for ready-built training simulators provided to Indian Offset Partners (IOP)", says the CAG report.

The MoD has told the CAG that the Department of Defence Production had accepted training simulators as offsets. But the CAG refuses to accept this as a reply, reminding the MoD that in December 2010 the ministry had clearly refused this provision. According to the CAG report, "The Ministry's reply does not reckon the fact that the elements of offset once included in the contract are liable to be claimed by the vendor. Moreover, even if the claim by the vendor is not admitted by the Ministry, offset deficit of Rs 750 crore would still remain."

Similarly, Boeing's deal for 10 C-17 Globemaster aircraft had offsets worth Rs 875 crore. The deal was concluded in June 2011. Boeing pitched the setting up of a Transonic Wind Tunnel (TWT) at a Defence Research & Development Organisation laboratory as offsets "in kind". The Defence Acquisition Council allowed this despite the fact that it was not an eligible offset. The decision was taken without the mandatory certification from DOFA — the Defence Offset Facilitation Agency, a single window agency to facilitate and look into offsets by manufacturers. It comes under the Department of Defence Production.

The MoD told the CAG that Boeing's investment to set up a Transonic Wind Tunnel facility was accepted by the DAC. But the CAG report says, "The Ministry's reply is silent on whether specific waiver of the Raksha Mantri (RM) was sought for the breach of the DPP provisions. It is also not acceptable because the DAC in the same meeting had maintained that investment in kind through non-equity route was not permissible for offset and only purchase of goods and services by OEM from IOP would so qualify."

Former Minister of State for Defence M.M. Pallam Raju had said in Parliament in August this year, "Considering the experience with offset since its introduction in 2005 and taking note of issues which have cropped up during implementation, Ministry of Defence had undertaken a comprehensive review of the offset policy and all related issues. The revised offset guidelines approved by the Defence Acquisition Council have come into force from August 1, 2012."

Yes, these are all dubious issues. But all those allegations are about whether Boeing circumvented the offset requirements in questionable tactics.

But with or without any offsets, these aircrafts shouldn't have cost us as much as they did.

BTW, FMS deals and offsets are mutually incompatible, so I think one of your info is inaccurate.

 

[uparyupari]

Yes, these are all dubious issues. But all those allegations are about whether Boeing circumvented the offset requirements in questionable tactics.

But with or without any offsets, these aircrafts shouldn't have cost us as much as they did.

BTW, FMS deals and offsets are mutually incompatible, so I think one of your info is inaccurate.

C-17 Globemaster III Tactical Transport Aircraft - Airforce Technology

The Indian Ministry of Defence signed a $4.1bn agreement with Boeing in June 2011 to acquire ten C-17 airlifters. US Congress authorised the FMS in May 2010.

CAG report is public. It lists the offset requirements.

Both facts are correct.

DPAP | Contract Policy and International Contracting | International Contracting | Offsets of Foreign Military Sales