What's new

MH-370 and the evolving Indian SAR paradigm - Performance of Indian Navy's P-8I Neptune

Chanakya's_Chant

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Jul 22, 2013
Messages
3,395
Reaction score
28
Country
India
Location
India
MH-370 and the evolving Indian SAR paradigm
Boeing_P-8I_of_the_Indian_Navy.jpg

Boeing P-8I of the Indian Navy

The case of missing flight MH-370 has turned out to be one of the greatest mysteries of the new millennium and now even as the official Australian underwater search draws to a close it is worthwhile to remember that several militaries in the Indo-Pacific mounted very large scale search and rescue (SAR) operations for MH-370 last year.

Garnering a lot of attention during the course of that multilateral SAR effort was the widespread use of maritime surveillance planes deployed on long duration patrols in a bid to locate suspected wreckage over vast stretches of open sea. Indeed, this tragic occurrence seemed to have given navies in the region an opportunity to test readiness levels and operational concepts revolving around contemporary maritime aviation platforms.

The Indian Navy (IN) was naturally a part of the initial international hunt for MH-370 showcasing some of its recent acquisitions such as the Boeing P-8I Neptune Maritime Reconnaissance and Anti-Submarine Warfare (MRASW) aircraft in a SAR role. Moreover, this incident may have also given the IN a view into the nature of its future acquisitions.

Just to recollect, MH370 disappeared from civilian radar some 40 minutes after take-off from Kuala Lampur on March 8, 2014 putatively en route to Beijing and is then believed to have been spotted again due west of Malaysia in the straits of Malacca some 45 minutes later after which it seems to have gone completely off radar.

The international search took place along a 'northern corridor' stretching in an arc from the point of last contact through Northern Thailand, Laos, China into Kazakhstan and a 'southern corridor' leading from Indonesia towards the Southern Indian Ocean Region (IOR), based on Inmarsat satellite data and range calculations taking into the account minimum and maximum speeds that the plane might have flown in. Each of those corridors had been sub-divided into seven quadrants each to allow for a more systematic search. Each quadrant was 720 kilometres long and 720 kilometres wide.

The southern corridor(SC), which was obviously the one in the maritime sphere emerged as the primary zone of focus, with China, Japan and even South Korea joining in the search by deploying maritime surveillance aircraft. Of course given that most of the passengers on board MH-370 were Chinese, Beijing naturally staked a claim to participating in the search in this zone though it did also give it an opportunity to gain some operational experience in the Southern IOR.

A March 16, 2014 Australian satellite image apparently showed two indistinct floating objects in the Southern IOR, the larger being estimated at 24 metres across thereby forming the basis for narrowing down the 'search box' in the SC.

Incidentally both Australia and Malaysia while releasing this information on March 20, 2014 described these sightings at the time as 'credible' leads. The location of this sighting was around 2000 km southwest of Perth, lying on top of a volcanic ridge in waters estimated to be 2,500 to 4,000 metres deep.

A couple of days later China's State Administration of Science, Technology and Industry for National Defense stated that a Chinese satellite had taken an image of an object 22 metres by 13 metres on March 18, 2014. This image pointed to a location 120 km south of where the Australian satellite had viewed two objects a couple of days earlier.

Since the larger object seen in the Australian image was about as long as the one the Chinese satellite detected, it only served to reinforce the attention being given to that remote area in the Southern IOR not very far from Antarctica and one that container ships usually avoid.

As such this search area began to buzz with assets from navies all across the Indo-Pacific looking for the 'larger object' as well as possible floating pallets released from the cargo hold of the missing airliner even though a Norwegian commercial vessel that happened to be in the vicinity actually looked around the location of the Australian sighting, only to find nothing.

At one point over a score naval ships, more than two dozen fixed wing aircraft and several helicopters concentrated their search efforts in the narrowed down search area. Malaysia which had half a dozen ships in the SC last year received support from two Indonesian Air force C-130 Hercules. Australia contributed P-3C Orions in addition to one C-130 operating out Pearce Air Force base in Bullsbrook, 35km north of Perth which served as a hub for the SAR effort in the new search box.

Pearce also supported operations of one US Navy P-8A Poseidon and one P-3C Orion. Other countries that hosted aircraft at Pearce included New Zealand (one P-3), South Korea (one P-3 and one C-130), Japan (two P-3s, two C-130s and one Gulfstream business jet) and even the United Arab Emirates (one Boeing C-17 and one Bombardier Dash 8). Of particular interest to India was the fact that three Chinese aircraft, two Ilyushin IL-76s and one Shaanxi Y-8Q MRASW operated out of Pearce.

The choice of sending two IL-76s seems a little strange however, since these are not particularly suited for this kind of SAR operation, being essentially transports, although one of may have been sent just to support the Y-8Q.

Meanwhile apart from the USN, the IN became the only other navy to deploy P-8s in search of MH 370. That is not surprising since the IN is after all the only other customer for Boeing's P-8 at the moment.

Early on during the disappearance, when there were suspicions of MH-370 having been lost in the Andaman Sea, the IN deployed two Boeing P-8I Neptunes and two Dornier Do-228 aircraft from the Eastern Naval Command's INS Rajali naval air station(NAS), alongside an Indian Air force(IAF) C-130J Hercules probably tasked with dropping marker buoys to determine current and drift conditions.

Subsequently responding to a specific Malaysian request the IN deployed P-8Is alongside an IAF C-130J to the new search box 5,000 km south of Jakarta in the IOR. Overall India h deployed some six warships and five maritime surveillance aircraft last year as part of it contributions towards the effort to locate MH-370.


These long distance SAR patrols for MH-370, gave the IN an opportunity to fine tune the technology on board it's P-8I acquisition. The P-8I's AN/APY-10 radar, a repackaged APS-137 mechanically steered radar has been optimized for littoral surveillance which allows it to look for objects (such as largish debris) amidst sea clutter.

This radar according to the USN has at least six modes: surface search (including simultaneous tracking and scanning), periscope detections, color weather, navigation, synthetic aperture radar (SAR) and inverse SAR (ISAR). The ISAR and scan modes are perhaps the most relevant to locate floating debris. Once suspected debris is located a MX-series EO/IR camera made by L-3 Communications Holdings with 2 megapixel optical zoom provides the visual picture.

The P-8I is also capable of deploying sonobuoys, carried in an internal bay that can trace/receive the acoustic signature of something like a 777's flight data recorder. It is noteworthy that the P-8I can deploy 129 sonobuoys per sortie versus the P-3C's 84.


Indeed Boeing in particular was probably keen that the P-8s performance is showcased vis a vis the pre-eminent legacy MRASW aircraft in the world, Lockheed Martin's P-3C Orion which as we saw was also heavily deployed for the MH-370 SAR effort.

The Boeing 737-based P-8Is equipped with new generation sensors do represent a new Concept of Operations (CONOP) related to MRASW as opposed to legacy propeller aircraft used in that role however. A P-8I flying out of Pearce would take much less time to get to the search box than the P-3C which took about 4hrs to reach the site related to the satellite images mentioned above, with about 2hrs left over for search time.

The P-8I which although has less range capability than the P-3C Orion may actually still be able to spend up to 3-4 hours over the same area on account of its dash speed and thereby lower time of transit. Besides, the P-8I is also air refuelling capable.

The P-3C Orion though also equipped with radar and electro-optical payloads was actually designed to fly low and slow over search areas in an MRASW role trying to locate Soviet nuclear submarines during the cold war.

The P-8I instead relies on its new sensor package for broad area maritime surveillance by scanning large swathes of Ocean quicker, perched at a higher altitude with much less vulnerability to sea surface weather or submarine launched anti-aircraft missiles that are beginning to emerge on the world market. The IN of course is in a unique position to evaluate the merits of these new CONOPS since it has long flown 'low and slow' in the Ilyushin IL-38s, a Cold War era contemporary of the P-3.


Now while the P-8I is certainly well suited to the search part of the mission, the 'rescue' part can actually be accomplished with a different class of aircraft. It is in this context that the proposed purchase of the Japanese US-2 Amphibious SAR aircraft by the IN assumes significance.

Produced by Shinmaywa Industries, the US-2 can fly 4700 km on internal fuel with humanitarian assistance and disaster relief (HADR) payloads at a top speed of about 580 km/hr (cruise speed is 100km/hr lower)and perform short take-off and landing in water with waves up to three meters high.

The IN is in discussions to procure 15 units of this amphibian at a cost of 1.65 billion dollars to be based out of the Andaman and Nicobar Islands which would allow it to cover wide swathes of the IOR. Though a military aircraft, the proposed US-2I being offered to India is a stripped down 'civilian' version which will come without an identification friend or foe (IFF) system. The real delay in sewing up this deal is on account of negotiations pertaining to the co-production of the aircraft in India.

Nevertheless if the US-2 does find its way into the IN's inventory alongside the P-8I and other maritime surveillance aircraft, it would only make the IN's case stronger to act as a lead agency for a future multilateral regional framework that is at constant readiness to undertake joint HADR operations across the IOR.

Source:- IBNLive News Blogs, News Expert Blogs on India, World, Politics, Business, Science & Technology
 
. .
TO cut it short P-8I was UNABLE to find MH-370 :lol:

The entire article is just a marketing write up, ............. funnily it points to the fact that P-8I was unable to do what it was assigned to do.

How on earth will it fine a submarine in the IOC :P
 
.
TO cut it short P-8I was UNABLE to find MH-370 :lol:

The entire article is just a marketing write up, ............. funnily it points to the fact that P-8I was unable to do what it was assigned to do.

How on earth will it fine a submarine in the IOC :P

IN's P8I was confined to a definite area which was pre-assigned by the Malaysian authorities - as if the MH370 was sure to have crashed in the same. :disagree:

MAS.jpg
 
.
IN's P8I was confined to a definite area which was pre-assigned by the Malaysian authorities - as if the MH370 was sure to have crashed in the same. :disagree:

MAS.jpg

That too is true.

I am only questioning the fan boy quality of the article. P-8I is not a mana from heaven. Its a Bloody Expensive platform and comes will all kinds of American strings attached. I can only hope it does not turn out to be a lemon.
 
.
That too is true.

I am only questioning the fan boy quality of the article. P-8I is not a mana from heaven. Its a Bloody Expensive platform and comes will all kinds of American strings attached. I can only hope it does not turn out to be a lemon.

Not sure about those "American strings" when it can actually buzz their nuclear powered aircraft careers like USS Carl Vinson!

Indian 'buzz' on US carrier

Anyways our defence establishment makes sure that any agreements concerning our platforms don't compromise our operational secrecy or readiness - Indian Government refusal to sign Communications Interoperability and Security Memorandum of Agreement (CISMOA) with US led to the integration of many home grown technologies and equipment on board P8I Neptune to compensate for the American ones.

P-8I-Poseidon-schematic.jpg
 
. .
Not sure about those "American strings" when it can actually buzz their nuclear powered aircraft careers like USS Carl Vinson!

Indian 'buzz' on US carrier

Anyways our defence establishment makes sure that any agreements concerning our platforms don't compromise our operational secrecy or readiness - Indian Government refusal to sign Communications Interoperability and Security Memorandum of Agreement (CISMOA) with led to the integration of many home grown technologies and equipment on board P8I Neptune to compensate for the American ones.

P-8I-Poseidon-schematic.jpg

I can tell you that what ever Indian equipment has gone on the P-8I, its peanuts.

Boeing still has a massive Offset requirement to fulfil on this project. That apart There is something called the End Use Monitoring Agreement (EUMA) which the Indian navy and the MoD had to sign to get the P-8I.

This basically means that,

1. EUMA will allow the US to periodically carry out an inspection and inventory of all articles transferred to India. In the negotiations, India strenuously objected to physical inspection and instead sought an inspection of the records and other measures in place. In the end, the Americans had their way, but it was agreed that the physical inspection would be done at a time and place granted by India.

2. The US will have the right to check that India is using any purchased weapon for the purpose for which it was intended.
EUMA restricts what the purchasing country, India, can do with the US-origin defense equipment, even within its own borders.

3. Under the terms of EUMA, India cannot modify the purchased defence article or system in any form.
Also, to prevent the buyer country from freeing itself from dependency on the United States for maintenance, EUMA restricts India from getting US-origin defence equipment serviced by any another country without prior American permission. Even spare parts need to be sourced only from the United States.


This will ensure complete US leverage on operations and Spares. US can decide how and when we can use this equipment. US can also refuse to provide spares and support if they are "unhappy" with us.

Does this remind you a bit about the "East Indian Company" ?


If this was not enough, there will also be pressure to sign Communications Interoperability and Security Memorandum of Agreement (CIS MoA), Mutual Logistic Support Agreement (MLSA).

US will use the existing leverage to arm twist us into signing these. It will not happen today or tomorrow, but it will happen. Modi will not always be the PM. They just need another MMS to become the PM and that is just a matter of time.


You make a deal with the Devil, you always end up paying with blood.
 
.
I can tell you that what ever Indian equipment has gone on the P-8I, its peanuts.

Boeing still has a massive Offset requirement to fulfil on this project. That apart There is something called the End Use Monitoring Agreement (EUMA) which the Indian navy and the MoD had to sign to get the P-8I.

This basically means that,

1. EUMA will allow the US to periodically carry out an inspection and inventory of all articles transferred to India. In the negotiations, India strenuously objected to physical inspection and instead sought an inspection of the records and other measures in place. In the end, the Americans had their way, but it was agreed that the physical inspection would be done at a time and place granted by India.

2. The US will have the right to check that India is using any purchased weapon for the purpose for which it was intended.
EUMA restricts what the purchasing country, India, can do with the US-origin defense equipment, even within its own borders.

3. Under the terms of EUMA, India cannot modify the purchased defence article or system in any form.
Also, to prevent the buyer country from freeing itself from dependency on the United States for maintenance, EUMA restricts India from getting US-origin defence equipment serviced by any another country without prior American permission. Even spare parts need to be sourced only from the United States.


This will ensure complete US leverage on operations and Spares. US can decide how and when we can use this equipment. US can also refuse to provide spares and support if they are "unhappy" with us.

Does this remind you a bit about the "East Indian Company" ?


If this was not enough, there will also be pressure to sign Communications Interoperability and Security Memorandum of Agreement (CIS MoA), Mutual Logistic Support Agreement (MLSA).

US will use the existing leverage to arm twist us into signing these. It will not happen today or tomorrow, but it will happen. Modi will not always be the PM. They just need another MMS to become the PM and that is just a matter of time.


You make a deal with the Devil, you always end up paying with blood.

If we are to look that way then the only option left is to go full indigenous for even the Russians or any other country for that matter is good at arm twisting not alone the US - RUSSIA ARM-TWISTS INDIA: India Gives In to Russia's Terms For High-Priced Tank Ammunition ~ Indian Defence News

When a foreign arms manufacturer is paid for transfer of technology and the licence to assemble a platform - say, a submarine, tank or aircraft - in India. The vendor supplies manufacturing technology and the jigs and tooling needed for assembling components, sub-systems and systems into a full-fledged combat platform. While hard bargaining sometimes obtains the technology to build some of those systems and sub-systems in India, vendors would seldom part with the technology to manufacture complex and high-tech systems, which they developed at enormous cost. A high proportion of the platform, therefore, continues to be supplied from abroad.

Pretty evident from the HAL's Sukhoi-30MKI assembly line in Nashik - While negotiating the contract for 180 Su-30MKIs in the year 2000 (which later went up to 272 fighters) India - the world's largest operator of this aircraft - employed all the leverage it had to extract technology from Russia. Even so, just 51 per cent of the fighter (by cost) is made in India. Russia insisted that all raw material - including 5,800 titanium blocks and forgings, aluminium and steel plates, etc - be sourced from that country. Similarly, HAL builds the fighter's giant AL-31FP engines in Koraput, Odisha, but is bound by the contract to import 47 per cent of the engine (by cost), including high-tech composites and special alloys - crucial secrets that Russia will not part with.

Sukhoi Su-30MKI - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
. .
If we are to look that way then the only option left is to go full indigenous for even the Russians or any other country for that matter is good at arm twisting not alone the US - RUSSIA ARM-TWISTS INDIA: India Gives In to Russia's Terms For High-Priced Tank Ammunition ~ Indian Defence News

When a foreign arms manufacturer is paid for transfer of technology and the licence to assemble a platform - say, a submarine, tank or aircraft - in India. The vendor supplies manufacturing technology and the jigs and tooling needed for assembling components, sub-systems and systems into a full-fledged combat platform. While hard bargaining sometimes obtains the technology to build some of those systems and sub-systems in India, vendors would seldom part with the technology to manufacture complex and high-tech systems, which they developed at enormous cost. A high proportion of the platform, therefore, continues to be supplied from abroad.

Pretty evident from the HAL's Sukhoi-30MKI assembly line in Nashik - While negotiating the contract for 180 Su-30MKIs in the year 2000 (which later went up to 272 fighters) India - the world's largest operator of this aircraft - employed all the leverage it had to extract technology from Russia. Even so, just 51 per cent of the fighter (by cost) is made in India. Russia insisted that all raw material - including 5,800 titanium blocks and forgings, aluminium and steel plates, etc - be sourced from that country. Similarly, HAL builds the fighter's giant AL-31FP engines in Koraput, Odisha, but is bound by the contract to import 47 per cent of the engine (by cost), including high-tech composites and special alloys - crucial secrets that Russia will not part with.

Sukhoi Su-30MKI - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There is no alternative to indigenous.

Dealing with Russia has its challenges, but its a lot safer. Its never a unfair deal. Russians are always fair about their deals. US is always unfair.

US likes to leverage its power and strength to arm twist Nations into agreeing with it.

Russia always bribes nations into agree with it.

Who will you choose to do business with ?

With Russia its always the petty blackmail with short term impact, with US its hard core blackmail will Long term impact.

India does not have plants the make super alloys. No one has prevented us from setting up one. We do not even have raw materials to set up a working plant. Most of the rare earth metals come from China.

If you think dealing with Russia is bad, wait till you deal with the US or France. Consider the delay in Scorpene submarines. It was a deliberate attempt to delay our submarine program. That is why HAL is insisting on guarantees and Dassault is refusing on it.

Why are we not manufacturing the G.E 404 Engine in India ? how about the 414 Engine ? At least we are manufacturing the AL 31 FP.
 
.
Who will you choose to do business with ?

Both - as that's exactly what we are doing and will continue to do so - over dependence on one specific country has it's drawbacks may it be US or Russia.

India does not have plants the make super alloys. No one has prevented us from setting up one. We do not even have raw materials to set up a working plant. Most of the rare earth metals come from China.

India HAS the capability to manufacture super alloys for different kinds of castings and forgings - At least those titanium blocks and forgings, aluminium and steel plates which we import from Russia but on the other hands the very same complex castings and precision forgings are exported by HAL to be used in major Civil Aircraft programs like Airbus A320, Boeing 777 and 737.

Exports
Machining Super Alloys

India is the second largest producer of rare earths after China - our rare earth production is sufficient enough to support our own industries apart from those which we export.

India ramps up rare earths production to meet China challenge
Japan to import rare earth from India - Nikkei| Reuters

If you think dealing with Russia is bad, wait till you deal with the US or France. That is why HAL is insisting on guarantees and Dassault is refusing on it.

One of the potential reasons why France won the MMRCA deal was that it was the only Western nation not to impose sanctions after India Nuclear Tests in 1998 and for the licence it grated back in the 1980's to manufacture the Jaguars along with the vital help during the Kargil conflict. For the guarantee issue - it has been solved following the same mechanism in case of Mirage 2000 upgrade. And in the same deal one of the reasons to sideline the Russians was the delays in their supply chain and of course poor after sales service.

Why are we not manufacturing the G.E 404 Engine in India ? how about the 414 Engine ? At least we are manufacturing the AL 31 FP.

We do manufacture Adour MK 804 / MK 811 engine, Garrett TPE 331-5, Artouste III B, DART 533 - 2 AND 536 - 2T, Allison 501 K for long wither coming from the US Firms or a one of the subsidiaries - what's the big deal in it?

GE, which is also supplying its LM 2500 gas turbine engines for some newer Indian Navy ships,after supplying an initial lot of 18 engines the remaining ones are being progressively assembled/ made in India only. Even then in case of GE404 and GE414 - the components are being manufactured by the GD Multi Nodal Facility in Pune. License production isn't a big deal - give the bucks and get the deal - as simple as that.

IAF has used Fairchild Packets in the 1960s, the Navy used the Lockheed Super Constellations for maritime reconnaissance during the same period. They both were very well used during the 1965 and 1971 wars against a county whom US supported but even then it was US's own hardware which was used against it's own ally - no one talked of those "strings" back then!

We source only second-line equipment from the U.S., such as transport (C-17, C-130J) or maritime patrol aircraft (P-8I). Vital weapons such as missiles and fighters, when they cannot be locally produced, will remain the preserve of France and Russia. What I am trying to say is that no one is a saint out there - neither the Russians nor the Americans - Self-Relaince is the need of the hour - as simple as that.
 
Last edited:
.
Both - as that's exactly what we are doing and will continue to do so - over dependence on one specific country has it's drawbacks may it be US or Russia.

Dependence on ANY country will have its drawback. Pretty much everything significant in our Armed forces comes from Abroad.

India HAS the capability to manufacture super alloys for different kinds of castings and forgings - At least those titanium blocks and forgings, aluminium and steel plates which we import from Russia but on the other hands the very same complex castings and precision forgings are exported by HAL to be used in major Civil Aircraft programs like Airbus A320, Boeing 777 and 737.

Exports
Machining Super Alloys

India is the second largest producer of rare earths after China - our rare earth production is sufficient enough to support our own industries apart from those which we export.

India ramps up rare earths production to meet China challenge
Japan to import rare earth from India - Nikkei| Reuters

1. Forging super Alloy is different from Making super Alloys.
2. We still do not forge world class super alloys. Single crystal blade being on small example.
3. We are PLANNING to mine rare earth metals. It will be ready in the next 6-7 years.

One of the potential reasons why France won the MMRCA deal was that it was the only Western nation not to impose sanctions after India Nuclear Tests in 1998 and for the licence it grated back in the 1980's to manufacture the Jaguars along with the vital help during the Kargil conflict. For the guarantee issue - it has been solved following the same mechanism in case of Mirage 2000 upgrade. And in the same deal one of the reasons to sideline the Russians was the delays in their supply chain and of course poor after sales service.

France does its bit to be Anti American. But its cancellation of Mistral deal with Russia tells us how vulnerable it is to US pressure.

Of course we also pay through our Nose for French support. But I am happy they exist.

We do manufacture Adour MK 804 / MK 811 engine, Garrett TPE 331-5, Artouste III B, DART 533 - 2 AND 536 - 2T, Allison 501 K for long wither coming from the US Firms or a one of the subsidiaries - what's the big deal in it?

GE, which is also supplying its LM 2500 gas turbine engines for some newer Indian Navy ships,after supplying an initial lot of 18 engines the remaining ones are being progressively assembled/ made in India only. Even then in case of GE404 and GE414 - the components are being manufactured by the GD Multi Nodal Facility in Pune. License production isn't a big deal - give the bucks and get the deal - as simple as that.

IAF has used Fairchild Packets in the 1960s, the Navy used the Lockheed Super Constellations for maritime reconnaissance during the same period. They both were very well used during the 1965 and 1971 wars against a county whom US supported but even then it was US's own hardware which was used against it's own ally - no one talked of those "strings" back then!

US has build a SYSTEM that is designed to prevent technology transfer to countries like India,

1. Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) - With 39 member states, the NSG is a widely accepted, mature, and effective export-control arrangement which contributes to the nonproliferation of nuclear weapons through implementation of guidelines for control of nuclear and nuclear-related exports.

2. Zangger Committee - The purpose of the 35-nation Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT) Exporters (Zangger) Committee is to harmonize implementation of the NPT requirements to apply International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards to nuclear exports. The Committee maintains and updates a list of equipment and materials that may only be exported if safeguards are applied to the recipient facility (called the "Trigger List" because such exports trigger the requirement for safeguards).

3. Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) - The 34 MTCR partners have committed to apply a common export policy (MTCR Guidelines) to a common list of controlled items, including all key equipment and technology needed for missile development, production, and operation. MTCR Guidelines restrict transfers of missiles - and technology related to missiles - for the delivery of WMD. The regime places particular focus on missiles capable of delivering a payload of at least 500 kg with a range of at least 300 km -- so-called "Category I" or "MTCR-class" missiles.

4. Australia Group (AG) - Objective is to ensure that the industries of the thirty-eight participating countries do not assist, either purposefully or inadvertently, states or terrorists seeking to acquire a chemical and/or biological weapons (CBW) capability.

5. Wassenaar Arrangement (WA) - The regime with the most extensive set of control lists; it seeks to prevent destabilizing accumulations of arms and dual-use equipment and technologies that may contribute to the development or enhancement of military capabilities that would undermine regional security and stability, and to develop mechanisms for information sharing among the 34 partners as a way to harmonize export control practices and policies.


IF that is not enough, they have Export Administration Regulations (EAR) which is designed to specifically regulate the export or re-export of U.S.-origin dual-use goods, software, and technology.

Department of Commerce administers and enforces regulations that prohibit certain trade and transactions with certain countries, entities, and individuals by U.S. persons or from the United States under the Trading with the Enemy Act and the International Emergency Economic Powers Act.

E.g. Trade embargoes & sanctions/Transactions by the Department of the Treasury.

They have specific laws developed to prevent technology transfer. The three major lists of export-controlled items are Commerce Control List (CCL), the United States Munitions List (USML), and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission Controls (NRCC).


All this is regulated by the Office of Defense Trade Controls in the Department of State's Bureau of Political-Military Affairs. Any technology, how ever small needs to be cleared by them.


We source only second-line equipment from the U.S., such as transport (C-17, C-130J) or maritime patrol aircraft (P-8I). Vital weapons such as missiles and fighters, when they cannot be locally produced, will remain the preserve of France and Russia. What I am trying to say is that no one is a saint out there - neither the Russians nor the Americans - Self-Relaince is the need of the hour - as simple as that.


That is the LEAST we could do. And yes, there is not alternative to Self Reliance, but in the mean while be wary when dealing with the US.
 
.
Flightradar24.com - Live flight tracker!

When there is live tracking (plz after open web click on flightradar24 symbol at left side) How to say missing plane?

US and Australia have SAR system, but as they dont want to reveal it, they did not reveal the true data, and do drama of searching.
 
.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom