U.S. Approves Boeing C-17 Globemaster Sale to India

[sudhir007]

U.S. Approves Boeing C-17 Globemaster Sale to India | India Defence

A Letter of Request (LOR) has been issued to the Government of United States of America for procurement of C-17 Globemaster-III aircraft for Indian Air Force (IAF) from United States of America, through Foreign Military Sales (FMS) route. In response, Letter of Offer and Acceptance (LOA) has been received, which is being progressed.

A technology scan was carried out as per the Defence Procurement Procedure 2008 which brought out that the C-17 Globemaster-III aircraft best meets the operational requirements of a Very Heavy Transport Aircraft (VHETAC) class for the Indian Air Force.

This information was given by Defence Minister Shri AK Antony in a written reply to Shri Jai Prakash Narayan Singh in Rajya Sabha today.

 

[Laughing Buddha]

Good news....

But what about the Electronic suite... and what about CISMOA (Communications and Information Security Memorandum of Agreement)

Remember we have to pay 4 % extra for Foreign Military Sales (FMS).
And may be 20 % extra for Isreali and French system

So what would be the actual cost ?

 

[sancho]

Good news....

But what about the Electronic suite... and what about CISMOA (Communications and Information Security Memorandum of Agreement)

Remember we have to pay 4 % extra for Foreign Military Sales (FMS).
And may be 20 % extra for Isreali and French system

So what would be the actual cost ?

And that is still cheap if you compare it with the price that Boeing alone wants for that aircraft. If they still want $580 million for each unit, this is good for the US, but not good for India!

 

[GORKHALI]

Am all against this showcase guys,we could better negotiated with russians and asked them for IL 476 AND ASKED THEM TO TRANSFER ASSEMBLY LINE HERE IN INDIA. With 5.8b$ we could negotiated for atleast 25 IL 476.. After reading those wikileaks and Us diplomacy even against their NATO ALLIES ,am sure when the real worst scenario comes then these C17 GLOBEMASTER'S WILL BECOME " C17 BLUFFMASTER'S " FOR INDIA.

 

[GORKHALI]

I know we need replacement bt what is the use of this elephant when a camel like new IL 476 can do the job. We could upgrade the IL 76 for 10years more like new engines ,new avonics at ukraine... But within 5years IL 476 WILL TRICKLEDOWN TO FORCE.

 

[sancho]

I know we need replacement bt what is the use of this elephant when a camel like new IL 476 can do the job. We could upgrade the IL 76 for 10years more like new engines ,new avonics at ukraine... But within 5years IL 476 WILL TRICKLEDOWN TO FORCE.

The only real advantage that the C17 have over any competitior is the fact that the cargo hold is wide enough to carry MBTs and combined with the high payload it can carry T90, or Arjun. That seems to be the justification for this deal, but lets be honest, that is by far not enough to pay such high costs. I do agree that the C17 is more capable than the IL 76, but not at any costs!

This is mainly a political deal and you can see it on the way it was pushed through. No competition, not even an RFI to other vendors, just to get an idea about the status and capabilities of new developments like the IL 476, AN 124 -2..., AN 70, A400M, or the Kawasaki C-2. There is no way that there was an equal comparison of IAF without getting these infos, like they are saying now and the fact that finance ministry is so quiet although they are so costly says enough.

 

[GORKHALI]

Sanco T90 CAN BE CARRIED BY IL 476 WHICH 52T PAYLOAD AND T9 SAY 48T WITH ERA & AMMO. You tell me why not place Arjun Mbt permanently to border areas,in year 2020 indian army going to have minimum 600arjun and these beast are suitable only for plain and desert not for mountain warfare where T90 COMES HANDY AND IL 476 CAN CARRY THESE.

 

[dbc]

This is mainly a political deal and you can see it on the way it was pushed through. No competition, not even an RFI to other vendors, just to get an idea about the status and capabilities of new developments like the IL 476, AN 124 -2..., AN 70, A400M, or the Kawasaki C-2. There is no way that there was an equal comparison of IAF without getting these infos, like they are saying now and the fact that finance ministry is so quiet although they are so costly says enough.

Admit it, you have a strong anti-US bias.

ACM Naik said, ''We did a comprehensive evaluation of all such available aircraft in the world. The C-17s best met our requirements.''

$4.1bn C-17 aircraft deal set to get bigger, 6 more coming - The Times of India

 

[Capt.Popeye]

The only real advantage that the C17 have over any competitior is the fact that the cargo hold is wide enough to carry MBTs and combined with the high payload it can carry T90, or Arjun. That seems to be the justification for this deal, but lets be honest, that is by far not enough to pay such high costs. I do agree that the C17 is more capable than the IL 76, but not at any costs!

This is mainly a political deal and you can see it on the way it was pushed through. No competition, not even an RFI to other vendors, just to get an idea about the status and capabilities of new developments like the IL 476, AN 124 -2..., AN 70, A400M, or the Kawasaki C-2. There is no way that there was an equal comparison of IAF without getting these infos, like they are saying now and the fact that finance ministry is so quiet although they are so costly says enough.

Sancho, there is not only one reason for the deal. The C-17 has better rough-field performance combined with hot-high parameters. Apart from requiring a smaller flight crew. Apart from better avionics. Apart from better MTBO. That is some of the reasons. The Russian planes are are cheaper (to buy), that is all.

Finally, do you think the AN-124 can land and take of from Leh or some of the other ALGs?

 

[Agnostic_Indian]

More than cost my concerns are centered around the biased agreements and their implications on india.

 

[sancho]

Sanco T90 CAN BE CARRIED BY IL 476 WHICH 52T PAYLOAD AND T9 SAY 48T WITH ERA & AMMO. You tell me why not place Arjun Mbt permanently to border areas,in year 2020 indian army going to have minimum 600arjun and these beast are suitable only for plain and desert not for mountain warfare where T90 COMES HANDY AND IL 476 CAN CARRY THESE.

Hi, not the payload is the problem for the IL's, but the width! The 476 (at least as far as I know) will have the same airframe like the normal IL 76, but will be streched for some meters. The width of the IL 76 cargo hold is 3.45m, while a T90 has a width of 3.78 m, Arjun even 3.86m.
The C17 instead can carry these MBTs not only because of the payload, but also because it has a cargo hold that is wide enough ( 5.49m).

Admit it, you have a strong anti-US bias.

I'm sorry to disappoint you again, I am not against US arms (which should be clear by the fact that I said that the C17 is more capable), but I am pro Indian forces in first place! That's why I always state that I don't want MMRCA to be a political decision.

 

[sancho]

Sancho, there is not only one reason for the deal. The C-17 has better rough-field performance combined with hot-high parameters. Apart from requiring a smaller flight crew. Apart from better avionics. Apart from better MTBO. That is some of the reasons. The Russian planes are are cheaper (to buy), that is all.

Finally, do you think the AN-124 can land and take of from Leh or some of the other ALGs?

First of all, the AN 124 does not offer short landing and take off on unprepared airstrips true, but when it comes to lift capacity, no matter what you need to lift, it beats the C17 hands down, because it is in the very heavy lift class, comparable to C5.
I said it my earlier post too, that the C17 is more capable than the IL 76, but I also mentioned the A 400 and C-2 as alternatives. AFAIK they fulfill all the requirements that you mentioned, while beeing way cheaper per unit and to operate too! So why didn't IAF at least asked for infos from their manufacturers?
Imo especially the A400 would have been a better alternative for IAF as well as our industry, but it's too late for a comparison now. Maybe tomorrow, but tell me one thing please, how important do you think is the MBT lift capability really for IAF and moreover for IA?

G8

 

[dbc]

I'm sorry to disappoint you again, I am not against US arms (which should be clear by the fact that I said that the C17 is more capable), but I am pro Indian forces in first place! That's why I always state that I don't want MMRCA to be a political decision.

ACM Naik said, ''We did a comprehensive evaluation of all such available aircraft in the world. The C-17s best met our requirements.''

So you disagree with your air chief and think you know better than the head of your air force?

 

[Dash]

Sancho, there is not only one reason for the deal. The C-17 has better rough-field performance combined with hot-high parameters. Apart from requiring a smaller flight crew. Apart from better avionics. Apart from better MTBO. That is some of the reasons. The Russian planes are are cheaper (to buy), that is all.
Finally, do you think the AN-124 can land and take of from Leh or some of the other ALGs?

I am not trying to buldoze your discussion with Sancho...But for the bolded part.....

is that the reason we are buying Su-30 MKIs??...

So when we say MKI and and an airlifter are different catagory I agree. but when you compare cost v/s usage, it will be same...when you say cost/vs effectiveness it will be different, thats where C-17 stands little ahead....China also invests on IL-76s and rumors are there that they are planning to acquire IL-476s, that plane isnt bad at all....

So when we compare C-17 and IL 476 against IAF requirements, I will say C-17 suits IAF more than IA. Which is much more than just heavy lift, like projecting power.

$4.1 bn C-17 aircraft deal set to get bigger, 6 more coming - The Economic Times

An extract from the link-

India may well order another six C-17 s after the first 10. The impending final contract for 10 C-17 s is in tune with India’s aim to have swift power projection capabilities, with the region spanning from Persian Gulf to Malacca Strait being seen as the country’s ‘‘primary area of geo-strategic interest’’

 

[shekhar]