Army Chief warns against govt-to-govt deals with US

[AJSINGH]

Government to government deals makes acquisitions of weapons quicker and avoids the headache of govt rules in the middle unlike the long time consuming tender bids. It also leaves less room for corruption by middlemen who are more so involved in tenders.

also we get deals at much higher price and also FMS is the way to score geo political points , why FMS only with America ,why not with Russia ?

 

[ahmedsid]

also we get deals at much higher price and also FMS is the way to score geo political points , why FMS only with America ,why not with Russia ?

Because dealing with Russia is not as much as a hassle as it is dealing with the USA. If we buy straight off from Boeing or LM or any others, things will get delayed, because ultimately the Govt of USA decides whether we get to buy it at the end stage. So here, we finish off the end stage, get USA to buy it for us, and we get rid of the time wastage and all which will be there if we do so otherwise. My knowledge on this is limited, but this is what I understand, maybe someone else can explain better and correct me. God Speed

 

[ppgj]

why FMS only with America ,why not with Russia ?

sir, SU/Russia has been the biggest beneficiary of this. mig 21, mig 23, mig 25, mig 27, mig 29, su 30 mki, t-72, t-90, il 76, frigates..... it is endless list which went by the direct (govt to govt) route!!

may be the word FMS is a new nomenclature vogue in the recent days. =xD

 

[AJSINGH]

sir, SU/Russia has been the biggest beneficiary of this. mig 21, mig 23, mig 25, mig 27, mig 29, su 30 mki, t-72, t-90, il 76, frigates..... it is endless list which went by the direct (govt to govt) route!!

may be the word FMS is a new nomenclature vogue in the recent days. =xD

well what you are talking about was before FMS was started and that was cold war era where we could not even think about weapons from USA , thats why Russia was/is our principal weapons supplier.

 

[Known_Unknown]

Government to government deals are preferable to politicians because they can receive kickbacks, and the tender process is preferred by the military because they get to set the requirements and thus manipulate the result in their favour thereby obtaining kickbacks. It's all a cesspool of corruption and unethical dealings. It's a wonder India manages to defend herself at all.....thank god her worst enemies are equally corrupt and motheaten. China, however, is not.

 

[ppgj]

well what you are talking about was before FMS was started and that was cold days era where we could not even think about weapons from USA , thats why Russia was/is our principal weapons supplier.

it has nothing to do with cold war though i agree with you on the rest of your post.

any military equipment sale by the US in a govt to govt method takes the name FMS (foreign military sales) program. the fact that india is procuring some items from US under this programme is why one keeps hearing the word so often now.

here is how it is defined -

Foreign Military Sales (FMS)

The Foreign Military Sales (FMS) program is the government-to-government method for selling U.S. defense equipment, services, and training. Responsible arms sales further national security and foreign policy objectives by strengthening bilateral defense relations, supporting coalition building, and enhancing interoperability between U.S. forces and militaries of friends and allies. These sales also contribute to American prosperity by improving the U.S. balance of trade position, sustaining highly skilled jobs in the defense industrial base, and extending production lines and lowering unit costs for key weapon systems.

The Department of Defense has launched a major effort to reform the current foreign military sales system and to ensure that this valuable program remains viable into the next millennium. This reform effort will focus on improving the FMS system's performance and adopting better business practices wherever possible. Total sales through FY2003 can be found on the DSCA Research Page.

What is Security Assistance Brief (entering DISAM)

http://www.dsca.osd.mil/home/foreign_military_sales.htm

it is not an indian term or GOI programme!!!!

the same method was adopted with SU and now with Russia but FMS term is not used because it is neither an indian nor a russian programme. but it is the same draped in a different form. india is still procuring SU -30 MKI's via the direct route.

 

[BunBunCake]

The IAF is currently in the final stages of negotiations for purchase of $2.2 billion worth 10 C-17 aircraft and the Army is finalizing the purchase of howitzers.

We could buy 60 IL-76 (newest ones) for that $2.2 Billion.

Or 25 AN-124's (which carry more payload than the C-17)

You guys still think this was "preferred" by our armed forces? They evaluated no other transport aircraft before approaching the C-17.

Surely the C-17 is better than those two AC I mentioned, but that price tag is huge. It's US lobby, and our politicians being idiots.

 

[nrj]

Indian C17 price is not quoted as IAF's specs has not been evaluated by Boeing yet. Sell clearance is obtained from congress. Now the specs evaluation & price quoting will be done. After which price negotiations will be carried out by GOI/MOD on corporate level & government-government level. Then agreement will be signed. Then we can decide whether the price/product ratio is justified or not.

 

[ppgj]

We could buy 60 IL-76 (newest ones) for that $2.2 Billion.

Or 25 AN-124's (which carry more payload than the C-17)

where do you get those figures?? 60 IL-76's or 25 AN-124's??

can you show me a link to support your claim??

You guys still think this was "preferred" by our armed forces? They evaluated no other transport aircraft before approaching the C-17.

whether "preferred" by IAF or not, the fact remains today, there is no other aircraft in the same class which is in production. hence the question of evaluation does not arise.

Surely the C-17 is better than those two AC I mentioned, but that price tag is huge. It's US lobby, and our politicians being idiots.

yes the price is huge but if you read the US press release, the price includes total support including spares, training, infra, ground support equipment etc.. the base price is 2.2 billlion $$. whether IAF opts for all sundry support or not is a question which will be answered in the coming days.

 

[Agantrope]

yes the price is huge but if you read the US press release, the price includes total support including spares, training, infra, ground support equipment etc.. the base price is 2.2 billlion $$. whether IAF opts for all sundry support or not is a question which will be answered in the coming days.

We havent signed CISMoA, so many crucial electronics will not be present, so the price is obviosuly a day light robbery to me.

Including support a price of a AC is $580M is justifiable? that too without any crucial electronics.

 

[AJSINGH]

it has nothing to do with cold war though i agree with you on the rest of your post.

any military equipment sale by the US in a govt to govt method takes the name FMS (foreign military sales) program. the fact that india is procuring some items from US under this programme is why one keeps hearing the word so often now.

here is how it is defined -



http://www.dsca.osd.mil/home/foreign_military_sales.htm

it is not an indian term or GOI programme!!!!

the same method was adopted with SU and now with Russia but FMS term is not used because it is neither an indian nor a russian programme. but it is the same draped in a different form. india is still procuring SU -30 MKI's via the direct route.

so why is F-18 SH or F-16 taking part in MMRCA competition , FMS is just the way to push weapons deal for much higher price. On one hand you cant buy USA weapons from tender ( read F-16 or F-18 ) and on the other hand buying C-17 from FMS, why not let C-17 compete with Il-476 or An-124 , by the way the lowest bidder wins , in that case it would be the new Il-476

 

[AJSINGH]

where do you get those figures?? 60 IL-76's or 25 AN-124's??

can you show me a link to support your claim??



whether "preferred" by IAF or not, the fact remains today, there is no other aircraft in the same class which is in production. hence the question of evaluation does not arise.



yes the price is huge but if you read the US press release, the price includes total support including spares, training, infra, ground support equipment etc.. the base price is 2.2 billlion $$. whether IAF opts for all sundry support or not is a question which will be answered in the coming days.

The new models of the Il-76 indicate a substantial R&D investment, and an effort to make the Il-76 a serious competitor (mainly on price, at about $50 million each) with the C-17 (which costs about four times as much, and is able to carry up to 100 tons). What the C-17 is best at is carrying about half that weight, half way around the world, non-stop

so Il476 costs 50 million and the total deal of C-17 is 1 billion , now 1 billion is 1000million ,so if we take the base price as 2.2 billion then in million it is 2200 million ,now lets divide it with 50million price of Il-476 , then it comes to 44 aircraft , remember 44 aircraft as opposed 10 C-17.
There are far more Il-76's in use than all of America's four engine jet transports (C-5, C-141, C-17) put together. Over 900 Il-76s were manufactured over the last thirty years, with nearly a hundred exported, so far, mainly to Cuba, Iraq, China, India, Libya and Syria

now if we take An-124 , it costs between 70million-100million , so let us take 100 million as the price of An-124 , now 2.2 billion is 2200million ,now lets divide it with 100million ,so we get 22 aircraft of An-124 . so which is better 10 C-17 or 44 IL-476 and 22 An-124


and An-124 is in production and so is Il-476 .

 

[gratewite]

Just a doubt regarding FMS purchasing. Will the armed forces get a chance to evaluate the weapon systems prior to a purchase through FMS?. Normally in a tender process army does conducts a weapons trial. Is this applicable in case of FMS

 

[ppgj]

so why is F-18 SH or F-16 taking part in MMRCA competition ,

simple. they were sent RFP's for the contest.

FMS is just the way to push weapons deal for much higher price.

historically western equipments have cost more. no denying that. at the same time they have been qualitatively superior and their support system works better of course at a cost.

On one hand you cant buy USA weapons from tender ( read F-16 or F-18 ) and on the other hand buying C-17 from FMS,

why can't we buy f-16/f-18?? are you referring to the reservations india/iaf has about EUMA restrictions??(i agree there) if yes, that is a different point of debate. the fact that f-16/f-18 are participating in the contest is for the sole reason of selling them!!

what about C-17 purchase via FMS??

let me enumerate a few points here -

1. wide bodied C-17 allows you take in a tank (be it Arjun or T-90) which a IL-76 can't because of width restrictions. how important this requirement for IA is not clear.

2. IAF may be needing the transport aircraft urgently based on their assessment wrt their IL 76 fleet and their spares position, their servicing situation and the situation at the OEM's.

3. the cargo carrying capability that a C-17 (75 tons) far exceeds IL 76 (48 tons) meaning low number of sorties for high cargo transport.

why not let C-17 compete with Il-476 or An-124 , by the way the lowest bidder wins , in that case it would be the new Il-476

how can they compete when they are not even in production??

as for AN-124 here is what wiki says -

The An-124 was manufactured in parallel by two plants: the Russian company Aviastar-SP (ex. Ulyanovsk Aviation Industrial Complex) and by the Kyiv Aviation Plant AVIANT, in Ukraine. Series production ceased with the break up of the Soviet Union. The last five unfinished airframes left from the Soviet times were completed in 2001 (1), 2002 (1), and 2004 (3). While currently no An-124 are being produced, Russia and Ukraine have agreed to resume the production in the Q3 2008.[5]

In May 2008, at the Berlin Air Show, it was reported that the governments of Russia and Ukraine were closing in on final details to restart production of the An-124. The new variant, to be known as the An-124-150, will feature several new features including a maximum lift capacity of 150 tonnes.[8] However, an announcement by Antonov's partner, United Aircraft Corporation in May 2009 does not include any planned production for An-124s in the period 2009 – 2012

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonov_An-124#Design_and_development

also sir, IL 476 is yet to fly.

As of mid-2008 the Ulyanovsk Aircraft Factory was preparing for the production of a brand-new version of the Ilyushin Il-76, called the Il-476.

The first IL-476 rises into the air in 2010 and during the year will be flight-tested. This project is very complicated because it involves the transfer of the factories in Voronezh and Ulyanovsk on a technological basis. Despite the difficulties, the project is implemented in accordance with established deadlines.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/russia/il-476.htm

as against these C-17 is up and running and is being flown by mainly NATO countries.

ADDED LATER :

as for the cost of IL 76, the phalcon deal with Israel gives an indication -

In January 2004, India and Israel signed a $1.1 billion contract for 3 Phalcon airborne warning and control system (AWACS) aircraft, as part of a $1.5 billion tripartite agreement with Russia.

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/Indian-AWACS-Moving-Forward-on-2-Fronts-04855/

it is clear, 3 IL 76's with PS 90 A 76 engines cost 400 million dollars meaning 133.3 mil $$ each and not 50 mil as you are quoting.

 

[ppgj]

We havent signed CISMoA, so many crucial electronics will not be present,

right Agantrope. but that will mean the price will come down. besides -

Although the steep price tag of $5.8 billion for ten C-17 Globemaster III aircraft is being considered as a downside of the deal, Boeing is trying to convince India that the price will come down since the deal will be determined by the requirement of the Indian Air Force (IAF). Besides, India may not need many of the services and parts which the US may be offering in the military aircraft deal.

http://indiadefenceonline.com/1978/boeing-offers-to-reduce-c-17-cost/

how much will it actually come to is the question.

so the price is obviosuly a day light robbery to me.

Including support a price of a AC is $580M is justifiable? that too without any crucial electronics.

completely agree with you. it is not justified.

considering a series of FMS purchases in the recent past (c-130j, p-8i, m777 howitzer and now c-17) - it looks like a quid pro quo wrt the nuke deal.

 

[Agantrope]

right Agantrope. but that will mean the price will come down. besides -



http://indiadefenceonline.com/1978/boeing-offers-to-reduce-c-17-cost/

how much will it actually come to is the question.



completely agree with you. it is not justified.

considering a series of FMS purchases in the recent past (c-130j, p-8i, m777 howitzer and now c-17) - it looks like a quid pro quo wrt the nuke deal.

I think the M777 deal is not yet finalised as the process is still in evaluating stage and army is interested in the pegasus, it government mulling the FMS route.

C-130 price can be justifiable.

C-17 catering the IAF requirement; which means hardly 8-10 @ max there will be a change from what unkil is getting; Besides unkil wont allow their product to be modified like the cold bear.

 

[nrj]

I think the M777 deal is not yet finalised as the process is still in evaluating stage and army is interested in the pegasus, it government mulling the FMS route.

C-130 price can be justifiable.

C-17 catering the IAF requirement; which means hardly 8-10 @ max there will be a change from what unkil is getting; Besides unkil wont allow their product to be modified like the cold bear.

I'm impressed by India denying CIsMOA & possibly sacrificing critical electronic gears in C17. We ain't in any trap. Bargaining sessions will continue for months. Maybe order will go 10+10 if things turn good till Mr.Peacemaker visits India in November. On the other hand, we should consider Ukrainian JV for medium class lifters (when it doesnt cross MTA path)

 

[ppgj]

I think the M777 deal is not yet finalised as the process is still in evaluating stage and army is interested in the pegasus, it government mulling the FMS route.

i think it is done deal. IA has a requirement for 4 types of howitzer guns. the one BAE is going to supply is the ultra light category. ST kinetics is vying for the others.

Since India is trying to maximize the use of its defence budget before the end of this fiscal year, The Indian Army will soon acquire 145 ultra-light howitzers from the US. The Indian Defence Acquisitions Committee (DAC) has taken a decision to pursue the foreign military sales (FMS) route and the deal is expected to be to the tune of $647 million.

As for the US Pentagon, the possible sale of 145 state-of-the-art lightweight towed Howitzers to India has been notified to the US Congress. For the US, this proposed sale will contribute to the foreign policy and enhance the US-India strategic relationship. India intends to use the howitzers to modernise its armed forces and enhance its ability to operate in hazardous conditions.

The Indian Army will get the M777 145 ultra-light howitzers, whose main contractors will be US-based BAE of Hattiesburg and Mississippi. This procurement will be part of the first phase of the field artillery rationalisation plan. This plan is part of the programme to upgrade Indian Army's artillery divisions. The Indian Army aims to buy 145 ultra-light howitzers, 158 towed and wheeled, 100 tracked, and 180 wheeled and armoured guns as a part of this entire phase of the plan.

According to BAE officials, M777 is, by some considerable margin, the lightest 155 mm howitzer in the world and the only system proven in battle. The M777 meets the requirement for the Indian Army's Ultra Lightweight howitzer programme and the only one in full production. A significant amount of work share would be completed in India by the Mahindra and BAE Systems joint venture Company, officials added.

In the beginning, there was another ultra-light howitzer in competition for the Indian Army's artillery modernisation programme which was the 'Pegasus' by Singapore-based ST Kinetics. Since ST Kinetics was blacklisted last year, the DAC decided to go the FMS route which is a US programme of government-to-government sales of military hardware, avoiding delays of competitive bidding.

http://indiadefenceonline.com/1625/india-to-buy-ultra-light-howitzer-guns-from-u-s/

i could be wrong. may be someone could clarify.

C-130 price can be justifiable.

even that is in doubt. it is rumoured to be more compared to other similar deals!!

C-17 catering the IAF requirement; which means hardly 8-10 @ max there will be a change from what unkil is getting;

may be more will come later.

Besides unkil wont allow their product to be modified like the cold bear.

agree.

however, it is not yet certain india will go with these aircrafts!! right now it is only interest shown by IAF and the willingness of Boeing and the US govt to sell. the final word is still not out!! =xD

 

[Agantrope]

i think it is done deal. IA has a requirement for 4 types of howitzer guns. the one BAE is going to supply is the ultra light category. ST kinetics is vying for the others.



http://indiadefenceonline.com/1625/india-to-buy-ultra-light-howitzer-guns-from-u-s/

i could be wrong. may be someone could clarify.



even that is in doubt. it is rumoured to be more compared to other similar deals!!



may be more will come later.



agree.

however, it is not yet certain india will go with these aircrafts!! right now it is only interest shown by IAF and the willingness of Boeing and the US govt to sell. the final word is still not out!! =xD

Structural changes is not possible in the C-17, only electronics and i think Boeing wont allow to touch the C-17s by Israelis or French. There is no ToT clause is in the agreement too. =

If the deal is not in way then nothing will smoke as like this

 

[AJSINGH]

simple. they were sent RFP's for the contest.



historically western equipments have cost more. no denying that. at the same time they have been qualitatively superior and their support system works better of course at a cost.



why can't we buy f-16/f-18?? are you referring to the reservations india/iaf has about EUMA restrictions??(i agree there) if yes, that is a different point of debate. the fact that f-16/f-18 are participating in the contest is for the sole reason of selling them!!

what about C-17 purchase via FMS??

let me enumerate a few points here -

1. wide bodied C-17 allows you take in a tank (be it Arjun or T-90) which a IL-76 can't because of width restrictions. how important this requirement for IA is not clear.

2. IAF may be needing the transport aircraft urgently based on their assessment wrt their IL 76 fleet and their spares position, their servicing situation and the situation at the OEM's.

3. the cargo carrying capability that a C-17 (75 tons) far exceeds IL 76 (48 tons) meaning low number of sorties for high cargo transport.



how can they compete when they are not even in production??

as for AN-124 here is what wiki says -





http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonov_An-124#Design_and_development

also sir, IL 476 is yet to fly.





http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/russia/il-476.htm

as against these C-17 is up and running and is being flown by mainly NATO countries.

ADDED LATER :

as for the cost of IL 76, the phalcon deal with Israel gives an indication -



http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/Indian-AWACS-Moving-Forward-on-2-Fronts-04855/

it is clear, 3 IL 76's with PS 90 A 76 engines cost 400 million dollars meaning 133.3 mil $$ each and not 50 mil as you are quoting.

first let me clear out the price of Il-476 it is 50million dollors ( http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htairmo/articles/20091230.aspx) check this site for confirming the price of Il-476
now about the FMS route,all i am saying is that why was not RFP sent to USA and EADS,also to russia , just by competitive tender ,prices could have come down.
and about the payload capacity of Il-476
( December 30, 2009: The Russian Air Force has decided to buy 38 of the new Il-476 transports. This is basically an Il-76 with more modern engines, state-of-the art electronics and numerous other improvements. This version can carry up to 60 tons and is about 15 percent more fuel efficient. It will be about two years before the first Il-476 enters service.) so as you can see Il-476 is capable to carry 60 tons
plus think of it , IAF has already full line of engeniers and pilots ,plus the ground crew to handle Il-76 ,for C-17 entire training has to be imparted ,plus new infastructure for maintainence. (Remeber the deal for airbus a2a re fuelers and why Fin Min denied it was because it was very expensive ,Il-78 were less than half the price and no need for new infastructure required hence the over all cost will be lower )
and buying 10 C-17 will redue the number of sorties but tell me can those 10 C-17 be in J&K and as well as Northeast at the same time, well 44 Il-476 can ,because they are more in mumber .
plus about the spares part problem , early in1990s there was a problem not any more because russia is better state now than ever , also it was part fault of HAL also for not taking up the manufacturing the spares part ( same problem with Mig29) HAL and govt of india was stupid enough to buy aircraft in substantial quantities and not supporting them with home industries.
IAF need was just heavy transport aircraft to which the govt replied with C-17 .
There are far more Il-76's in use than all of America's four engine jet transports (C-5, C-141, C-17) put together. Over 900 Il-76s were manufactured over the last thirty years, with nearly a hundred exported, so far, mainly to Cuba, Iraq, China, India, Libya and Syria. With few foreign or domestic sales in the last decade, the Il-76 manufacturer (Chkalov) was surviving by manufacturing wings and other components for the An-124, An-70 and An-225 transports. In addition, it made replacement parts for the Il-76 and Il-114 aircraft.