Indo-US jet trainer - the Indus moment

Ajai Shukla: Indo-US jet trainer - the Indus moment
.
.
The inherent buoyancy of the US-India relationship has again become evident from the US Congress's recent attempt to jump-start
flagging defence ties.
Concerned over the drift, the pivotal Senate Armed Services Committe (SASC)has asked the Pentagon to submit by November 11-2011, a detailed assessment of the current state of US-India security co-operation; and a five-year plan for enhancing that.
Noteworthy in itself is the bipartisan belief within the Committee that "it is in the national interest of the US, through military-to-military relations, arms sales, bilateral and multilateral joint exercises, and other means, to support India's rise and build a strategic and military culture of cooperation and interoperability between our two countries, in particular with regard to the Indo-Pacific region". But far more substantive is the SASC's call on the Pentagon for "a detailed assessment of the desirability and feasibility...[of] a potential US partnership with India to co-develop one or more military weapon systems, including but not limited to the anticipated program to replace the US Air Force T-38 trainer jet". This is the first time that the US Congress has officially demanded a report from the Pentagon on the US-India security relationship. It raises the possibility that Congress might end up discussing the trickiest issues that dog US-India defence cooperation: viz. India's wish for jointly developing military equipment rather than buying over-the-counter from the US; the tough US export control laws that stand in the way of joint development; and the building of trust through successful development programmes for high-technology platforms like the proposed trainer jet, which can only be named the Indus(given the rivers tradition set by the Indo-Russian cruise missile, the Brahmos, an amalgam of the Brahmaputra and the Moskva)..
.
.
,....,.,.,,..for full article go to above link

Senate pushes Pentagon on US-India defence ties

Senate pushes Pentagon on US-India defence ties

Wants 5-year plan, F-35 sales and joint development of trainer aircraft.

The United States Congress has moved decisively to bridge a widening gulf between the defence establishments of India and America. In an unprecedented initiative, the powerful Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC), which oversees the US Department of Defense, has ordered the Pentagon to submit a report by November 1 with a detailed assessment of the current state of US-India security cooperation; and a five-year plan for enhancing that cooperation in the Indo-Pacific region and globally.

The SASC has also ordered "a detailed assessment of the desirability and feasibility of the future sale of F-35 Joint Strike Fighters to India, and a potential US partnership with India to co-develop one or more military weapon systems, including but not limited to the anticipated program to replace the US Air Force T-38 trainer jet".

The Indian Ministry of Defence (MoD) has indicated its unwillingness to procure the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF), a futuristic, fifth-generation fighter aircraft that is at an advanced stage of development by US aerospace major Lockheed Martin. The reason that New Delhi cites is an ongoing joint development programme with Russia to develop a Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft (FGFA). But MoD sources indicate there will be keen interest in New Delhi in any joint development programme with the US, especially in the realm of aerospace.

The Indian Air Force (IAF) is grappling with a severe crisis in the availability of basic trainer aircraft for its cadets. The MoD is evaluating bids in a global tender for buying basic trainers for the IAF. Meanwhile, Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) is launching an indigenous programme for developing and building a basic trainer that has been dubbed the Hindustan Turbo Trainer-40 (HTT-40).

With the Indian requirement estimated at about 200 trainers, joint development with the US would achieve a three-fold purpose: Indigenously meeting the IAF requirement; leveraging the experience of the US aerospace industry to ensure that the HAL programme meets time and quality yardsticks; and, most attractive for New Delhi, establishing a framework for high-technology cooperation and joint development with the US.

The SASC initiative was piloted last week by two influential members — Senator John Cornyn (Republican from Texas) and Joe Lieberman (Democrat from Connecticut) — as an amendment to the Defense Authorization Bill (each allocation of the US defence budget is evaluated and passed by the SASC). The amendment notes, "It is in the national interest of the United States"¦ to support India's rise and build a strategic and military culture of cooperation and interoperability between our two countries, in particular with regard to the Indo-Pacific region."

This new initiative from the US Congress illustrates how the US-India relationship is expanding from the strategic into the popular realm. The senators' interest reflects pressure from electoral constituencies, especially the powerful American-Indian community, and from economic considerations like the jobs created by Indian military purchases.

Senior US officials privately contrast the flowering of the broad US-India strategic relationship with deepening scepticism about the defence relationship. Declaring flatly that there was "hesitation within the Indian MoD about working too closely with the US", a top American official recently lamented that Washington's outreach evokes little more than "wariness" from South Block. Meanwhile, Indian officials complain that America is interested only in defence sales, talking partnership but implementing technology sanctions.

Henceforth, the flagging Pentagon-South Block relationship will not be left merely to bureaucrats, guided as they are by procedure and precedent rather than by an overarching vision. The efforts of the administration will now be watched over by the US Congress.

Says Manohar Thyagarajan, head of Paragon International, a strategic advisory firm that closely monitors the US-India security relationship, "This signifies that the Senate is willing to take a leadership role in discussing key elements of the US-India relationship. Key constituencies such as industry and the Indian-American community would likely welcome thought leadership by Congress, which can be useful at times of inertia in the Washington interagency process, especially in trenchant areas like technology transfer."

Wud like to read such articles from american sources, rather than ajai shukla.

What India needs is a tie up with an American firm like Lockheed Martin to co-develope a trainer. Of course this will still need US Congressional approval as it will definitely involve the inclusion of sensitive technologies developed by LM with US public funds. The South Koreans did it with their T-50 Golden Eagle, which is really a good start for their aviation industry. This AC is really practical, u get an trainer and a light attack AC at the same time (talking about force multiplier).

Id rather India maintain a cordial distance.

No need for this trainer.

We have ordered 100+ hawk for this role.

what i think is this trainer in question, is India's attempt to make an ultra low-cost fighter in the ranks of jf-17.
Which will support in cas and ground support mission if required.
By this way we might penitrate market of pak-china and also increase our steretgic say in world.

No, Not really. Anything with US isn't low cost in its category.

Hawk can do the CAS role as well.

please mearge these two threads as they contain same news artical but diffrent titles.
.
http://defenceforumindia.com/indian-air-force/23048-indo-us-jet-trainer-indus-moment.html

i agree but with involment of India, we can assume that this trainer may have low cost compare to its counter part.

i only agree when no pre condition attached with it.

what about naval lca,once navy chief showed interest on it.

The best options for the T-38 replacement are all foreign (non-US) made. If the US does decide to build a new trainer it will be twenty years before its reliable, cheap and cost effective.

what about thunderbolt,the tank busters,they can also opperate side by side with lah,and in war can create havoc with their awesome firepower.

I think we should just use the twin-seater LCA mk-1 as our supersonic trainer. I think we should actively market it to the US as well, it already has an American engine, put in a few US made avionics and customise it for them and sell it. I am sure they'll find that it will be cheaper to buy a modified LCAmk-1 than to develope a brand new trainer. For a trainer the lca-mk-1 twin seater is the best anywhere in the world.

Immanuel said:

I think we should just use the twin-seater LCA mk-1 as our supersonic trainer. I think we should actively market it to the US as well, it already has an American engine, put in a few US made avionics and customise it for them and sell it. I am sure they'll find that it will be cheaper to buy a modified LCAmk-1 than to develope a brand new trainer. For a trainer the lca-mk-1 twin seater is the best anywhere in the world.

Click to expand...

USAF does not use delta winged fighters... They therefore need a conventional AC layout for their trainers.

asianobserve said:

USAF does not use delta winged fighters... They therefore need a conventional AC layout for their trainers.

Click to expand...

Just because they didn't in the past doesn't mean they can't now. From a training stand point a delta wing aircraft is just as effective. LCA mk-1 twin seater can not only meet their training requirements but also exceed them.

Why do we need one more Jet Trainer? We already have the HAL Sitra and the BAe Hawk, how does one more trainer aircraft help? We will end up with more trainers than Fighters!! lol

I think it would be nice if we can co-develop an Reusable launch vehicle for space or Naval systems vessels would be much better.

asianobserve said:

USAF does not use delta winged fighters... They therefore need a conventional AC layout for their trainers.

Click to expand...

I dont think it is an policy issue of not using Delta winged aircrafts! I think it is just the way the Americans think and if its only a trainer then there is nothing much set in stone per say.

BTW, is there an air force that uses a delta winged jet trainer?