garg_bharat
Senior Member
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2015
- Messages
- 5,078
- Likes
- 10,139
IAF should have thought about all this before getting into MTA. Or Antony arm-twisted IAF??The speed advantage is present with the MTA but so what? The aircraft the MTA was to replace (An-32) is turboprop, has the IAF explictly stated they want a turbofan aircraft to replace the An-32s? They were just going along with it as this was what the Russians had proposed. The An-32s are exclusively used within India for relatively short trips and the "speed factor" is thus negligable- this would only really be relevent in long range flights (which the IAF would not need the An-32 replecment to do).
Addtionally, given that the C-130XJ/MTA would be the backbone of the IAF's transport wing one would want them to have the highest possible availabilty, correct? With the American product this is ensured- literally (by contract the C-130 and C-17 of the IAF have to have >85% availabilty at any one time)- we all know how poor Russian after sales support and availabilty rates are.
The C-130's "rough feild" capabilties are legendary, turbofans always struggle with this aspect and Russian aircraft are particuarly vulnerable to FOD it seems so I can confidently say the C-130XJ is a more suitable replacement to the An-32 than the MTA.
India needs to stop falling for Russia's "cheap factor", in the long run India pays for it in spades and I think the establishment has woken up to this reality.
Poor Generals.