Yes, and the Koreans and the Japanese. But India, Norway, Singapore and Germany have chosen both. Very likely Israel too. Perhaps Spain as well.
There is definitely more to it than merely one being better than the other.
Project 75 India Diesel-electric Submarine Programs (SSK) : Updates and Discussions
- Thread starter Himanshu
- Start date
Yes, and the Koreans and the Japanese. But India, Norway, Singapore and Germany have chosen both. Very likely Israel too. Perhaps Spain as well.
There is definitely more to it than merely one being better than the other.
Germans are to be taken out of the bidding for political interference in Indian affairs.
Nothing , what relation could it have with business ? might be that G2G deal may be scuppered. But other processes & deals will carry on.
Just like we don't want US fighters, similarly after Germany trying to poke their nose inside our judicial system, their military ware is now a strict no no for us. We need to cut off defence ties with them, period. They are a covert enemy of India just like US.
If we are not cutting off terrorism center Pakistan, insignificant Maldives
What makes you think we can shut off a larger economy than us? Take as much advantage as possible from Germany.
Depending upon them for a critical defence project would be a disaster in waiting. Thankfully with them trying to poke their nose in this Kejri case, GOI is now fully aware of their intentions.
Navantia S-80+ it's going to be now.
What makes you believe that failing to close in 10 years Modi will close it in a single vendor situation in coming times?
Further why buy the 3rd best?
french’s proposal to indonesian navy, « scorpene evolved » is full LIB too
France Offers New 'Scorpene Evolved' Li-Ion Submarine to Indonesia - Naval News
In its latest proposal to the Indonesian Navy, France's Naval Group is offering the new Scorpene Evolved submarine with Lithium-Ion battery
www.navalnews.com
I have made an argument that after Doklam in 2017, the govt has deliberately weakened themselves militarily in order to placate China so they can concentrate in the Pacific. So there have been no real contracts for offensive weapons systems since then. 2016 was the last major one.
So all new offensive systems are planned for 2030+ instead. Which explains why there has been movement everywhere in terms of new programs. Which means, instead of getting stuff today, which will become old 2030+, we are aiming to get cutting-edge capabilities when they matter. For example, buying 114 Rafale F5 instead of F3 or F4 makes more sense. We are seeing movement on FICV and FRCV as well. And the infantry modernization.
Rafale M better suited us anyday.Just how we picked Rafale-M over Super Hornet
This argument is wrong at so many levels.
You cannot get China to focus elsewhere by being a sissy. 62 should have taught us that.
We need capabilities in 2013. Not in 2033.
This argument is wrong at every level.
After doklam, there were galwan clashes. You mean to say that - India deliberatly weakened itself after doklam and go rewarded with Galwan clashes.....and even after galwan clashes, India is weakening itself with the assumption that India will somehow become strong (after weakening for many years) in 2030+.
I can not imagine a knowledgeable person like yourself have thought in such terms. However, please substantiate your argument with real facts.
PS: My understanding is - India (under Modi) wants to improve indigenous weapon systems. However, I can not explain / understand why India did not already order more Rafales. Maybe, they want to order F-35 (after J20 matures).
a) Except France, every European country can not resist interferring in other countries affairs (particularly India). Remember, even tiny portugal put so many conditions for "repatriating" a known gangster / terrorist called Abu Salem.
b) Earlier, Sweden was also interferring in India's affairs (statements on kashmir + equating India with Pak). After the arrival of many peacefuls in their country (Sweden actively invited them initially), the swedish came to their senses (or did they??).
c) My friend, who works with Polish people say that they (polish) are very angry with India for not condemning Russia for attacking Ukraine. Did the polish condemn Pak for kargill + for terrorism in India (I do not know)??
The europeans can not help themselves. They think they have strong guidelines for how India must be behave both internally and externally.
d) Better India restrict european arm purchases to the french.
Then bite the bullet and go for bigger Scorpene subs with France in a gov. to gov. deal(scrap the current tender). But Germany? Just no.
One of the reasons why I'm supporting Navantia is to woo Spain in our support club. So far just France and Russia are our tested Euro/Eurasian allies.
Ensure we grow at 7-8% and everyone will be in our club. France has veto, Spain doesn't.
That's the only argument available. Because incompetence is not enough of an explanation for something we are seeing across the board. We have quite literally not inducted a single new offensive system after Rafale. The only things we have focused on is force multipliers, defensive systems and other support systems.
We have more than enough ground forces on the border today. Enough to not just defend but also take vast amounts of territory inside China, 4-6 divisions worth of offensive troops. We have enough airpower to support that. And our border infra also matches Chinese infra today. So we are the opposite of being a sissy. But at the same time, we have limited our offensive capabilities to an extent that prevents China from worrying about the Indian front along a more strategic scale.
So today we are at a point where we can invade China and significantly hurt their pride, but it's not to the extent that it's an existential threat to Tibet. This is more than enough to avoid their evil eye while they gaze upon other fronts which are becoming more dangerous day by day. You can see that Vietnam has chosen a similar approach, more focus on land power and less focus on destabilizing capabilities.
So, with that goal in mind, I suppose GoI believes 36 Rafales, 84-96 MKI MLUs and 100+ LCA Mk1As are enough for this decade. And all primary offensive systems across the board are aimed for 2030+.
At least we know it's working. China's completely focused on other fronts.
Personally, I believe that a lot of europe is making itself irrelevant. India will do great to focus on its allies and ignore the rest.
My previous post will have explained my reasoning.
Anyway, we have strenthened ourselves, not weakened. We have at least 17 divisions along the Chinese border today, that's effectively the same strength as today's US Army + British Army + French Army + another French Army. Before Galwan we were effectively at the same strength level as only the US Army.
We have more troops than the Chinese and as much infra as the Chinese. So we hold the ground advantage. But to maintain balance, we have decided to give them the air advantage. Had we bought 200 Rafales back in 2012, pretty much all would have been inducted by this year, we would have taken a significant air advantage too. And remember, Tibet is really, really bad for aviation. To counter every Rafale we have, they will need 3-4 jets of the same capability or many more inferior jets.
Had we done that, right now China would have been preparing to go to war with India, not Taiwan. It's because we may have the numbers, but we are yet to modernize. The fact that the Chinese have modernized and we have not is a huge advantage to them. Even if we have the same strength as multiple Western armies, we don't have the same equipment or support as the Western armies. The only way we catch up is by buying time, and this is how we are buying time, by making them look for trouble elsewhere.
Now that we have strength, we are gonna focus on modernization, ie, replacing 105mm guns (we have well over 2500 such guns) with 155mm guns. Then there's infantry modernization, with new rifles, combat gear, portable comm and EW systems and so on. And new vehicles. All of that makes it a 10-15 year effort. The point being, there's quite literally no use in buying 200 Rafales if our ground forces only have 105mm fixed guns while the Chinese have 155mm advanced highly mobile guns.
Regardless of our disadvantages, we still have the ability to enter Tibet and take over large swathes of land, so that's enough of a deterrence 'cause China does not want to deal with the shame of losing ground in Tibet before fighting the US. So that's our goal, deterrence.
India's official stand:
Rafale will provide IAF strategic deterrence: Defence ministry | India News - Times of India
India News: The Rafale aircraft will provide the IAF strategic deterrence and requisite capability to engage targets at long ranges, the defence ministry said, ad
timesofindia.indiatimes.com
The idea behind deterrence is you don't want others to be aggressive 'cause you have a big stick. It's no different from the French nuclear doctrine, during the Cold War they only had enough capability to wipe out 40% of the SU. So it served as deterrence.
Except Germany, and to a certain extent Sweden, all others can be managed. The US does this way more than Europe, but our defense deals with the US are still going strong because of bipartisan support, along with support from other institutions like the Pentagon.
In the end, we gotta buy what best suits us. Everything else can be handled via contracts. From what I've heard, there are certain clauses in US deals where they cannot sanction existing contracts with India.