U.S. offers naval reconnaissance planes to India

India had five Il-38s. Two were lost in a mid-air collision. This
leaves three Il-38s and eight Tu-142s to patrol a long coast line. In
addition, the Tu-142 are not very well equipped for maritime patrol.

Despite what the article says, production switched from the P-3B to P-3C
in 1969. Hence, the airframes are more like 35 years old.

"Quant" wrote in message
om...
(Tuollaf43) wrote in message
m...
(Kamal R. Prasad) wrote in message
[snip]

The Indian Il-38s and Tu-142 are undergoing an extensive refit
incorporating the fully digital Sea Dragon suite that will keep them
operational for at least another 15 years. The Indian Navy Officers
quote is puzzling.


yes-retrofitting is one way to keep costs low. Different aircrafts
have different purposes and not all need to be the latest-greatest.

It makes no sense to me why they would want to buy old, used, second
hand P-3B patrol aircraft. It probably makes more political than
military sense.

they want to buy used aircrafts for about the same reason that people
buy used cars.

regards
-kamal

Since tbe buy is in very small numbers (numbers bandied about are
around 2-6) - raw cost per aircraft is not likely to be a major
factor. And the best that Russia or France will offer the Indian Air
Force will be much better than the second best hand-me-downs from the
USA.

If this deal goes through, then India will have three different LRMP
aircaft types for a 18 craft inventory. A great way to keep the
logistics costs down! But I suppose it does satisfy the IAF aircraft
collection mania.



It could be that they negotiate with the US only in order to bring
down the price of the Russian planes.


russian planes are very cheap. It's expensive only after you buy them.

On Fri, 12 Sep 2003 09:17:59 -0700, David Lednicer wrote:
Despite what the article says, production switched from the P-3B to P-3C
in 1969. Hence, the airframes are more like 35 years old.

How long is the airframe's useful life likely to be? Wouldn't India
be better off buying something that isn't about to fall to bits?

--
A: top posting

Q: what's the most annoying thing about Usenet?

On Fri, 12 Sep 2003 14:26:35 -0500, harmony wrote:
It could be that they negotiate with the US only in order to bring
down the price of the Russian planes.

russian planes are very cheap.

I don't think so. The MiG-29 and Su-30 are reportedly more expensive
than the Gripen or F-16, for example.

--
A: top posting

Q: what's the most annoying thing about Usenet?

"phil hunt" wrote in message
. ..
On Fri, 12 Sep 2003 09:17:59 -0700, David Lednicer
wrote:
Despite what the article says, production switched from the P-3B to P-3C
in 1969. Hence, the airframes are more like 35 years old.

How long is the airframe's useful life likely to be? Wouldn't India
be better off buying something that isn't about to fall to bits?




We're talking about an air force that used B-24s in that role until the
early '60s and has a natonal culture of patching up and making do.


When the P-3Bs wear out, they'll be upgraded to P-3K status, then used as
fighter cover.


No - damn, that's someone else ...




Cheers

Dave Kearton