China won Turkey's missile defense competition
- Thread starter Hendrik_2000
- Start date
Equation
Lieutenant General
That could be , but why would they when the Chinese FD -2000 were superior in both performance test and economically?
Because the united states is in a position to penalize turkey much more readily than china could by imposing direct and indirect costs on many aspects of Turkish economy, military and diplomatic in retaliation. It would be easy for the united state to incur a few billion dollars of indirect cost to the Turkish economy over 5-10 years if it were so minded. It could steer the Kurds in a way annoying to turkey. It could steer outcome of Syrian crisis in a way harmful to turkey. It could withhold technical and military cooperation and force the Turks to spend more to go it alone. It could even destabilize Turkish government as the recent riots in ankara demonstrates.
Cost of Chinese missile to turkey therefore equal the dollar value of missiles and technology, plus the direct and indirect cost of us irritation, which could substantially exceed the dollar value of the patriot missiles p,us the cost of Chinese irritation.
Cost of Chinese missile to turkey therefore equal the dollar value of missiles and technology, plus the direct and indirect cost of us irritation, which could substantially exceed the dollar value of the patriot missiles p,us the cost of Chinese irritation.
Last edited:
AssassinsMace
Lieutenant General
I think the US is determined not to allow high-tech Chinese military exports to see the light of day. The arms trade is one of the top money makers in the world and could have drastic effects on the global arms industry especially if what they say how the FD-2000 performed against competitors is true. The next shoe to drop would be Chinese technology beating Western in a real war situation.
Quickie
Colonel
A somewhat related story.
Pentagon nixes plan to buy helicopters from Russian company that supplies Syria's Assad
By Warren Strobel, Reuters
WASHINGTON — The Pentagon no longer will buy Russian helicopters for the Afghan Air Force from Rosoboronexport, a state-owned arms exporter that also sells weapons to the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, U.S. defense officials and a leading Senate opponent of such deals said on Wednesday.
The switch in Pentagon policy appears to end, at least for now, its plans to buy an additional 15 Russian Mi-17 helicopters for $345 million, sources familiar with the matter said.
"I applaud the Defense Department's decision to finally cancel its plan to buy additional helicopters from Rosoboronexport," Senator John Cornyn, Texas Republican, said in a statement.
"Doing business with the supplier of these helicopters has been a morally bankrupt policy, and as a nation, we should no longer be subsidizing Assad's war crimes," Cornyn said.
Defense Department spokeswoman Maureen Schumann said in an email: "After initially requesting funds from Congress in the FY14 (2014 fiscal year) budget to provide additional enhancements for the Afghan National Security Forces, the department has re-evaluated requirements in consultation with Congress."
"We currently do not have plans to purchase additional Mi17s from Rosoboronexport beyond those in the Afghan Program of Record," she said.
The Pentagon had planned to purchase 63 new Mi-17s from Rosoboronexport for nearly $1.1 billion, defense officials told Congress in August. It is unclear how many of those 63 have been delivered.
Senior Pentagon officials had previously defended the deals with Rosoboronexport - which were to total $1.1 billion over several years - as the fastest way to outfit the Afghan Air Force before most U.S. troops leave Afghanistan by the end of 2014.
But the Pentagon's relationship with the company and other foreign contractors involved in the program has faced bipartisan criticism in the U.S. Congress. Critics cited Rosoboronexport's deals with Syria; the helicopters' escalating costs; and federal procurement investigations involving the Russian helicopter project.
Reuters reported in August that the Defense Criminal Investigative Service had opened a criminal probe into the Huntsville, Alabama, Army aviation unit that oversees the Mi-17 program, and ties between the unit's former chief and two foreign subcontractors.
No charges have been filed in the case.
"The Army's mishandling of this arms program, as well as the Afghan military's inability to maintain the helicopters, further underscores why this contract should have been canceled long ago," Senator Richard Blumenthal, a Connecticut Democrat, said in a statement.
"I applaud (the Defense Department) for correcting this wrong, and hope the agency buys American in the future," added Blumenthal, whose state is home to helicopter manufacturer Sikorsky Aircraft, a division of United Technologies Corp.
Blumenthal said he plans to introduce legislation that would ban contracts "with foreign companies that enable war crimes in Syria."
Deputy Defense Secretary Ashton Carter called Cornyn last week to tell him the Pentagon was cancelling the additional helicopter purchases, according to a Senate aide who spoke on condition of anonymity.
It remains unclear whether the Pentagon has alternative plans to bolster the Afghan Air Force's capabilities to fight militants and drug trafficking.
A U.S. Army planning document, dated November 6 and obtained by Reuters, shows that the service had planned to deliver a total of 30 Mi-17s for the Afghan Air Force's Special Mission Wing between now and October 1, 2014.
Pentagon nixes plan to buy helicopters from Russian company that supplies Syria's Assad
By Warren Strobel, Reuters
WASHINGTON — The Pentagon no longer will buy Russian helicopters for the Afghan Air Force from Rosoboronexport, a state-owned arms exporter that also sells weapons to the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, U.S. defense officials and a leading Senate opponent of such deals said on Wednesday.
The switch in Pentagon policy appears to end, at least for now, its plans to buy an additional 15 Russian Mi-17 helicopters for $345 million, sources familiar with the matter said.
"I applaud the Defense Department's decision to finally cancel its plan to buy additional helicopters from Rosoboronexport," Senator John Cornyn, Texas Republican, said in a statement.
"Doing business with the supplier of these helicopters has been a morally bankrupt policy, and as a nation, we should no longer be subsidizing Assad's war crimes," Cornyn said.
Defense Department spokeswoman Maureen Schumann said in an email: "After initially requesting funds from Congress in the FY14 (2014 fiscal year) budget to provide additional enhancements for the Afghan National Security Forces, the department has re-evaluated requirements in consultation with Congress."
"We currently do not have plans to purchase additional Mi17s from Rosoboronexport beyond those in the Afghan Program of Record," she said.
The Pentagon had planned to purchase 63 new Mi-17s from Rosoboronexport for nearly $1.1 billion, defense officials told Congress in August. It is unclear how many of those 63 have been delivered.
Senior Pentagon officials had previously defended the deals with Rosoboronexport - which were to total $1.1 billion over several years - as the fastest way to outfit the Afghan Air Force before most U.S. troops leave Afghanistan by the end of 2014.
But the Pentagon's relationship with the company and other foreign contractors involved in the program has faced bipartisan criticism in the U.S. Congress. Critics cited Rosoboronexport's deals with Syria; the helicopters' escalating costs; and federal procurement investigations involving the Russian helicopter project.
Reuters reported in August that the Defense Criminal Investigative Service had opened a criminal probe into the Huntsville, Alabama, Army aviation unit that oversees the Mi-17 program, and ties between the unit's former chief and two foreign subcontractors.
No charges have been filed in the case.
"The Army's mishandling of this arms program, as well as the Afghan military's inability to maintain the helicopters, further underscores why this contract should have been canceled long ago," Senator Richard Blumenthal, a Connecticut Democrat, said in a statement.
"I applaud (the Defense Department) for correcting this wrong, and hope the agency buys American in the future," added Blumenthal, whose state is home to helicopter manufacturer Sikorsky Aircraft, a division of United Technologies Corp.
Blumenthal said he plans to introduce legislation that would ban contracts "with foreign companies that enable war crimes in Syria."
Deputy Defense Secretary Ashton Carter called Cornyn last week to tell him the Pentagon was cancelling the additional helicopter purchases, according to a Senate aide who spoke on condition of anonymity.
It remains unclear whether the Pentagon has alternative plans to bolster the Afghan Air Force's capabilities to fight militants and drug trafficking.
A U.S. Army planning document, dated November 6 and obtained by Reuters, shows that the service had planned to deliver a total of 30 Mi-17s for the Afghan Air Force's Special Mission Wing between now and October 1, 2014.
FarkTypeSoldier
Junior Member
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
Its not related at all other then geography. Basicly the US was going to buy MI17 choppers to build the nonexistent Afghan Air Force, (the afghans have had a air force in the past but after the Russians and the Taliban it was left to rust.) but someone decided to make a moral stand or so the story goes and the US canceled. The Afgan air force may get a alternative design, I say may as there was another competition run by the US for the Afghans in the form of a Coin aircraft but that got canned too.
this story and the Turkish missile deal are totally unrelated other then the stated reason given by the author being Assad. Who Turkey is looking to depose.
this story and the Turkish missile deal are totally unrelated other then the stated reason given by the author being Assad. Who Turkey is looking to depose.
Quickie
Colonel
The U.S., or rather the Congress, had issues with the contractors/manufacturers of the Mi-17 helicopter deal. A similar situation as the U.S. having issues with the Chinese manufacturer of the Turkey missile defense proposal.
Which is his convenient excuse for applauding the cancellation.
Which is his actual agenda behind it.
Kurt
Junior Member
The Patriot missiles are not just some US weapon system, they are one of the few Trans-Atlantic weapon systems with much German input. This makes it the standard NATO system. Replacing it by Chinese systems does certainly not improve communality with other NATO members and will include ire from Germany (because they are so proud of their technology).
Considering the performance issues of the Patriot, there are differences between national versions. The US uses a cheap and crude manufacture (they go for quantity), while the Germans prefer good workmanship (they adopted quantity from the US). That is not widely advertised, but there are differences of the same system if you are able to look really close. For this reason the German patriot version is slightly more expensive.
Another issue, who trains the crews. An NCO of the Fla-Rak (German air defence) told me years ago:
There are regular competitions of operators of this system. One international and one for the US since the US soldiers did not score in the international competition. Germany is a leading country in air defence within NATO and their trained personnel dominates the winners of the international competitions with Patriot missiles.
Who offered to train to Turkish personnel and which Patriot missile version was evaluated?
That does not exclude the possibility that the Chinese system is indeed superior. It highlights that the Patriot system is more complicated politically than cancelling the F-35 purchase by Turkey.
Considering the performance issues of the Patriot, there are differences between national versions. The US uses a cheap and crude manufacture (they go for quantity), while the Germans prefer good workmanship (they adopted quantity from the US). That is not widely advertised, but there are differences of the same system if you are able to look really close. For this reason the German patriot version is slightly more expensive.
Another issue, who trains the crews. An NCO of the Fla-Rak (German air defence) told me years ago:
There are regular competitions of operators of this system. One international and one for the US since the US soldiers did not score in the international competition. Germany is a leading country in air defence within NATO and their trained personnel dominates the winners of the international competitions with Patriot missiles.
Who offered to train to Turkish personnel and which Patriot missile version was evaluated?
That does not exclude the possibility that the Chinese system is indeed superior. It highlights that the Patriot system is more complicated politically than cancelling the F-35 purchase by Turkey.
Last edited:
