India joins the GCAP programme as a dialogue partner

[Raj-Hindustani]

The leading UK, Italian and Japanese countries will give their industrial secrets to a "dialogue" partner?

What the f**k does that even mean? They email you the news on new developments before they email Flight Global or Aviation Week?

Do you understand Potential areas:

also i said, any transfer Or further understanding, will require another agreements

 

[Ali_Baba]

Do you understand Potential areas:

also i said, any transfer Or further understanding, will require another agreements

Potential Area's = "Horsehit".

It is fantasy copium by Indians engaged collectively in their mass self delusion.

There is NOTHING India brings to the table that the GCAP programme needs. Canada, Australia, Poland make far better dialogue and observer partners as they are all very capable technically, far more than India.

 

[Raj-Hindustani]

Potential Area's = "Horsehit".

It is fantasy copium by Indians engaged collectively in their mass self delusion.

There is NOTHING India brings to the table that the GCAP programme needs. Canada, Australia, Poland make far better dialogue and observer partners as they are all very capable technically, far more than India.

Sir, what was brought by Pakistan to China during JF-17 development? Did Pakistan even design before a trainer aircraft?

India is not currently a core GCAP development partner, and that dialogue status doesn't guarantee technology transfer or a purchase. But saying India brings ‘nothing’ to the table, or that Canada, Australia and Poland are ‘far more capable technically than India’ across the board, is an unsupported generalisation. India has substantial indigenous fighter development programmes, aerospace, missile, radar and systems-development capabilities. The relevant question is what specific capability GCAP would seek from India, not whether India is technically capable at all?

After WWII, both the US and Soviet Union made extensive use of captured German aircraft technology, research, equipment and engineering expertise. This became one of several inputs into their rapidly developing post-war aerospace programmes, alongside their own substantial indigenous research. Some of this knowledge and technology also influenced the development of aerospace capabilities in other countries, including China.

The point is that no country becomes an advanced aerospace power overnight. Everyone has to start somewhere, learn, acquire knowledge, build an industrial base, and progressively develop indigenous expertise. What matters is not simply what a country can bring to the table today, but what it is capable of developing and contributing over time.

 

[Ali_Baba]

Sir, what was brought by Pakistan to China during JF-17 development? Did Pakistan even design before a trainer aircraft?

Not much, other than requirements, and small allocation of engineering staff. No one on this forum has any illusions about Pakistan's technical engineering contribution!

India is not currently a core GCAP development partner, and that dialogue status doesn't guarantee technology transfer or a purchase. But saying India brings ‘nothing’ to the table, or that Canada, Australia and Poland are ‘far more capable technically than India’ across the board, is an unsupported generalisation.

You claim "lost of experience" and "capability, but look at the piss poor development projects of the Tejas, the Arjun, the HJT-36 to name a few, to understand Indian's simply cannot design and develop products for operational deployment. Your history of lack of achievements speak for themselves.

India has substantial indigenous fighter development programmes, aerospace, missile, radar and systems-development capabilities.

Yes - lots of trophy projects, but so little of these projects make it to operational deployment on time, or even at all.

Your history of lack of achievements speak for themselves...

The relevant question is what specific capability GCAP would seek from India, not whether India is technically capable at all?

India is not capable of much, given your history of lack of achievements to date..

GCAP is going quite well, and it only natural for lots of "pretenders" to try and jump onto the bandwagon, and India is one of those pretenders. The core partners of the programme know India is that pretender and won't allow India anywhere near anything. That is why India has been relegated to the tea and biscuit forum...

After WWII, both the US and Soviet Union made extensive use of captured German aircraft technology, research, equipment and engineering expertise. This became one of several inputs into their rapidly developing post-war aerospace programmes, alongside their own substantial indigenous research ans same technolgy was transfer to china and others.

All of these countries were able to learn, and develop new products on their own. India has been doing license builds and TOT projects since the 50's but still cannot design and deploy platforms itself. Look at how late Türkiye started compared to India in developing its own platforms and the successfully deploying them to operational use. Türkiye have overtaken you soo quickly...

Your history of lack of achievements speak for themselves...

 

[Nimble]

Not much, other than requirements, and small allocation of engineering staff. No one on this forum has any illusions about Pakistan's technical engineering contribution!



You claim "lost of experience" and "capability, but look at the piss poor development projects of the Tejas, the Arjun, the HJT-36 to name a few, to understand Indian's simply cannot design and develop products for operational deployment. Your history of lack of achievements speak for themselves.



Yes - lots of trophy projects, but so little of these projects make it to operational deployment on time, or even at all.

Your history of lack of achievements speak for themselves...



India is not capable of much, given your history of lack of achievements to date..

GCAP is going quite well, and it only natural for lots of "pretenders" to try and jump onto the bandwagon, and India is one of those pretenders. The core partners of the programme know India is that pretender and won't allow India anywhere near anything. That is why India has been relegated to the tea and biscuit forum...



All of these countries were able to learn, and develop new products on their own. India has been doing license builds and TOT projects since the 50's but still cannot design and deploy platforms itself. Look at how late Türkiye started compared to India in developing its own platforms and the successfully deploying them to operational use. Türkiye have overtaken you soo quickly...

Your history of lack of achievements speak for themselves...

Look at our achievements of our space program, warships building, nuclear submarines, ballistic and cruise missiles, nuclear program.... you can only dream of such achievements yet you talk as if we are nothing.... yes some failures or delays are there but that doesn't mean we learnt nothing.....

 

[Raj-Hindustani]

Not much, other than requirements, and small allocation of engineering staff. No one on this forum has any illusions about Pakistan's technical engineering contribution!



You claim "lost of experience" and "capability, but look at the piss poor development projects of the Tejas, the Arjun, the HJT-36 to name a few, to understand Indian's simply cannot design and develop products for operational deployment. Your history of lack of achievements speak for themselves.



Yes - lots of trophy projects, but so little of these projects make it to operational deployment on time, or even at all.

Your history of lack of achievements speak for themselves...



India is not capable of much, given your history of lack of achievements to date..

GCAP is going quite well, and it only natural for lots of "pretenders" to try and jump onto the bandwagon, and India is one of those pretenders. The core partners of the programme know India is that pretender and won't allow India anywhere near anything. That is why India has been relegated to the tea and biscuit forum...



All of these countries were able to learn, and develop new products on their own. India has been doing license builds and TOT projects since the 50's but still cannot design and deploy platforms itself. Look at how late Türkiye started compared to India in developing its own platforms and the successfully deploying them to operational use. Türkiye have overtaken you soo quickly...

Your history of lack of achievements speak for themselves...

I think you're missing my point.

Take China as an example. It took them decades, probably 50+ years, of manufacturing, licensed production, reverse engineering and even cloning earlier aircraft before they were able to develop increasingly advanced aircraft of their own with the starting J10 aircraft. Even the fighter-engine problem took them many years to overcome.

Nothing is a piece of cake when you're trying to build an advanced aircraft from scratch. If it were that easy, more than 4–5 countries would already be independently designing and developing advanced fighters.

Everyone has to start from somewhere. First you manufacture, then you learn, improve, develop your own technologies and eventually become capable of designing your own systems.

So saying “India has nothing to bring to the table” compared with Australia, Canada or Poland doesn't really make sense either. Those countries have their own strengths, but that doesn't mean they are independently more capable than India in every aspect of advanced fighter development. India has been building its own aerospace and fighter-development capability for decades