1461 replies to this topic

[Martian]

suryakiran, on 13 March 2012 - 05:01 AM, said:

You just turned around my statement, proving what I said, since you do not have any other basis for debate. If it was acceptable damage, Chinese flag would be in Arunachal Pradesh. Last I saw, Chinese are still freting and fuming and we have held elections and politicians visiting there. Dalai Lama still stays in India. What happened? Chinese to Chinese invincilibity? Just happens that the Chinese government is sane. And thank you for having pity on us. No more replies from me on this topic.

Let me define "unacceptable damage" for you. Unacceptable damage is when China unleashes its thermonuclear arsenal and wipes out every Indian on the subcontinent. That's unacceptable damage.

China only needs a single Indian ballistic missile headed towards a Chinese city to declare "escalation" by India. American and Russian satellites can verify the Indian ballistic missile trajectory. Once India escalates, China will retaliate with hundreds of megatons. Indians just became extinct.

You cannot bring one megaton to a 294 megaton fight. Only an idiot would think otherwise.

[love my homeland]

Gs_0629, on 07 March 2004 - 12:57 PM, said:

Chinese get put in prison for insulting their government ON THE INTERNET.  Enough said.  I'd rather be an Indian than a Chinese anyday.

If you have done something such as declaring that you will assassinate the president,calling people in some nationality to kill the others,making silly rumors like "the government has killed 3000 people in XXX",maybe even if you are in a “democratic society" you will also be taken into prison.Actually,I usually complain about our gov on the Internet,but the most serious "punishment" I have ever got is that,they deleted my comments,that's all.What we chineses concern most is not so-called "democracy",but efficiency,economic development,environment protection,less culture limits and equality,not "declaration of democracy".I mean,act as voting,act as being equal but still keep the cast system,act as separated into many parties but actually from the same origin.President is voted by the people,but the real king is the ones who are the most richmen in the country...

[Martian]

Agni V will get overconfident Indians killed

Contrary to the exultation in the Indian media, I believe the development of the Agni V increases the danger to all Indians. Basically, it makes all Indians less safe and more likely to become extinct. Here's why.


DF-3A/CSS-2 IRBM with 3.3 megaton warhead

Citation: Securing India's Future in the New Millennium - Brahma Chellaney, Centre for Policy Research (New Delhi, India) - Google Books

"Brahma Chellaney, Centre for Policy Research (New Delhi, India) - 1999 - History - 612 pages
China's missile choices against India include the DF 3 and DF 3A, armed with a 3.3-megaton thermonuclear warhead and capable of hitting targets up to 2800 ..."

China has a multitude of IRBMs with thermonuclear 3.3 megaton warheads that can easily obliterate an entire Indian city with a single blast.


A single 3.3 megaton DF-3A strike by China would instantly vaporize New Delhi.

In contrast, a 20 kiloton atomic warhead delivered by an Agni V (that survives China's missile defenses) causes relatively minor damage.


For comparison purposes, an Indian 20 kiloton blast on New Delhi is hardly noticeable.

The impudence of Indians to trumpet their "China killer" and if they are actually stupid enough to launch one at a major Chinese city will bring terrible retribution. China can legitimately claim India has used a Weapon of Mass Destruction (WMD) against Chinese civilians and choose to respond in kind.

Unfortunately for Indians, China will destroy every major and minor Indian city to drive home the message that the use of a WMD against a Chinese city means self-genocide for dumb Indians.

The bottom line is you do not threaten the world's third-largest thermonuclear power that possesses the most advanced W-88 warhead design and delivery vehicles. Crazy Indians with puny atomic weapons (which are roughly 1/100 as powerful as a similarly-sized hydrogen bomb) are asking for trouble and seeking their own self-extinction.

Yes, it is true you might successfully atomic nuke a few city blocks in a few Chinese cities. In response, we will thermonuke all of India and take your subcontinent as payment. The Indian capability to inflict limited damage upon Chinese cities will force China to fight India at full thermonuclear power. At last check, China had a minimum of 294 megatons and God knows how many more in 5,000km of underground tunnels.

Also, China can now legitimately claim that India poses a serious threat to its national security. China may choose to launch a preemptive strike (citing the Bush doctrine) against India at any time. In conclusion, I think the development of the Agni V is a detriment to Indian security and existence.

http://www.crf-usa.o...h-doctrine.html

"The Bush Doctrine The Iraq War [or China's War Against India] may only be the beginning of an ambitious American [Chinese] strategy to confront dangerous [Indian] regimes and expand democracy [Chinese national security] in the ..."

[macau boy]

I'd say a couple rounds of mobile DF-21 or its variants are good. Just let the TEL drive near and around the scenic State Route 219 west of Burang.

[Martian]

Only 2 Agni Vs each year. China can build a Nike Hercules-class anti-missile faster.

India is expected to add two Agni Vs per year. China can easily counter these low numbers with thermonuclear-tipped Nike Hercules-class antimissile missiles. Alternatively, China can endeavor to apply political pressure and impose an embargo on imported electronics for the Agni V.

Expert: India Missile Launch Part of 'Longstanding' Strategy, Not Threat to China | Asia Society

"So even though India may test Agnis regularly it adds, at best, two such missiles to its arsenal every year."

----------


China can easily build an U.S. Nike Hercules nuclear-tipped anti-missile missile with a 2 to 20 kiloton warhead and a range of 77 miles (or 124 km)

High-altitude nuclear weapon test:


----------

Production of Agni-V to begin in a year's time: Saraswat - Hindustan Times

"...DRDO chief V K Saraswat said on Thursday.
...
Saraswat said that barring some electronic components, the Agni V was a completely indigenous product.

"More than 80% of the missile is indigenous, except for the electronic components which we import... Everything has been designed, developed and produced in our industry and our laboratory," he said."

[Martian]

Indian Rupee deathwatch at 52.52 rupees per U.S. dollar

In a nutshell, the Indian government is spending too much with money that it doesn't have. The Indian deficit and debt are skyrocketing. Also, the Indian balance of trade is in shambles with a large trade deficit. These factors are putting severe downward pressure on the Indian rupee. Basically, these are the same problems that afflicted Greece.

However, India has a few tricks it can use to temporarily stave off a financial collapse. Firstly, India can use the hard currency from migrant remittances to prop up the rupee. Secondly, India can sell off national assets to garner more hard currency. Thirdly, India can open up its retail sector to attract a large inflow of hard currency. Fourthly, India can dip into its foreign exchange reserves to prop up the rupee.

Anyway, India has a limited number of tricks to artificially support the rupee before an inevitable decline. The only long-term solution is to bring Indian spending under control, such as reducing the $40 billion military budget. Don't hold your breath though. Indian politicians (just like the Greeks) are notorious for avoiding hard choices.

Occasionally, I'll post deathwatch updates on the Indian rupee. The citation below shows the Indian rupee has fallen back to 52.52 rupees per U.S. dollar.

Indian rupee posts biggest fall in almost a month | Business Recorder

"Indian rupee posts biggest fall in almost a month
April 24, 2012
RECORDER REPORT
...
The rupee ended at 52.52 to the dollar, down sharply from Friday's close of 52.07/08, and making this the currency's biggest one-day fall since March 29, according to Thomson Reuters data."

----------

Interestingly, you will notice India's nominal GDP is shrinking fast. India's 2011 GDP was 78.8 trillion rupees (see India's Economy at 80 trillion Rupees and should be at US$ 2 trillion in 2012).

Math:

78.8 trillion Rupees / 52.52 Rupees per U.S. dollar = $1.50 trillion U.S. dollars (current Indian 2011 GDP in U.S. dollars), which will keep falling if the Rupee keeps falling against the U.S. dollar.

You will notice the current market rate Indian GDP of $1.50 trillion is substantially less than the IMF's "official" outdated 2011 GDP of $1.67 trillion for India (see List of countries by GDP (nominal) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia).

[PS:Annonymous]

I said that sometime ago and bhindian and someone of my countrymen didnt pay attention. Indian economy is all illusion created by Keynesian economic tricks and this economy has no legs. the whole thing is based on spend and spend and print more. Like Keynes said himself. things that cannot go on forever, wont.

[macau boy]

Martian, on 23 April 2012 - 09:23 PM, said:

Thirdly, India can open up its retail sector to attract a large inflow of hard currency.

I believe that was what they tried to do by allowing Walmart to open stores. But, it didn't work due to massive local objections, deep suspicions on influx of foreign influence and unfounded fear on destroying the livelihood of small businesses. So, they shut off, for no good reasons, a source of FDI in the tens of millions, if not hundreds of millions of dollars and a big chance to bring the country's retail sector into the 21 century.

[vishwaprasad]

Martian no doubt China is militarily, economically in totally a different league in comparison of India but thinking about nuclear wars with 1 mega ton vs 294 mega tons is not a mature thinking in my opinion. imagine having cities like shanghai or hong kong nuked? after that if you think that China will unleash her entire nuclear capacity on India and vaporize it, then you are not thinking about other countries like your friends Pakistan, Burma, BD...all of these will be vaporized along with India...nuclear winds/clouds will flow to Nepal, Bhutan and offcourse China too....So you have already lost important cities like hongkong and shanghai but now you will have to face nuclear rains in other parts of your country caused by your own nukes....

India and China both are very mature powers and they both are not going to play a nuclear war over some border issues....conventional war which will be more like a big skirmish to snatch territories from each other with no side having true victory, this is the only possible scenario....but due to highly sophisticated fire power and huge economy of China India will take more beating by loosing more soldiers, fighters, resources and maybe more border posts....

[PS:Annonymous]

vishwaprasad, on 02 May 2012 - 05:30 AM, said:

Martian no doubt China is militarily, economically in totally a different league in comparison of India but thinking about nuclear wars with 1 mega ton vs 294 mega tons is not a mature thinking in my opinion. imagine having cities like shanghai or hong kong nuked? after that if you think that China will unleash her entire nuclear capacity on India and vaporize it, then you are not thinking about other countries like your friends Pakistan, Burma, BD...all of these will be vaporized along with India...nuclear winds/clouds will flow to Nepal, Bhutan and offcourse China too....So you have already lost important cities like hongkong and shanghai but now you will have to face nuclear rains in other parts of your country caused by your own nukes....

India and China both are very mature powers and they both are not going to play a nuclear war over some border issues....conventional war which will be more like a big skirmish to snatch territories from each other with no side having true victory, this is the only possible scenario....but due to highly sophisticated fire power and huge economy of China India will take more beating by loosing more soldiers, fighters, resources and maybe more border posts....

Bhindian, you should be worry about mother india. If the times come and you should pray it never does. You should ask yourself a question Can India survive the joint nuke attack from china and Pakistan? Pakistan alone can destroy each indian city 10 times over and Chinese will make sure whatever left behind never see the light of day.

[Martian]

The Indian military annoys me. They like to make grand announcements. Yet, they are the least professional service in the world (see below). India has lost 482 out of 872 Mig jets in the last 40 years due to accidents. That has got to be a world record for incompetence.

India lost over half of its 872 MiG jets in 40 years - Economic Times

"India lost over half of its 872 MiG jets in 40 years
IANS May 2, 2012, 05.45PM IST

NEW DELHI: Over the last 40 years, India lost more than half of its MiG combat fleet of 872 aircraft and 171 pilots, the Rajya Sabha was informed Wednesday.

The causes of the accidents were both human error and technical defects, Defence Minister A.K. Antony said in a written reply.

He said that India bought 872 MiG planes of various types between 1966 and 1980. These were procured from the erstwhile Soviet Union and also built indigenously at Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd ( HAL).

Of these, "482 MiG aircraft accidents took place from financial year 1971-72 to financial year 2012-13, till April 19, 2012", Antony said.

The country lost 171 pilots, 39 civilians, eight service personnel and an aircrew member in these accidents, the minister said.

The MiG series aircraft were inducted into the Indian Air Force starting from the MiG-21 in the 1960s to the MiG-29 in the 1980s.

"These aircraft were purchased as per rules and procedures of that period. At present, the procurement of capital equipment is carried out as per the Defence Procurement Procedure," Antony said.

The training of initial batches of pilots for MiG aircraft was carried out in the erstwhile Soviet Union, followed by training for the rest of the pilots in India."

[Siddharth]

What is the attrition rate in PLAAF?

[Martian]

China's Air Force is three times the size of the Indian Air Force. To match India's record, China would need to lose three times as many planes or 1,446 fighter aircraft. There have only been a few scattered Chinese crashes here and there. A handful of Chinese crashes cannot approach India's record of 482 crashes (e.g. an attrition rate of over 50%). Indian MiGs are called "flying coffins" for a reason.

Chinese fighter jet crashes:

J-10: Four crashes.
J-11: Zero. (Since 1998, 164 J-11 fighters have been built and put in service.)
Su-27: One crash.
Su-30MKK: One crash.
JH-7/7A: Three crashes.

I might have missed a few accidents, but China's minimal losses of nine aircraft are miniscule compared to India's 482 losses.

----------

Chinese J-10 Vigorous Dragon: Since 1998 (i.e. 14 years ago), four known crashes of J-10.

http://en.wikipedia....s_and_incidents

"There have been four known crashes of the J-10 to date, the first crash was of a prototype combat aircraft during testing in 1998 with the most likely cause cited as failure of the fly-by-wire flight control system.[9]"

-----

Chinese Su-27: One crash in 2004.

http://www.milavia.n...7_operators.htm

"The first batch of six aircraft was delivered in February 2004, one of which crashed on March 16 due to pilot error."

-----

Chinese Su-30MKK: One crash in 2002.

http://cnair.top81.cn/gallery.htm

"One Su-30MKK (#01) crashed into a moutain during a training mission in April 2002 and was later replaced."

-----

Chinese JH-7/7A: Three crashes.

http://cnair.top81.cn/gallery.htm

"[#085] crashed in 1996. [#814] crashed on October 14, 2011."

http://en.wikipedia....ational_history

"On 19 July 2009, a JH-7A crashed during the Sino-Russia military exercise "Peace Mission 2009". Both pilots failed to eject and were killed.[9]"

[PS:Annonymous]

Is India a Poor Country or Emerging Superpower?
85
rate or flag


By Goodpal





See all 3 photos
Rich Smile of Poor kids
Source: http://karteekmancha...ategory/gene...




Ads by Google

Status Of Women In Africa 10x10act.org
Investing in Girls and Women Will Help Change the Global Economy!
Low Income Housing www.LowIncomeHousingHelp.com
Search Local Low Income Housing! Free Fast & Simple Application.
The Wall Street Journal WSJ.com
Official Site. Subscribe Today for Home Delivery & Get 4 Weeks Free!


Indian Economy


India, along with China, is the fastest emerging economy in the world. It is the fourth largest global economy looking from the purchasing power parity angle and its large domestic market kept it insulated from the recent depression in Western economies.Few years ago, Goldman Sachs predicted that India's GDP would overtake France and Italy by 2020, Germany, UK and Russia by 2025 and Japan by 2035, making it the third largest economy of the world, behind the US and China. Most economists see India as an emerging economic superpower and expected it to play a major role in the global economy in the 21st century.
In recent years the GDP has been growing impressively at 8 – 9% per annum, yet the number of poor doesn’t seem to diminish proportionately.India continues to face significant income inequality, considerable unemployment, poverty and malnutrition.India has a large service industry that accounts for 57.2% of the country's GDP while the industrial and agricultural sectors contribute 28.6% and 14.6% respectively. The unemployment rate for 2009–2010, according to the Labor Bureau, was 9.4% nationwide and 10.1% in rural areas, where 73% of the 1.2 billion population lives.
Although agriculture and related activities like forestry, logging and fishing accounted for just about 15% towards GDP but keep about 50% people busy, mostly in rural areas. Other major sources of employment are the service and the industrial sectors, providing 34% and 14% jobs, respectively. Therefore, despite a steady decline of its share in the GDP, agriculture still plays a significant role in the overall socio-economic development of India.

Indian Demography


India occupies 2.4% of world’s land area and supports about 18% global population. At about 1.4% annual population growth India is adding 17 million people every year - far larger than the number of jobs created in the economy annually. Its population reached 1.21 billion in 2010 and is set to overtake China by 2025 and is expected to be about 1.60 billion by 2050.
India has more than 50% of its population below the age of 25 and more than 65% hovers below the age of 35. Not being able to harness the potential of "young India" is the major failure of current economic model. It is expected that, in 2020, the average age of an Indian will be 29 years, compared to 37 for China and 48 forJapan; and, by 2030, India's dependency ratio should be only about 0.4.

Role of Agriculture


India is next only to the United States in arable land area in the world. It also has the third largest water area after Canada and the US.
Globally, India ranks second in the farm output. It is the largest milk, jute and pulse producer in the world and has world’s second largest cattle population (175 million in 2008). It is the second largest producer of rice, wheat, sugarcane, cotton and groundnuts, as well as the second largest fruit and vegetable producer, accounting for 10.9% and 8.6% of the world fruit and vegetable production respectively. India is also the largest consumer and second largest producer of silk (after China) in the world. In 2008, it had the world’s third largest fishing industry.
Given the fact that over half the employment comes from agriculture, health of this sector is directly linked to the wellbeing of rural India where most of country’s poor live. So, commonsense demands that government should strengthen this sector so that rural poor are directly benefited. Unfortunately, government policies are doing doing just the opposite and shrinking it; consequently adding to the number of poor.

Poverty in India


The extent of poverty varies from 33% to 75% depending upon the yardstick of measurement. According to the most recent 2010 data, about 33% Indian population lives below the poverty line. Thus, officially almost 400 million people of the country are poor. If one considers World Bank’s $1.25 a day income or Asian Development Bank’s benchmark $1.35 a day, 42% to 55% Indians live in extreme poverty. Even with these most conservative benchmarks about half of Indian population (600 million) is poor – about 400 million, with the new official poverty line and 2010 data. Therefore, as a country India is home to the largest number of poor in the world.

Urbanization is Not Development




Source: http://trak.in/tags/...4/india-urba...




Hunger Map of India

Why India will not be able to Reduce Poverty?


For last two decades, India has embarked on economic growth through market reforms and assumed that it will take care of poverty by itself – through the trickle down effect. In reality, it has only increased the riches of those who are already rich and capable living in or around big towns without any meaningful impact on the lives of poor who mostly live in the rural areas. Trickle down works when there are no deep rooted social divisions and everyone is part of mainstream economy. You may like to read: Understanding the True Nature of Indian Poverty.
(1) Economic growth meant only for urban India: Multi National companies and big corporate houses have displaced more people, through acquisition of land in rural areas for raw material and mineral resources, than the jobs they have created. They achieve profits by employing high technology and downsizing the labor force in a country that needs more numbers of jobs, particularly at lower levels where the poor can fit in. Therefore, they only cater to the interest of those who are skilled and educated – non-poor. Besides, such activities encourage migration towards urban areas when the displaced poor can not find means of sustenance in villages. This only increases the population of urban poor rather than reducing poverty.
Around 70% of the labor force inIndiahas education below primary level or is illiterate. Economic policies don’t.
(2) No Focus on rural employment: Indian government lack policies that encourage small and micro-enterprises in rural areas where most of country’s poor live. These tiny entities employ more number of unskilled people and hence, are more suitable for reducing poverty and stopping the flow of people towards towns. There are government programs for rural employment, but they offer mere subsistence and temporary relief. Besides, large chunk of welfare funds get eaten by corruption which creates further unease in the public.
(3) Faulty population management: Adding 17 million people every year to the population nullifies most of the economic prosperity – not that many jobs can be created in the present economic set up. Population management policy does not focus of solving the real cause of population growth – population momentum – there are too many people in the reproductive age group. It can only be reduced by preventing early marriages, delaying first pregnancy and spacing further births. You may like to read: Population Growth in India: Need to Kill Population Momentum.
(4) GDP led growth is misleading: The GDP numbers present a wrong picture of development. More relevant indicators for a complex country like India are Human Development Index (HDI) or Global Hunger Index (GHI).India ranks badly on these benchmarks. For example, read Understanding Poverty in India through the Hunger Index.

Conclusion


India needs to sincerely address the population issue by attacking the momentum driven growth and at the same time focus on job creation in the rural India where bulk of the poverty lies. Not GDP, but human development index and poverty index should guide India’s development policies.

http://goodpal.hubpa...ging-Superpower

[PS:Annonymous]

400 million population suffers from poverty in India

By Fahim Patel - Oct 24th, 2011 (No Comment)
4
Mumbai: India, the second largest country of the world in terms of population facing immense poverty and around 400  million of population are living below the poverty line.
Initially, Indian planning commission’s report showed poverty rate up to 800 million population but suddenly the report was changed and cut 400 million people from the list, which was presented in the Supreme Court.
In the report, population excluded from the list whose majority  had the income of 32 rupees per day in urban while the 26 rupees income for rural population.
The report described that the family of five members was not included in the list who had the earning of 5,824 per month in urban and 3,905 rupees in rural areas.
The report by Indian planning commission further described the ages of people who suffered from poverty in 2004-2005. Report showed that, in province Andhra Pradesh, 6.47 million children of 11 years, 6.14 million of 28 years and 12.4 million of 15 years had been affected. In province Assam, 5.45 million people of 22 years, 5.57 million people of 19 years had been affected. In province Bihar, 33.6 million of 22 years, 32.42 million of 34 years, 36.91 million of 41 years.
According to the report, around 220 million population is living below the poverty of 28 years, 87.1 million of 25 years while 300 million of 27 years.
According to The News Tribe investigation report, poverty rate have been increasing for 6 years in India and currently 37.2 percent population is living below the poverty line, which is far higher as compared to  year  2004 and 2005.

http://www.thenewstr...a/#.T6OBZlLNn5w

[PS:Annonymous]

China


The world's most populous country with a population of 1.27 billion in 2001¹ , China has made major strides in poverty reduction in recent years. By 2001 5 per cent of China's population lived below the national poverty line.²  Rural poverty is estimated to have fallen from 250 million in 1978 to 35 million in 2000 and from 30.7 per cent of the population to 3.7 per cent according to official statistics.³ Between 4 and 8 per cent of the urban population, somewhere between 15 and 31 million people live in poverty.⁴
Much of this decline in poverty is due to far-reaching processes of economic and social transition  However, economic growth has been slower in Western China, leading to higher poverty rates. For example, in 1988, a person in the West was 3 times as likely as their Eastern counterpart to be poor; by 1998, they were 6 times more likely to be poor.⁵ This figure shows the enormous rise in inequality in China in recent years - from one of the most equal societies in the world to one of the most unequal.⁶ Furthermore, the national poverty line is low by international standards, meaning that many more people live close to poverty.
China's transition from a centrally planned to a globalised market economy has helped reduce chronic poverty and disadvantage, but also created new forms of vulnerability and poverty. Eastern China, in particular, has clearly benefited from controlled liberalisation, and carefully used foreign investment - China receives more foreign investment than any other country in the world except for the US.⁷  At the same time, throughout the country, adapting to the market and preparing for joining the World Trade Organisation in 2001, has had enormous implications for employment and wellbeing.
One critical area of reform is the ongoing restructuring of state-owned enterprises. In 1995-2000, the state sector lost 31 million jobs. Not enough new jobs in the non-state sector have yet been created and an estimated 14.6 million are without a full-time job - an unemployment rate of 12.3 per cent.⁸   In addition to this, inflation in the early 1990s and the introduction of charges for health and education services increased pressures on many households. Liberalisation has also led to massive migration, as over 120 million people have moved to the cities since 1990, in search of better opportunities.

Childhood poverty
4.2 million Chinese children live in absolute poverty and 8.7 million live in disadvantaged conditions.⁹  Both the absolute numbers and proportion of children living in poverty have declined over the 1990s. Education and health levels in China are higher than in many countries with equivalent incomes  - life expectancy at birth is 71 years, and 85 per cent of the population aged over 15 are literate. However, improvements in these areas have slowed down over the 1990s and there are major regional differences. For example, in 1999 the national child mortality rate was 32 per thousand but 47.9 in the West.¹⁰  While 80 per cent of Western Chinese children complete primary school, this is 9 per cent fewer than the national average and 15 per cent fewer than in Eastern China. Recent studies suggest that the health and education reforms are reducing poor families' ability to make use of these vital services. For example, one study in Beijing, China's richest city, found that 75 of poor families could not afford all children's education costs such as tuition fees and stationery costs, while 50 per cent of poor families in Shanghai had no medical insurance because they could not afford it.¹¹

Urban social security reform
As the structure of the economy has changed, the social security system has had to adapt to protect people from different forms of poverty. Up to 1992, in urban areas, only people without work, with no savings and with no family to depend on were eligible for financial support.  A Minimum Living Standards (dibao) system has been developed since 1997 and by 2002 covered 23 per cent of poor urban households. Though this is the main form of social relief in urban China, there are concerns that the amounts allocated are too small to meet people's basic needs for food, clothing shelter, health and education and in particular, aren't enough to allow families to pay the compulsory education fee. Furthermore, large numbers of vulnerable people are excluded because they are unregistered migrants, or are disqualified by local administrations.¹²
The Ministry of Civil Affairs, under whose responsibility the dibao system falls, is considering increasing the amount paid to ensure that it does, for example, enable school attendance and extending this system to rural areas. It is therefore interested in finding out how far it protects poor families, and their priorities for additional support. CHIP is working with this Ministry to explore these issues as part of wider research on urban poverty and its effects on children.
Wider anti-poverty programmes have been in place since the 1980s, mostly focusing on rural areas. However, in the 5th Plenary Session of the 14th Chinese Communist Party Conference placed urban anti-poverty policy on the agenda for the first time. Shifts in government policy mean there is now growing scope for community anti-poverty initiatives, though at present these remain fairly small scale.^13
1 www.worldbank.org/data/countrydata/aag/chn_aag.pdf
^{2 See footnote 1.
3 Using a World Bank $1 per day poverty measure 124 million people were poor at the end of 1997.
S. Cook, 2002, 'From Rice Bowl to Safety Net: insecurity and social protection during China's transition', Development Policy Review 20 (5): 615-636. Using a World Bank $1 per day poverty measure 124 million people were poor at the end of 1997.
4 Tang, J, 1999, 'Situational analysis of poverty and anti-poverty in China' in 1999 Social Development Report, Beijing: Social Science Literature Press.
5 Lu, A and Wei, Z (2002) 'Child poverty and wellbeing in China in the era of economic reforms and external opening', from G.A. Cornia (ed), Harnessing Globalisation for Children: a report to UNICEF (http://www.unicef-icdc.org/research/ ESP/ globaliation.html)
6 The Gini coefficient, a measure of economic inequality, has risen very quickly from 0.23 in 1990 to the present rate of around 0.40. Ren, Y. and Xu, F. 2003, Urban Poverty, Disadvantaged Children and Social Protection: Critical issues for further research, Institute of Population Research, Fudan University and CHIP, London
7 See footnote 1. 8 See footnote 5.
9 Hussein, A. (2003) Urban Poverty in China. Measurement, Patterns and Policies, ILO, Geneva.
10 See footnote 6.
11 See footnote 5.
12 See footnote 6.
13 See footnote 6.
14 See footnote 6.}
  
Click here to find out about CHIP activities in China.

http://www.childhood...action=countryo

[PS:Annonymous]

Does any indian still wishes to dream of comparing hindia with China ?

[Siddharth]

Sure.. why not?

PS:Annonymous, on 04 May 2012 - 01:16 AM, said:

Does any indian still wishes to dream of comparing hindia with China ?

[Siddharth]

Martian, on 03 May 2012 - 10:59 PM, said:

China's Air Force is three times the size of the Indian Air Force. To match India's record, China would need to lose three times as many planes or 1,446 fighter aircraft. There have only been a few scattered Chinese crashes here and there. A handful of Chinese crashes cannot approach India's record of 482 crashes (e.g. an attrition rate of over 50%). Indian MiGs are called "flying coffins" for a reason.

Chinese fighter jet crashes:

J-10: Four crashes.
J-11: Zero. (Since 1998, 164 J-11 fighters have been built and put in service.)
Su-27: One crash.
Su-30MKK: One crash.
JH-7/7A: Three crashes.

I might have missed a few accidents, but China's minimal losses of nine aircraft are miniscule compared to India's 482 losses.
----------

Only 9 crashes in last 40 years!!!

Thants awesome.

[macau boy]

A more meaningful comparison, if that's what you're after, is to compare the number of accidents/mishaps ves. the total number of flight hours of each air force in a given period of time. That would show how good (or the lack of it) PLAAF/NAF/LH really is.

[Martian]

Macau Boy is correct. The number of accidents per given number of flight hours is the best comparison. However, I don't think the data is publicly available for the PLAAF and the IAF.

Regarding the nine PLAAF crashes, it occurred over a twenty year period. Planes that are over twenty years old tend to be retired by the PLAAF. Some early Chinese Su-27s have been retired.

All of China's J-6s were retired in 2005 and I don't know its crash history. Therefore, I excluded the J-6 from the list.

China ceased production of J-7s in 2008 and I have no idea about its crash history too. I also excluded the J-7 from the list.

In conclusion, it is reasonable to say that China's crash rate is about nine aircraft over a twenty year period. To be fair, we will double the number to a hypothetical 18 crashes to fit a 40 year period. No matter how you look at it, a projected loss of 18 PLAAF aircraft over a 40 year period is not comparable to India's amazing 482 crashes (e.g. one MiG loss per month) during the last 40 years.

----------

How do we explain the discrepancy between China's minimal crash rate and India's awful crash record? One important factor is China's extensive use of flight simulators during the past 10 years (see below).

Flight simulators give pilots real training|Science-Tech|chinadaily.com.cn

"Flight simulators give pilots real training
Updated: 2012-05-02 07:37
By Xin Dingding (China Daily)

China's air force is expanding the use of flight simulation technology to hone fighter pilots' skills and air battle tactics.

One of the earliest institutes to study flight simulation in China, the Flight Simulation Technology Research Institute of the Air Force is now able to develop simulators of the latest fighter jets that China produces, said Xie Donglai, head of the institute.


Pilots in Harbin, in Heilongjiang province, practice skills in a flight simulator, which can simulate bad weather, engine failure and other special situations. (Tan Chao / for China Daily)

"Flight simulators are playing a more important role in military training around the world," he said.

The United States was the first to use flight simulators to train pilots. The US air force found that an hour's training in a simulator has an effect equal to that of training in a real fighter jet for 0.5 to 0.9 hours.

China's air force began to train fighter pilots with simulators a decade ago.

So far, the institute alone has given at least 70 simulators to the air force and other units, which have provided 15,000 hours of training since 2002, according to the institute.

"That means huge amounts of training costs were saved," he said. Thanks to simulators, pilots can quickly master flying skills necessary for a certain type of fighter jet.

Guo Lei, director of the institute's simulation training center, said that a number of pilots who flew the first-generation of fighters spent more than 50 days in simulators and made a successful transition to flying third-generation fighters.

Also, the equipment can simulate bad weather, engine failure and other special situations, and teach pilots how to handle them, which training on real fighter jets cannot do, Xie said.

"A fighter plane could cost from tens of millions of yuan to hundreds of millions of yuan. Using fighter jets for special training is unlikely, because people could die and planes could crash, if things are not handled well," he said.

And the special training through a simulator can also prepare fighter pilots to make quicker responses to unexpected situations in real flights.

He recalled that a few years ago, when the navy was equipped with a type of third-generation fighter, a pilot encountered a rare engine failure on the aircraft's first flight.

Fortunately, the previous simulation training had prepared the pilot for such a special situation, and he returned safely.

The simulators also allow airmen to practice shooting missiles, which are so expensive that pilots are reluctant to fire them in real aircraft practice, he said.

Researchers in recent years looked to develop new simulation technologies to prepare pilots for air battles.

In one of the latest developments, the institute has developed a system in which pilots can challenge the world's major fighter jets alone or in joint force.

The system took the institute three years to develop, as airmen previously complained to researchers that the rival jets did not seem real in previous simulators, he said.

The system has been welcomed by pilots and was later awarded a top prize related to military science and technology.

Contact the writer at xindingding@chinadaily.com.cn"

[Martian]

U.S. willful blindness to Indian Agni V MTCR violation

The United States has to decide whether it is serious about stopping the proliferation of long-range missiles that can carry weapons of mass destruction (WMD). The United States complains vociferously when China sells a dual-use truck to North Korea. And yet, an unnamed country is freely exporting the electronic guidance system for India's 5,000 km+ Agni V nuclear missile.

The Chinese truck is a murky situation, because the North Koreans probably imported it under a civilian pretext and then misused it. However, the Indian Agni V MTCR (i.e. Missile Technology Control Regime) violation is crystal clear. The electronics for an Agni V ICBM has only one purpose, which is to guide a long-range missile.

The Agni V can carry a payload of 1,500 kg for at least a distance of 5,000 km. This is a clear and flagrant violation of MTCR in the export of sensitive electronics to India.

If the United States is serious about stopping proliferation, it should publicly identify the perpetrator and demand an immediate halt to the export of critical electronics for the Agni V WMD.

----------

Missile Technology Control Regime - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"The Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) is an informal and voluntary partnership between 34 countries to prevent the proliferation of missile and unmanned aerial vehicle technology capable of carrying a 500 kg payload at least 300 km."

Launch of Agni-V only the beginning of new series: DRDO chief - India - DNA

"Launch of Agni-V only the beginning of new series: DRDO chief
Published: Thursday, Apr 19, 2012, 14:23 IST | Updated: Thursday, Apr 19, 2012, 14:26 IST
Place: New Delhi | Agency: PTI
...
"More than 80% of the missile is indigenous, except for the electronic components which we import... Everything has been designed, developed and produced in our industry and our laboratory," he said."

[Krad]

Quote

The United States complains vociferously when China sells a dual-use truck to North Korea. And yet, an unnamed country is freely exporting the electronic guidance system for India's 5,000 km+ Agni V nuclear missile.

MTCR refers to and covers one thing very stringently as far as export restrictions go: Complete missile systems (Category I in MTCR)

When it comes to components such as guidance, navigation, propulsion etc etc (Category II).... things are much murkier.

Refer to:

http://www.mtcr.info...guidelines.html

"While still agreeing to exercise restraint, partners have greater flexibility in the treatment of Category II transfer applications."

I mean even laser ring gyros and such could have perfectly benign uses...so this becomes very hard to implement. There is a lot of overlap with national space programs which the MTCR promises to not curtail....so again it is a very tricky process as there is no end-user monitoring.

Quote

The Chinese truck is a murky situation, because the North Koreans probably imported it under a civilian pretext and then misused it.

This is a  valid statement...and the U.S media raising this as an issue shows that they dont understand the MTCR at all. However the U.S governement has not made an official statement or complaint....and China as it stands is not an MTCR member (rather China has unilaterally declared to abide by the basic framework in the interest of global peace)....so therefore there is absolutely no violation in the truck being exported....however it just makes for a pretty nasty photo as it asks other questions about what else might have been traded (but this is all open to speculation).

Quote

However, the Indian Agni V MTCR (i.e. Missile Technology Control Regime) violation is crystal clear. The electronics for an Agni V ICBM has only one purpose, which is to guide a long-range missile.

As mentioned, there is no violation by any exporting country since it had no way to monitor how laser ring gyros (for example) would be used by India. The wording is ambiguous in the guidelines for this very reason. MTCR only really prevents complete systems from being exported.

[macau boy]

Krad, on 05 May 2012 - 08:13 AM, said:

there is no violation by any exporting country since it had no way to monitor how laser ring gyros (for example) would be used by India.

Really?
I am pretty sure some hindu temple needs that thing to figure out what direction to face when praying to their gods or certain yoga guru can safely balance himself on top of a nail.

[Martian]

India is making a mockery of the MTCR

At Krad, are you seriously trying to argue that a laser ring gyro and an electronic guidance system for an ICBM may have a dual use? A laser ring gyro may also be used for the navigation of a commercial jet. India lacks the technology to build commercial jets. You can eliminate that dual-use argument. Furthermore, the electronic guidance system for an ICBM has only one use: to guide an ICBM.

India has demonstrated that it has violated the MTCR (Missile Technology Control Regime) and the United States should come out and demand an immediate halt to further exports and violations of the MTCR by India and the supplier country. If the United States continues its willful blindness, India will make a mockery of the MTCR and the United States will be silently complicit in aiding long-range missile proliferation.

Let me narrow down the list to make it easier for the United States to identify the missile proliferator in violation of the MTCR. There are only five countries that have proven electronic guidance systems for an ICBM. All five countries also happen to sit on the U.N. Security Council with a permanent veto (i.e. UNSC P-5).

1. United States
2. China
3. Russia
4. Britain
5. France

Among the five suspected countries, we can rule out the United States and China. The United States would not actively help India in developing an ICBM. To the contrary, the United States has a history of imposing sanctions and technological prohibitions on India. Also, it is obvious that China would not help India to develop the Agni V "China killer" to hit cities like Shanghai.

There are only three viable violators of the MTCR: Russia, Britain, or France.

The United States should publicly condemn the MTCR violator and demand that they stop destabilizing the world and proliferating ICBMs that carry WMDs (weapons of mass destruction). The U.S. effort to save the MTCR is worthwhile; even if the guilty party says "nyet."

[Krad]

Quote

A laser ring gyro may also be used for the navigation of a commercial jet.

Congrats, you listed one more application....have a cookie. But how about general aerospace? India from what I've heard is making prototypes and TDs of so called commercial aircraft....what about Helicopters, UAVs etc etc... and above all Space Payload Launchers?

Quote

India lacks the technology to build commercial jets. You can eliminate that dual-use argument.

Don't make me laugh. Both the core technology and know-how are all there. Trust me, I have worked with several Indian aerospace partner companies in research.... The only area where there is a serious gap is gas turbine propulsion specifically materials. Right now the cost benefit of investing into something as high end as civilian aerospace is pretty low.....but I have come across projects recently where they are attempting such as the regional turboprop and the mid range turbofan a/c....india regional jet IIRC.

Besides even scrapping all of the above for arguements sake, most of the gyro imports and guidance imports would be consumed by the helicopters and UAVs that are being made on the production line....not to mention the tons they probably imported in a large quantity under the pretext for using in their space launcher.

When the French pretty much GAVE them the design for the Viking Engine (a clone is used on the PSLV)....are you going to say that western countries are going to say no to a laser ring gyro if the official reason India put on paper is....say the space program...and they imported like a thousand of them in say mid 90s when the PSLV program was expanding?

Quote

Furthermore, the electronic guidance system for an ICBM has only one use: to guide an ICBM.

Nope. General space launchers such as the PSLV as well...and thats if they are importing electronic guidance systems as a whole (which would be really dumb). My guess is they imported a whole bulk of the components for these (gyros, processors, connectors) from pretty much any western country under the pretext of using it for their space launcher (France and Germany pop to mind first...but potentially UK or USA pre-1998 nuke tests). They later integrated these as they saw fit (mostly for their PSLVs) but also for their various missiles that required reasonable CEP at longer ranges.....this dual use between space and military has always been there and been exploited by many countries to get around the MTCR (including China)....its nothing new at all.

Established countries just dont like to see full complete, ready to use missile systems being exported to countries that are in the process of acquiring ballistic missile tech....but there really is no stopping the exporting of components...and really it becomes unfeasible to even try monitor it and enforce it at that level....though it may technically be written on paper (albeit with enough wiggle room to skirt if you really try).

Quote

India has demonstrated that it has violated the MTCR (Missile Technology Control Regime)

You only violate the MTCR if you are a member of it and you have supplied direct complete systems to a party outside the MTCR. India is not a member (though there are talks of bringing it into the fold eventually...from a supplier point of view not consumer...though the benefits would most likely be consumer side)....so there is no violation.

An extreme case would be if North Korea showed off a full complete working chinese missile with significant capability (for arguements sake). North Korea would not be in violation of the MTCR...it would be China.

Quote

and the United States should come out and demand an immediate halt to further exports and violations of the MTCR by India and the supplier country.

There are about a dozen countries that make high quality ring gyros for all aerospace applications and even more that can make the chips and associated circuitry to integrate them into a system....you can pretty much take your pick....list the purpose as a space launcher or helicopter (if that is even required for a country like India)......

The reality is that the west does not see India in the same prism as say North Korea and Iran....so these components are going to be exported one way or another. Why the west wants to bring India into the MTCR is not to curtail India's ballistic tech programs...but to firmly ensure that India doesn't re-export any of this tech to a west-unfriendly country or any of the systems it eventually manages to design on its own developed from the stuff it imported previously.

So the word you are looking for is "could" rather than "should"....and the chances are next to nothing of that happening when the US pulled the strings to get India a waiver from the NSG for civil nuclear tech..... When you are willing to do that to accomodate India.....MTCR category II items that are being exported to India really pale in comparison.

Whether it is fair or not....depends on your point of view...but that is the reality. The MTCR is flexible enough to not be violated in this case. The dual use chinese truck in North Korea is also not a MTCR violation.....western media will have you believe otherwise....but thats the media playing their same old game of earning profit and readership from the yellow commie threat of the far east.

[Martian]

Bottom line: Indian DRDO chief has publicly acknowledged importing critical electronic components for use in the Agni V ICBM. The imported electronic guidance system and software comprise approximately 20% of the Agni V missile. This is a clear violation of the MTCR by RUSSIA, Britain, or France.

The United States must put a stop to this flagrant violation of the MTCR and ensure no further illegal exports of electronic components for the Indian Agni V WMD program.

[Krad]

Quote

This is a clear violation of the MTCR by RUSSIA, Britain, or France.

This is not a violation....as nowhere does it say in the MTCR that there is a complete BAN on category ii items. In fact like I have said repeatedly, it is deliberately left ambiguous so that the P5 and other countries can continue to trade with countries they deem friendly in the components of ballistic missile systems.

Hence the west provides to India and China provides to Pakistan and Iran....all the while no one is breaking the MTCR because only complete missile systems attract attention and condemnation from fellow MTCR signatories.

Plus the countries you listed could include germany, spain, japan, italy, sweden....and many other countries that make laser ring gyros. Nothing special about such a system.

Quote

The United States must put a stop to this flagrant violation of the MTCR and ensure no further illegal exports of electronic components for the Indian Agni V WMD program.

Why does it rest on the US to do this? Did the US officially complain about China violating the MTCR ever? Its always been trade in components....and these fall under the radar as far as MTCR is concerned. The MTCR is a collective voluntary agreement to prevent proliferation....but it is by no means water tight....it was never designed to be.

If it were water tight....a ton of business the West and China does would disappear....and none of them want that.

Its basically a gentlemans agreement to not give a whole system to a country outside the MTCR.

[Martian]

Russia needs to stop violating the MTCR (Missile Technology Control Regime)

At DMLA (on another forum), the DRDO chief said 20% of the Agni V (e.g. the electronic components) were imported. You make it sound as if you can go down to the local Radio Shack and buy the electronic components and software to operate a Mach 24 ICBM. Your argument is ridiculous.

India can't build a Mach 3 BrahMos cruise missile by itself without Russian technology. Yet, you are claiming India can buy the electronic components for a Mach 24 ICBM down at the local electronics store. This is a laughable scenario.

Those Russians are seriously violating the MTCR and they need to stop. Proliferating ICBM technology to the highest bidder is destabilizing the world and placing everyone at risk of Indian WMDs.

If the Russians are allowed to freely violate the MTCR for India, there is nothing to stop the Russians from violating the MTCR and proliferating ICBM technology to Iran, North Korea, or the next highest bidder. The MTCR is crumbling and the United States must stop it.

[Krad]

Quote

You make it sound as if you can go down to the local Radio Shack and buy the electronic components and software to operate a Mach 24 ICBM. Your argument is ridiculous.

Wrong. I never made it that easy....you are the one thats making this premise. All I'm saying is that the MTCR has always had loopholes for advanced countries whether P5 or not to export to 3rd party clients....and look the other way even if they know its going to be used for ballistic missiles (eg. when the country is not seen as a direct threat or is seen as a friend though not an ally). In many cases they dont know or would be hard to tell....and would be losing perfectly good business to another country.

Thats why a number of countries have ballistic missile programs courtesy of Chinese-tech transfer (either whole missile systems or through importing chinese components). The whole missiles were exported during the days when the Chinese did not follow MTCR guidelines....and the component transfer continued afterwards due to the easy loophole in Cat II that can be exploited....(and is exploited by all P5 members and many other MTCR countries).

Quote

India can't build a Mach 3 BrahMos cruise missile by itself without Russian technology. Yet, you are claiming India can buy the electronic components for a Mach 24 ICBM down at the local electronics store.

The complexity of a Mach 3 cruise missile does not scale up as you imply when we are talking about a Mach 24 ICBM. The largest challenge with higher speeds is the materials needed to withstand re-entry. Guidance is about equally tough in both cases....and to ensure a quality system....a country might need to import till it builds up enough of a local base in such technology to have the same quality assurance to its military. A local electronics store certainly cannot provide this technology (I don't know where you get this from)....a country would have to seek outside help from various high end suppliers...but the purposes are multi-use. There isn't a certain supplier that only makes laser ring gyros for ICBMS....you import the component (with a certain G-rating and other parameter assurances) and then integrate it with your system.

This goes against the spirit of the MTCR ...sure.....but that hasnt stopped any of the P5 or european countries from engaging in such trade with India, Middle East, Asia pacific ...you name it....depending on who is friendly to said country and whether good business can be done.

Most of the U.S export restrictions are covered by ITARRs which are completely different from the MTCR...but most other supplier countries have no such self-imposed regulation.

Quote

Those Russians are seriously violating the MTCR and they need to stop. Proliferating ICBM technology to the highest bidder is destabilizing the world and placing everyone at risk of Indian WMDs.

First you went from saying it could be the russians, brits and frenchs....and now its just the russians. (When in fact it could be a number of countries....they dont have to be P5 at all)

Obviously you already have it in your head how all of this exactly works...so its a waste of time now to go in circles. Its apparent to me you have no idea what the MTCR is or how manipulative many supplier countries are (China included) to get the business or alliances that they want. Zeroing in on the U.S is frankly hypocritical. Everyones fingers are dirty.....not just the Russians.

And its funny how you despise Russian assistance and claiming this puts everyone at risk of Indian WMDs. Didnt russian technical assistance to China in the 50s put a large amount of the world under risk of chinese WMDs? Why the double standard here?

Countries with large clout and large populations will find a way to ensure what they see as a reasonable right to secure their existence....there is no way to fully deny them of that. Might as well welcome them to the fold and ensure that they have access to technology that secures their WMD arsenal safely.

Quote

If the Russians are allowed to freely violate the MTCR for India, there is nothing to stop the Russians from violating the MTCR and proliferating ICBM technology to Iran, North Korea, or the next highest bidder. The MTCR is crumbling and the United States must stop it.

On top of the Russian assistance,

French provided the Viking Engine for the PSLV amongst other things

Germans provided many crucial booster and cold gas thruster tech to India in the 80s...as well as inertial guidance tech

The British have provided other forms of tech as well for SLV use.

This was all done AFTER india exploded its first nuclear device. Are you telling me these countries are that gullible to think that India would strictly use their tech only for civilian space launchers? Don't make me laugh....be a bit pragmatic.....it was never only the Russians.

And its not like the Chinese are saints either....before or after they unilaterally declared in the 90s to abide (but not join) the MTCR. You think the Syrians, Iranians and North Koreans are getting everything from the Russians? And since when have the arming of these 3 countries been a real headache for the chinese when they get strategic leverage and cheap oil in return?

Every single powerful country has its allies and friends....even on opposing sides of the cold war sometimes.... read up a little bit on it sometime.

No one has clean hands....the MTCR is just made to look like theres some sort of action being taken on proliferation....an invisible rubber band to slow the process down....but in reality....its just another useless agreement.

I mean it doesn't even have a set of conseuqences should a member country actually deliberately violate the guidelines.

Its like the U.N of agreements...meant to look nice on the surface...and same old crap continues behind the scenes.

[macau boy]

Hummm....,very interesting
Viking engine from France, gas thrusters and inertial guidance devices from Germany, cryogenic engines from Russia (hindia bought a total of seven), other forms of tech from Britain and this ring laser gyro is from the US of A, I presume.
No wonder hardly anyone took the Agni V seriously. I am wondering if all foreign made devices (hardware & softwares) are to be removed from the Agni V or from any of hindian launch vehicles, what else is left?

[Krad]

Quote

Viking engine from France, gas thrusters and inertial guidance devices from Germany, cryogenic engines from Russia (hindia bought a total of seven), other forms of tech from Britain and this ring laser gyro is from the US of A, I presume.

Much like the CANDU nuclear reactor derivates....India I am sure has made made reverse engineered and localised versions of the above in many of their newer rockets....whether space or military launchers.
The continued import of the electrical systems (probably guidance and control) could illustrate they have problems in getting a quality local chip built and of course the gyros...and that it is cheaper to just import for the time being esp to get a certain CEP precision.

Quote

No wonder hardly anyone took the Agni V seriously. I am wondering if all foreign made devices (hardware & softwares) are to be removed from the Agni V or from any of hindian launch vehicles, what else is left?

It is always a bad idea to downplay the capabilities of a rival nation or competitor. Always assume they are strong and capable....because the downplaying has made many countries in history experience some nasty shocks in times of confict.

Whether it is imported or not, the Agni missiles do present a certain integrated capability...wherever the source of their components....and I am sure the Chinese govt has factored them in their long term strategy...even if members here rubbish them.

[macau boy]

Krad, on 06 May 2012 - 08:34 PM, said:

Much like the CANDU nuclear reactor derivates....India I am sure has made made reverse engineered and localised versions of the above in many of their newer rockets....whether space or military launchers.
The continued import of the electrical systems (probably guidance and control) could illustrate they have problems in getting a quality local chip built and of course the gyros...and that it is cheaper to just import for the time being esp to get a certain CEP precision.


It is always a bad idea to downplay the capabilities of a rival nation or competitor. Always assume they are strong and capable....because the downplaying has made many countries in history experience some nasty shocks in times of confict.

Whether it is imported or not, the Agni missiles do present a certain integrated capability...wherever the source of their components....and I am sure the Chinese govt has factored them in their long term strategy...even if members here rubbish them.

I did not try to downplay anything. I am simply looking at the facts.
I would not disagree that hindia looks upon China as a rival nation since they claimed that the Agni V is an ICBM (I suppose a theoretical range of 5,000 km is ICBM by hindian standard) capable of reaching Beijing and Shanghai. They also claimed that it is nuke capable, so I again make the audacious assumption that this is their "holy grail" for national security and national survival. Can you imagine core components inside delivery system of a nation's nuclear deterrent and last line of defense is at the mercy of some companies half way around the world?
Allow me to get a bit more technical. The other three big guys ( China, USA, Russia) have been conducting this type of tests for decades and we all know, in some details, how they go about doing them. Critical ingredients would include, among others, a complete tracking system to cover the entire range, a recovery team to retrieve the equipment capsule (the most valuable item of the test as it contain raw data of the missile in flight) and a logistical/support contingent to make sure that nothing is overlooked. Beside bragging the "success", there not a word of anything else. Did the missile complete the voyage according to the planned trajectory? Did the payload manage to return to earth? Did the recovery team ( I assume ships in this case as the Agni V was shot over the Bay of Bangal) arrived on time on schedule and on location? Was the capsule being picked up? There was no mention of such activity, no press release, no picture, no sign of follow-up activity, no nothing.
So, what do you make of this "test"?

[Krad]

Quote

Can you imagine core components inside delivery system of a nation's nuclear deterrent and last line of defense is at the mercy of some companies half way around the world?

If a component is tested and certified...it doesnt really matter where it comes from.... If I was India I would have bought a ton load of whatever is required from whichever country provided them.....for official use in aerospace. So I doubt they would run out of these critical components suddenly if they get some sort of sanctions on them in the future. But its anyone's guess what the contingency plans are for these worst case scenarios and future indigenisation programs.

Quote

Critical ingredients would include, among others, a complete tracking system to cover the entire range, a recovery team to retrieve the equipment capsule (the most valuable item of the test as it contain raw data of the missile in flight) and a logistical/support contingent to make sure that nothing is overlooked. Beside bragging the "success", there not a word of anything else. Did the missile complete the voyage according to the planned trajectory? Did the payload manage to return to earth? Did the recovery team ( I assume ships in this case as the Agni V was shot over the Bay of Bangal) arrived on time on schedule and on location? Was the capsule being picked up? There was no mention of such activity, no press release, no picture, no sign of follow-up activity, no nothing.
So, what do you make of this "test"?

No idea. Maybe google Agni V tracking or something? When have China, Russia and the US released full information on their missile tests at the height of the cold war (or even now) in full press releases?

Any country can say they did a test and that they tracked and recovered everything perfectly...and there's no way to really independently confirm that by anyone (at least by those that would release such information to the general public as opposed to secret agencies of large countries that can monitor such activities if they so choose). So I don't see the point of your statement.

[macau boy]

I see.
Perhaps you should find out how China handled the capsule recovery in 05/80. BTW, it took place in the South Pacific and yes, no secret with full press release, official statement and color photos.
Oh, the event was also witnessed by the USN, RAN and French navy.
Here are other "interesting dates you may want to check: 10/27/66, 05/18/80, 10/7-16/82, 10/85, 09/28-10/15, 1985,...
Of course, the Russian and Americans have done pretty much the same thing with similar "openess".
Any idea why?

[Krad]

Quote

I see.
Perhaps you should find out how China handled the capsule recovery in 05/80. BTW, it took place in the South Pacific and yes, no secret with full press release, official statement and color photos.
Oh, the event was also witnessed by the USN, RAN and French navy.
Here are other "interesting dates you may want to check: 10/27/66, 05/18/80, 10/7-16/82, 10/85, 09/28-10/15, 1985,...
Of course, the Russian and Americans have done pretty much the same thing with similar "openess".
Any idea why?

I would be interested to see these colour pictures you speak of for the Chinese recovery of an ICBM test....or for any ICBM testing of any country in the relatively nascent stages of their ICBM program.

[macau boy]

These informations are readily available in the internet and just a few clicks away.
But, it was nice to be able to have this exchange with you; bye.

[Krad]

Quote

These informations are readily available in the internet and just a few clicks away.

I see. Well you must have really good efficient search skills because, try as I might, I couldn't find any pictures of the 1980 ICBM recovery or any others (US or Russian).

Most of the them were just simple press releases like what India released: Missile launched, Missile tracked, Missile Recovered, Missile successful.

Plus even a press release of this nature, would do next to nothing to convince people who have something inherent against believing India's capability (after all such a warhead splashdown can also be staged with another short range missile...as can pictures of recovery). So again I fail to see the point you are trying to build up here.

[东方巨龙]

巴基斯坦的兄弟们对中国的印象如何呢？

[safdar]

Krad, on 08 May 2012 - 11:35 AM, said:

to convince people who have something inherent against believing India's capability

This is the one single fact that irks you to the point that you end up barking mad on this forum.


Martian is right the U.N. Security Council Resolution 1172 specifically asks India (and Pakistan also) to stop ballistic missile developments. Yet India conducts an ICBM test in the back drop of muted criticism from USA who shrilled the loudest when north Korea fail tested a mere SLV! What is it going to take for you to see this hypocrisy?  

Belief in an opponents capabilities would give that opponent encouragement to coerce the believer. do you remember the Indian SRE-1 RV capsule that came back down to earth without any char marks due pyrolysis? Those pictures of the RV’s shiny  phenolic resin and black silica tiles cant be found anywhere now. Indian shiit came out then when the Chinese debunked their test as fake. doesn’t carbon carbon composites go through some form of thermodynamic transformation?

remember the handyman-1 that found water vapour and concluded that there is enough water on the moon to grow vegetables one day? I was trying to draw your attention to the fact that there is water vapour everywhere in space... hell, ESA even found water vapour in the Orion nebula for crying out loud.


But you’re the professional and we are all illiterate taxi drivers!  hence we should according to you believe in indian capabilities.