The United States and Japan have been aiding India, but how much of a point is that aid?

Obviously, it doesn't make much sense.

At that time, what India needed most was advanced fighter jets and main battle tanks, self-propelled howitzers, long-range rocket artillery, air defense systems, tactical ballistic missiles and cruise missiles.

Can the United States and Japan provide these weapons and equipment?

Taking fighter jets as an example, there really isn't much that the United States can use to provide aid to India.

Why?

The main forces of the U.S. Air Force are the F-22A and F-35A, and the replaced F-15s are basically scrapped, while the F-16 is almost cleaned up.

At that time, among the F-16 fighters that the US military had withdrawn, the slightly better ones were sold or given to weaker allies as military aid, while the ones in poor condition were sent directly to the aircraft cemetery.

Why?

There's really no need for that.

In the past, it was because there were strong opponents, and a world war could break out at any time, so it was necessary to keep a hand in order to ensure that there were fighters available in the early stage of the war.

Now, what is the probability of a world war?

Since there is no such demand, why spend money on mothballing weapons and equipment?

It can be said that if it were not for the fact that it costs money to deal with the retired fighters themselves, the United States will not set up an aircraft cemetery, but will directly let the retired fighters come back to the furnace.

Aid India with the most advanced fighter jets?

Is it possible?

At that time, in the list of active fighters of the US military, there were only two types that could be used to assist India, one was the F-35A, and the other was the F-16, which had only more than 200 left.

The latter, apparently, doesn't make much sense.

The Indian Air Force also has quite a few F-16E/F, and the actual combat has proved that with the Indian Air Force system, it is difficult for this fighter to defeat the JF-20 in the air.

Of course, the key is that the Indian Air Force's system is too fragile.

Besides, the F-16 used by the US military is actually a low-end fighter, and it is not as good as the F-16E/F in terms of overall performance.

What India wants, in fact, is the F-35A.

The question is, will the United States be able to send F-35A assistance to India?

You must know that the US military's own F-35A is not enough, not only are there more than 200 F-16s waiting to be replaced, but there are many more vacancies waiting to be filled.

Besides, such an expensive fighter, American taxpayers will definitely not agree.

Let Loma, which produces the F-35A, come to India's aid?

Obviously, overthinking.

In the United States, businesses are independent and have the same legal status as the federal government, and the federal government cannot force companies to bail out.

As a matter of fact, the US military has to go through legal procedures when procuring weapons and equipment.

The U.S. military was able to buy advanced weapons at a lower price only because it invested in the development and owned a part of the intellectual property rights.

That is, if India wants to acquire F-35A fighters, it will have to purchase them from Loma.

What the US authorities can do is to get a lower price for India and give India priority in terms of production scheduling.

Unfortunately, it's just the priority.

As it was then, even if India had the money and paid the full amount immediately, it would have to wait at least a few months to get the first batch of F-35A.

Also, not too much.

Why?

Loma has already received deposits for F-35A orders from more than a dozen countries, and in the event of a default, Loma will have to pay a large amount of compensation.

How much money is there in India?

In order for Loma to produce the F-35A for India in the first place, it would have to pay liquidated damages for Loma, which is obviously impossible.

Buying a second-hand F-35A from the US military?

Obviously, it's also unlikely.

Why?

The F-35A used by the US military is very different from the F-35A exported, not to mention that India buys a monkey version, and even Japan buys a lack of it.

For the US military to use the F-35A for its own use, the sensitive equipment must be dismantled.

Obviously, this is a hassle, and it is not cheap.

With the usual style of the United States, the price will not be too low.

In fact, given the situation at that time, it was very difficult for India to obtain advanced fighters from the United States.

Well, what about other main battle equipment?

Equally unrealistic.

Taking main battle tanks as an example, the US military has a lot of ready-made goods, and there are thousands of M1 main battle tanks in stock, and the United States has been using tanks for foreign aid, and in the past few years, it has only provided thousands of tanks to Iraq, and later it has also been aided to the rebels in Syria.

The problem is that these tanks simply don't work in India!

Even the lowest configuration M1A1 has a combat weight of more than 56 tons, which is about 10 tons heavier than the T-90S, while the M1A1 in full state exceeds 60 tons, and the M1A2SEP3 of the latest improved version exceeds 70 tons, which can be said to be the heaviest main battle tank in the world.

Such a heavy tank is simply not used in India.

In fact, before the purchase of the T-90S, the Indian Army sent people to the United States to inspect the M1A2, but the result was that it was abandoned because it was too heavy.

In addition, the Indian Army does not have many officers and men who can handle American-made tanks.

Train officers and soldiers from the new?

Obviously, that's going to take more than enough time.

Of course, there are also problems with the logistical support system.

Because it uses gas turbines with extremely high fuel consumption, even if there are tank crews, even if the roads can withstand it, India cannot afford to use American-made tanks.

And what about artillery?

There are many M109 self-propelled howitzers in stock in the United States, but they are all models before the A6, and many have been mothballed for more than 20 years.

How much combat power do these howitzers with a 39x diameter barrel have?

Obviously, this is a big problem.

In addition, the Indian Army has never used the M109, so it may not be able to control this howitzer, but the Pakistani Army has rich experience in using it.

If it is captured by the Pakistani army in battle, the Pakistani army can immediately use it against the Indian army.

To put it bluntly, the Indian Army rarely uses American-made equipment, so even if it receives assistance from the United States, it is difficult to use it immediately.

Wait a few months?

By that time, the war was over.

Of course, that's not to say you can't use them all.

At least one piece of equipment, which the Indian army has procured, and it is not bad on the battlefield.

What equipment?

AH-64D Apache helicopter gunship.

India has long procured dozens of such helicopter gunships, some of which are deployed in the northwest and played a role in the attack on Lahore.

The point is that the Indian army has not lost a single AH-64D.

Although this helicopter is not very adapted to the hot and humid climate of South Asia and often breaks down, it has been praised by the Indian army and can be regarded as the best helicopter gunship that the Indian Army has.

At that time, the Indian Prime Minister's request to the US ambassador was to hope that the United States would provide a batch of AH-64D as soon as possible.

Actually, this is not a high requirement.

Why?

The U.S. military has hundreds of AH-64s, and the utilization rate is not very high, most of them are in semi-decommissioned loading, even if dozens of them are aided to India, there is not much loss.

In fact, in a few years, the AH-64 will be retired from the US military one after another, and then it will have to spend a sum of money for it.

In that case, why not be a favor?