Even in 1979, before F-16 IOC was declared. The plans and engineering development for Blocks 5, 10 and 15 had begun. The production continued to crank out “old” jets as development of new capabilities for the newer lots was performed CONCURRENTLY.

Having stuff on paper and testing assemblies is not the same as cranking aircraft off the assembly line! You know that.

The F-35 has not finished flight testing. The testing that has thrown up quite a few problems. Yet still hardware is being built at a crazy rate. Hardware that will likely require modification.

It is not remotely the same as taking a viable working solution (which the F-16 was and the F-35 is not) and adding capability. Right now Lockheed are just trying to make the F-35 a viable working solution – and at this point, it is where concurrency is crazy.

http://www.defensenews.com/article/20120507/DEFFEAT05/305070006/Change-Course-Protect-F-35

You do realise your quoting a man formerly President of Lockheed?

The R-27 was more hype that threat and it wouldn’t have been significant to double their load.

The MiG-29 was probably the optimum solution to mass air-warfare over Europe in the 80s.

You can fire a couple of BVR AAMs, follow them up to get in close when they probably miss then use your HMCS to use your ultra-high performance IR AAMs to effect the kills.

-It didn’t need long range as the battleground was condensed.
-It didn’t need high performance radar as the contested airspace would have been extremely chaotic and no other aircraft had a decisively superior situational awareness environment at the time.
-It had the best WVR weapon system in the world, by a distance, at the time.
-It could run off rough fields so was relatively tolerant of the inevitable runway cratering that would occur.

Inter-service politics, the USAF fought tooth and nail to prevent the Army getting the C-27J a small to medium fixed wing transport. THERE IS NO WAY that the USAF is just going to give a fixed wing combat jet to the Army. Would never happen in a month of Sundays!

I would have had numerous air force generals doing jail-time for the bit in bold. If they objected to it, I’d have offered them the firing squad instead.

You have various “patriots” label Ed Snowden a traitor – but Snowden’s actions would never have put so many US troops in danger as the pig-headed actions of the USAF top brass with regards JCA. Yet not a thing will be done to bring them to task.

If only it were just that because in some instances it`s actually disinformation.

Disinformation = Factually incorrect.

Whether it is “lost in translation”, intentional lying or just plain stupidity is moot. As far as I am is concerned, any statement from these officials should be taken with a pinch of salt.

http://www.business-standard.com/article/economy-policy/russia-can-t-deliver-on-fifth-generation-fighter-aircraft-iaf-114012100059_1.html

Russia can’t deliver on Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft: IAF

The Indian Air Force alleges Russians reluctant to share critical design information, besides technical and cost issues

hahaha, did you read it?

They go from:

On December 24, in a meeting in New Delhi chaired by Gokul Chandra Pati, the secretary of defence production, top IAF officials argued the FGFA has “shortfalls… in terms of performance and other technical features.”

To:

The IAF’s three top objections to the FGFA were:
(a) The Russians are reluctant to share critical design information with India;
(b) The fighter’s current AL-41F1 engines are inadequate, being mere upgrades of the Sukhoi-30MKI’s AL-31 engines; and
(c) It is too expensive. With India paying $6 billion to co-develop the FGFA

Furthermore:

Top MoD sources suspect the IAF is undermining the FGFA to free up finances for buying 126 Rafale medium multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA) for an estimated $18 billion, an acquisition that has run into financial headwinds because of budgetary constraints.

and this:

Officials also say the FGFA programme involves co-developing radar far superior to the one on current prototypes. The Russian Air Force wants conventional radar for its version of the FGFA, which looks only towards the front. The IAF wants two additional radars that look side-wards, allowing the pilot vision all around. Now the Russians are evaluating a similar requirement.

is just plain wrong.

In general, I would pay very little heed to anything that comes from the mouth of a high level Indian official. They tend to be technically clueless and are attempting marketplace bargaining on a billion dollar program.

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articles-view/release/3/151088/f_35-unit-cost-continues-to-rise.html

The F-35-specific data in the Omnibus’ Joint Explanatory Statement (JES) calculate to a unit cost for a generic F-35 (only counting procurement costs, not research and development) at $185 million, each. The Air Force’s F-35As are $159 million, each; the Marines’ F-35Bs are $214 million, each, and the Navy’s F-35Cs are $264 million, each. But none of that is the whole story; these calculations may well be undercounts of what F-35s will cost in fiscal year 2014.