That will be solved with the arrival of MMRCA. Then there will be two “major types”, MKI and MMRCA both ordered in good numbers from two different suppliers and with the capability of doing overlapping roles.

Indeed it will help in easing the burden of being the most modern frontline jet on the MKI..

and with the latest reports that the PM is going to raise the issue of AL-31FP engine failures with the Su-30MKI fleet, it does give another reason as to why the IAF was keen to have a twin-engined fighter.

]PM to raise issue of Su-30MKI engine failures with Russia

how is all that relevent?

Do you have problems with comprehension ? A genuine question.

Originally Posted by matt

Does anyone know what warheads will be put onto nirbhay? Any chance they will stick a anti radiation warhead onto the missile?

Would be a very good addition to the IAF, however apart from the harpy i am not sure if they have any other anti radar missiles.

Something with a 1000km range could be very useful.

You said that the IAF doesn’t have anti-radiation missiles apart from the Harpy, which shows how much you know of the IAF’s weapons. I corrected you and pointed out all the different anti-radiation missiles that the IAF has. How it is relevant is quite obvious. If its not obvious, I guess you have some other issues.

Apparently the F-35 has been chosen by the Japanese over the Super Hornet and the Typhoon.

link to AviationWeek article

Japan has chosen the Lockheed Martin F-35 in the F-X competition, Japanese newspapers report, citing government sources. A decision will be formally made on Friday, Dec. 16.

Around 40 aircraft are required, says the Mainichi. Officials previously said the requirement is for 42. The selection may result in many more F-35 sales, however, since Japanese industry has urged that the aircraft chosen for F-X be built until the late 2020s.

Even at the low production rates typical of Japanese industry, that would result in deliveries of perhaps 120 fighters, partly replacing Japan’s Boeing F-15C/D Eagles — although the selection of the F-35 somewhat limits the industrial benefits to Japan.

If the media reports prove true — and it would be unusual for top Japanese newspapers to be falsely briefed on an imminent decision — then Japan’s choice also is likely to improve Lockheed’s chances of winning South Korea’s current fighter competition, called F-X Phase 3, for which 60 aircraft are required. South Korean procurement officials would be criticized for ordering aircraft of earlier design than those chosen by Japan.

In both north Asian competitions Lockheed’s rivals are the Eurofighter consortium, offering the Typhoon, and Boeing, which has promoted the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet to Japan and the F-15SE Silent Eagle to South Korea.
…..

T-129 ATAK P6 – Begins Cannon Fire Tests

Its the first live fire tests of the T-129 with AselFlir 300T E/O and Turkish Avionics.
Test conducted in the video is reaction time of cannon when slewed to an already designated area with E/O and fire a few rounds.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oI4g0TBUOy8&feature=player_embedded

Thanks to the Combat-Master from militaryphotos

nice to see this video in HD..I wish more military videos were filmed this way.

Nice.:D Indian UPG and UB-UPG. What’s with the ( presumably ) airshow number on the UPG , are they going to display it somewhere ? I don’t think any of the indian upgrades were shown at MAKS , or am i wrong ?:confused:

http://russianplanes.net/ID59713
http://russianplanes.net/ID59714

Thanks for posting those pics.

Brad, Kramer,

I think people are getting carried away by claims of the offset offerings. For one, both bidders would be offering packages which are of comparable value.

There is no indication that both are offering packages of comparable value but the Eurofighter consortium companies does have a larger spread and penetration within India that will allow them to offer a larger offset package. They did offer better offsets in Switzerland too.

Again the ‘variety’ argument that is offered for EADS should be seen in a proper perspective-does it offer everything that the Indian MOD and industry want at a reasonable cost within a meaningful timeframe. I highlighted those two terms to show a possible disadvantage that EADS may have. Offsets essentially involve a legal framework for industrial partnerships. So for the Eurofighter, you would need to deal with major sub-vendors in four different nations in addition to a few minor ones elsewhere. Transferring technology and systems and drawing up a legal framework with Indian partners for such a package would take more time and cost more than a similar agreement say with Boeing or Dassault. This is not an issue of politics (dealing with four countries vs one) but one of logistics and commercial law.

That is what the MoD’s job is- to try and figure out whether or not the offsets being offered by the Eurofighter consortium offer what India wants, and whether or not it meets their time goals.

The sub-vendors for the Rafale-Thales, Snecma and Dassault all are predominantly French and already have a presence in India with JVs and upgradation work. Their offset proposals would in theory be easier to implement.

As usual I will add the rider that this doesn’t give the Rafale an automatic edge. What it shows is that evaluating offset proposals is a very fluid job.

And the same is also true for Cassidian, Rolls Royce and BAe.

why would F-15J grounding have any relevance to F-15SE grounding? Did USAF F-15E grounded due to F-15C grounding?
F-15SE is suppose to use completely new engine, avionics and industrial supply chain. It is like comparing salut powered Su-34 to saturn power Su-35. Engines/radar/factories are not shared.

India need to create industrial redundancy. and this can only be created if you know already how to built it same product at mulitple location. so better create anotherer factory for Flankers and built 100% with different supply chain. for example built it with GE engines/Israeli radar/Hexcel composites. if things cannot be developed in India. This what China did with J-11B. This is faster and less costly option.
The other of MMRCA has huge implementation/financial hurdles.

I have been lurking here so I know of your wonderful posts.

I will simply say it again- JASDF fears that if the F-4s were to be replaced by the F-15 and if for ANY structural or safety reason, they were to be grounded, their air force would be left with no other fighter to depend on except the F-2. This type of a thing has happened before

The U.S. Air Force’s Boeing F-15 grounding is being felt around the globe, with other nations such as Japan and Israel halting flights of their Eagles, and with the Navy shifting its carrier-based air power to Southwest Asia.

F-15 operations were suspended pending review of a Nov. 2 crash. “A possible structural failure” was involved in the Missouri Air National Guard F-15C crash, which could have larger implications about the integrity of the entire F-15 fleet, say USAF officials.
…
The grounding affects the entire USAF fleet of more than 670 aircraft, including Strike Eagle models, the only USAF aircraft now able to drop the new 250-lb. Small Diameter Bomb in Iraq. Israel and Japan quickly followed USAF’s lead. An Israeli official said they grounded their fleet, but are still awaiting information from the U.S. about why the aircraft were grounded.

What it says is that Air Forces may not want to depend entirely or too much on any one type, which may develop some issue that could possibly ground most of an Air Force’s fleet. The Silent Eagle isn’t a complete rework of the Eagle and will share most of its fuselage structures with the legacy Eagles. So if a F-15J were to be grounded, it could possibly lead to a Silent Eagle being grounded as well, at least till the issue was fully understood.

The rest of your post is not worth replying to.