info on the MiG-27ML upgrade that HAL is carrying out.

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/MONITOR/ISSUE2-6/rupak.html

I also had pictures of the upgraded cockpit and a HAL inhouse mag article, which I can’t find right now..once I do, I’ll post it.

but there were posts indicating that the IA had asked for a 50% increase in the Nag’s range, was’nt there ? whereas this article indicates that the Nag will be accepted with its present range and capabilities by the IA..if true, thats great news !

Joey, think of the procurement costs and timelines as well- considering just how pathetically slow this whole process is, the IAF would be lucky if it does’nt whittle down to 29 squadrons- even that, with an average of 18 aircraft per squadron is 522 aircraft with at least another 50-60 in reserve. considering that there wont be any more follow on Su-30MKI purchases, and the 126 MRCA, that takes care of 230+126= 356 jets- if the Tejas is ordered in substantial numbers (like the 200 originally thought of), that would pretty much take numbers to 556 jets-and allow for 29 squadrons- and with the 5th generation fighter deliveries starting in 2016 (assuming), at a rate of 14 per year like the MKI, thats another 126 5th gen fighters by 2025.
that would not be near the ideal IAF strength of 49 squadrons, but better than the current dwindling numbers.

I too would love to see an IAF specific MCA but be practical- does the GoI have the funds to procure the MRCA, 5th generation fighter as well as the Tejas and the MCA ? I’d be happy if some headway was made on the MCA, but considering just how bad the GoI can make the situation for the IAF, I’m willing to settle for lesser than ideal.

Look at the politics. The whole thing is screwed up, & the IAF is getting shafted.

The only reasons I can imagine for including the F-16 (in a version which doesn’t yet exist, for what was originally supposed to be an urgent requirement) & F-18E (which will cost far more over its lifetime than the funding will bear, unless numbers are slashed), are either 1) to cuddle up to Uncle Sam, regardless of what the IAF wants or needs, or 2) to kill the whole thing by endless delays.

The Gripen also doesn’t fit the official requirement (though at least it’s affordable). Maybe it was put on the list by someone who’s trying to kill the Tejas.

The procrastinators have so far succeeded in killing the Mirage 2000-5 buy the IAF wanted. Perhaps there are rival groups: one is trying force a Russian buy, so killed the M2K deal, & another is trying to block them, possibly just from spite, so forced the list to be opened up to all & sundry, even if they don’t fit the bill. There could be some trying to keep options open just so they can get jollies visiting as many interesting foreign countries as possible at taxpayers expense. BTW, I’m not joking about any of this: these tactics have been used before. Look at the Hawk buy. Indian trainee pilots died – many of them – while politicians conducted personal vendettas over that deal.

you’re right Swerve. the F-16 is a complete no-no. the IAF’s top brass had gone to the extent of providing presentations on how the Mirage-2000 suited the IAF more and how the F-16s safety record did’nt compare well to that of the Mirage. plus the neighbour’s pride syndrome. and yet we see it in the list. the IAF’s choice was pushed aside to avoid the Single-vendor case which would allow opposition parties to have a field day in accusing the Govt. that would approve the deal, of having taken bribes.
Gripen being part of the MRCA competition is itself so strange ! considering that its a light tactical fighter like the Tejas, how it fits into a Medium sized fighter slot for the IAF is beyond me.
the Typhoon as far as I remember was not even on the horizon initially and only came into the picture later as the MRCA competition dragged on and heavies like the F-18 got in..
as for the MiG-35, the Russian side could well be offering bribes to officials considering that they’re refusing to sign Integrity pacts- and shockingly, this is being let go of on a case-by-case basis by inept or corrupt politicians and bureaucrats.
and not hard to see just why- MiG is the least financially viable among all the contenders and Russia itself would love to prevent a Western firm from penetrating this lucrative market that Russia knows how to deal with so well.

cant believe there are posters talking about the FC-1 and the J-10 as classics !:D the former has’nt even entered service and the latter is totally unproven and it would be considered as a classic ?! 😀 by the same yardstick, the Tejas and HJT-36 Sitara would be classics too..:diablo: National pride carrying away some people here !

when was this news article posted ? like Joey mentioned above, the Astra was recently tested a few times so development work on it is progressing..where the LRAAM fits into the scheme is the question. does the IAF need a longer range AAM ? the Mirage fleet will get the MICA EW/IR and the Jaguar fleet will get short range dogfight missiles ASRAAMs or AIM-9X..the SHar fleet has the Derby missile and the new MiG-29Ks will get the Russian Adder and R-73. interesting news !

are those pics that of the Interceptor itself ??

you’re talking as if you’re one of the program managers and have indepth internal knowledge of the problems facing the program..the fact is that the Jonesey is making a guess on the state of the carrier from a report that has been DEBUNKED ( just how many reports are debunked by Indian Service Chiefs ?)..and you’re forming your opinion based on that.

so with all due respect, I’d believe the Indian Naval Chief and not someone whos forming his opinion based on a debunked internet report, of spurious origin.