Composites are not the future. The future lies in a clever combination of metall alloys and composites.

Things like Diffusion Bonded (SPFDB) Titanium , Lithium-Aluminium alloy, Magnesium alloys and compsites. Which is a step up from normal aluminium alloys.

I think calling the LCA a 4.5 generation fighter is a bit too positive.

Btw, could it be that the high use of composties can also be attributed to a lack of experience in metallurgy and experience with modern metal alloys ??

So for the EF we count from the technology demonstator phase and for LCA we count from offical contract signment. Don´t you think that LCA has also seen some desing studies before the contract was signed.

After government approval of the programme on 6 May 1982, development of the Gripen began on June 30, with an FMV contract for five prototypes and 30 production JAS 39, plus an option for 110. Test runs of the RM12 engine were conducted in January 1985, while the HuD was tested on a Viggen from February 1987.
Roll-out of the first prototype was on 26. April 1987, but first flight did not occur until 9. December 1988, with Stig Holmström at the controls. This aircraft was lost in a landing accident on 2 February 1989 due to problems with the fly-by-wire system.
Testing was restarted on 4. May 1990 with prototype 39-2. 39-4 followed on 20 December 1990, 39-3 on 25. March 1991 and 39-5 on 23. October 1991. To make up for the loss, the first production aircraft was eramarked for the test programme as well. It flew on 4 March 1993, but crashed on 8 August during a display at Stockholm, again due to fly-by-wire problems exacerbated by pilot induced oscillations. By 22 December 1995, 2000 flights had been completed.
Meanwhile, a second batch of 110 aircraft, including 14 two-seaters, was approved in June 1992. The final 64 aircraft of batch 3 got its approval in parliament on 13 December 1996 and was signed on 26 June 1997. Deliveries are to run until 2007, and despite recent plans for drastic defence cuts, it seems that the Gripen order is safe for the time being.
The first batch of 30 aircraft was delivered by Saab from 1993 to 1996.

Yes, some of the last RF-4C were equipped with the wrap around windshield, as were a really small number of F-4G.

First of all how many F404 has India purchased ?? Has ti decided to fund the proposed specially modified F404 variant. AFAIK it has not doen the later and the F404 are surely not enough for more then one wing.

If India would decide to go with the F404 and drop the Kaveri engine, then I would have much more faith in the LCA. But as some stated the Kaveri is supposed to be better then the F404. So we can conclude that Tejas can only live up to its expectations if that happens to be the case. Unfortunately we have seen few news from the Kaveri programm. Few news about testing and even less about succesfull tests.

When I said LCA is tested like a technology demonstrator, then I meant that X-31 for example was flown more often and more to the limits of the nevelope, then the current porotypes (soon) are flown. We have seen no news about the testing of the whole flight envelope, supersonic testing, high AoA testing, testing with external loads, weapons release tests, low speed handling tests, tests under different climatical conditions, icing tests. All those things are still to be done and that is apart from testing the avionics systems, which I cagree can be done with other aircrafts to a bigger extent. Looking at other programms (F-22, EF) and at the current speed of testing I simply can not believe that we are looking at an IOC date much before 2009. And that is without some software problems, which would be very surprising if they would not happen on an advanced fighter of today.

The reported good handling characteristics say nothing about the capabilites of the aircraft, it only says that the flight control systems semms to working good under normal conditions. Not more but also nothing less.

With my remarks about the ALH, I just wanted to point out that some times there are reasons (external or internal) that mean that certain goals are not met. So we should wait and see if LCA and Kaveri will meet all goals. And in which timeframe.

If I would a a say in that programm I would drop the Kaveri engine and go for the F404. Then I would put the money saved from developing the Kaveri into flight testing of the LCA. That would do the programm very good imho.

Excellent pics, really awesome