As suspected, this rapidly turns into a IAF is better then PAF saga. Almost all the time, by the same posters whenever facts may be inconveniant for them.

Not a single fact from your end, only rhetoric and insults so far.

@ Kramer

It really does not matter how many hours PAF, PLAAF or USAF does.

Why? The number of hours flown is very germane. Depending on the hours flown by the average airframe, it’d be obvious whether it requires strengthening or not.

You claim IAF Mirages do 1,500 hours per decade (with no source), in the same breath you can reliably inform us IAF only has 1.2 pilots per plane. You know this how? 125 hours? Almost below NATO minimum.

I cannot think of any fighter plane entering service in the 80s that will not need at least some strenthing in order to continue being active beyond 2020. Even USAF is retiring F-16s and F-15s younger then 1985due to airframe issues, but in your magic world the rules of physics do not apply to IAF planes.

What are your figures for the hours to rebut Kramers deductions?

How do you know the Mirages are not getting structural strengthening?

More facts and less insults, please.

@ Boom

Can Top Owl cue a AAM? No. Please do not call me kiddo or try and BS me and forum members.

Looks like you can’t even read while spewing insults – “BS me and forum members”, it seems. Go read what Boom showed. He showed the Topsight HMS which is the HMDS being offered for the Mirage 2000 by Thales & Samtel India.

Since you can’t even check the most basic of facts:
http://www.thalesgroup.com/Pages/PressRelease.aspx?id=5365

Topsight is an advanced, integrated unit, handling three primary functions:

* Display of critical information:
* visual target designation, by transmitting the target’s line of sight to the nav/attack system. Used with modern missiles, Topsight allows pilots to perform wide off-boresight target designation;
* visual target acquisition – reverse cueing mode; the display’s symbology guides the pilot’s eyes to the target tracked by the aircraft sensors. The nav/attack system provides spatial data.

And this, from 2001.

Again, we have a case where Boom, Kramer and Quadbike claim “Mirage 2000 upgrade puts it on par with Block 50 F-16”

When facts prove wrong we get into PAF fighter numbers, flight hours etc.

Au contraire, the facts as they stand clearly bear out that the PAF’s Viper 50’s dont appear to have any critical differentiator bar having newer airframes.

An upgraded Mirage2000 is not on par with a Block 50. That is simply the point I am refuting.

And so far, you have done a pretty lousy job of attempting to prove your point since you have relied on insults, insinuations and snide jabs which do not a point make.

It seems to be some matter of pride for you that the Viper 50 has to be superior versus the Upgraded Mirage 2000, whereas most of us couldn’t care less, given the fact that even when the upgraded Mirage 2000 comes, the IAF will have even superior & equivalent aircraft around, especially the MKIs, and that too in numbers that dwarf the few Vipers the PAF is getting.

Good luck trying to avoid that basic fact.

You’d have been better served in trying to stick to logic, that the handful of newer Vipers PAF is getting (not the MLUs) may last longer than these upgraded Mirages & some possible range advantages (CFTs).

But so far, instead of logical claims about why you think different, you have been using bluster. But such attacks won’t convince anyone serious.

If the weapons costs so much then the IAF better choose the Rafale so that the weapons can be commonized…2.1 billion dollars sheesh!!! Isn’t this more than what Pakistan paid to buy their entire new fleet of F-16 block 50’s?

Its not just the weapons. French avionics and systems are very credible and very expensive. The Mirage 2000 upgrade for instance should come with the standard ICMS Mk3. This is a modern system, with digital receivers & integrated DRFM. Public sources indicate it has many advanced features including ESM capability, and even target localisation. In short, the Mirage upgrade would make them very modern and capable aircraft. I don’t buy into claims that they are getting the RDY3 either. This has so far been only reported by AWST, whereas earlier reports mentioned the more powerful & Mirage 2000-5 standard RDY-2.

F-CK-1 is not in production but is a design which is test flown may need fine-tunning with AESA radar (if they can find one) and other avionics.

F-CK-1 C/D wasn’t put into production because they wanted a higher capability aircraft like F-16s and it may be cheaper/more effective to import off the shelf like F-16s whihch is in production but LCA MK-II project is yet to be realized, ie while F-CK-1 C/D is not in production because it lacked orders, LCA MK-II is yet to have a prototype therefore a more time consuming and risky project.

That is fine, but you are missing the point which I was making about production, or perhaps I was not clear enough, that unless the production line is kept open with confirmed orders for new builds (not just upgrades) then ROC will have no option but to import, if it wants cost effective aircraft. Whether it be the LCA or F-16 or Gripen or whatever.

Skills are lost, people leave & after a time, you have to spend a lot to regain skills.

Otherwise, like Japan, it will have to spend heavily to keep local capabilities continuing (see the F-2 program costs). That the ROC is seeking the Viper, when the F-CK-1 C/D on paper, appears fairly credible, indicates they are not too much in favor of the latter, or its too expensive or does not have political support or is facing pressure on some other grounds.

Hence, it seems the F-CK-1 is the end of the line for this program. There has been talk of a follow on program to the F-CK-1 but it has not been launched formally, as far as I am aware.

You point can only have some validity if LCA MK-II was already in production which we know is not going to happen for atleast 6 to 7 years.

When did I say India has a ready LCA MK-II to offer. My point is even if it were ready, or if India were to offer ROC a stake in co-development of the MK-II or the MCA, even such ideas are unlikely to be taken forward as India-ROC ties are not overt enough to antagonize PRC, for now. India is not too bothered about antagonizing PRC when it comes to defensive actions (its raising 2 new division for the mountains, inducting new missiles etc) but is pretty subdued when it comes to external moves.

One explanation is policy drift. Another is that its simply waiting till its economic growth is even more well established & secure, till it acts more forthrightly in terms of realpolitik.

Certainly India should make serious efforts to sell LCA because very few projects are able to survive for long if you don’t have exports but before Indian goes to far it will need to have big orders in the bag from the IAF which shouldn’t be a problem given large number of Migs IAF needs to replace

before this discussion goes any further just say that i always thought of LCA as one of the most important Indian a project but unfortunately with a moving goal post if you know what i am trying to say. Anyways best of luck to LCA MK-II and its fans

Fair points. And I agree when you say:

To achieve sales Indian government will have to do a lot more then simple sale pitch and promise of delivery, they will have to make Bold gestures”

Because thats where the Govt. of India has been lagging in terms of foreign policy & speedy decisions.

Past experience is not a pre-requisite for setting up an assembly line for a foreign model.

You are joking, right? Experience & availability of skilled & experienced manpower is everything in Aerospace. Institutional learning takes decades to achieve and accomplish. HAL did not just license assemble its MiGs and Jaguars and substitute them with local “substituting local components and materials as they became available from the domestic industry.” either.

They were firmly vertically integrated with Phase wise manufacture. HAL set up a Korwa complex for avionics, had an entire complex at Nasik for the MiG family, which has now been expanded & reequipped for Sukhois, started entire plants for forgings, machining. Only later on, have they sought to incorporate third party Indian made systems etc.

HAL has also then moved onto system integration & design architecture level in a big way. They have a D&D team, and multiple divisions now with a clear roadmap and reasonable funding.

So far, lets be realistic, Pvt industry is at the level of providing individual subystems & doing design and development work at the same level, to replicate what HAL does will be very daunting, expensive and time consuming.

My friend my point was if ROCAF wanted LCA MK-II class aircraft they could always go for F-CK-1 C/D. Yes it will need up-gradation like AESA radar and some other avionics but that will be certainly less risky and time consuming option when compared LCA MK-II which will make its first flight in 4 to 5 yeas (i hope i am not off target for the First flight dates) and will have to go under clarification and meet IAF’s own urgent needs.

I certainly do agree that F-35 or advanced Viper are the only options capable of handling the threats faced by the ROCAF thus it is unrealistic to assume that LCA MK-II can be pitched to them for their requirements.

But the point is whether the F-CK-1 is even in production? If it has stopped, and the lines are not active & only kept for upgrades, it may be cheaper/more effective to import off the shelf. Presumably, apart from capability, that is why the ROC is so keen on more F-16s.

Coming to the LCA, selling or even attempting to sell the LCA to them would be a very important political statement. Frankly, ROC-India ties are not in that league yet of overt declarations of intent. Right now, India is very focused on growing its economy & hence, so it appears, biding its time. Alternatively, some could point out its policy drift.

like Teer said Taiwan will need to make sure that war isn’t over before USN and USAF can react to the Chinese invasion and with every increasing defense budget and high growth of Chinese military it is getting harder year by year for USN to extend its military support for Taiwan . We have already seen the world backing down from selling Taiwan weapons under pressure from China and now what looks like a first phase of giving into Chinese demands, USA has started to follow the world by declining the critical weapons sales something no one would have imagined in 1990s.

Agreed, but ROC-US ties remain very strong & the US would most certainly intervene in an attempt to preserve the status quo. In recent days, the US has taken note of the PRC military modernization & started revamping its capabilities in turn.

See for instance:
U.S. and Vietnam Build Ties With an Eye on China
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/13/world/asia/13vietnam.html
US, Australia expand ties with an eye on China
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101107/ap_on_re_as/as_us_australia
India, U.S. build ties, with an eye on China
http://blogs.reuters.com/afghanistan/2010/11/09/india-u-s-build-ties-china-in-the-frame/

After a RAND study found a possible win for the PRC in a war of attrition, the US is proceeding with countermeasures
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2009/07/air-force-plans-to-dodge-chinese-missile-barrage/

The leading power, namely the US, is not going to allow the PRC to dictate its policies anytime soon. Plus, US ROC military ties remain close & it’d be safe to say they are continuing.

All in all, a Rafale/Typhoon/Gripen NG would still put India way less at risk of US political cloud than an US plane. And if ever USA was trying to annoy Rafale/Typhoon/Gripen NG they would not only annoy India but as well the selling country, which both would try to change the situation. Once again, something quite different than having an US plane.

For all practical purposes, the Gripen is American in a majority of systems, NG is not much different. India may as well buy American from Boeing/LM themselves.

Problem is, looks apart, the F/CK-1 C/D also has limitations. The program has 71 orders for upgrades, which means existing airframes converted to the latest standard. Am unsure if production of the aircraft is still ongoing.

Second, the program per Wiki had 3 phases:

1. Increase the carrying capacity for the TC-2 Beyond-Visual Range Air-To-Air missile from two to four. Integrate the TC-2A anti-radiation missile and the Wan Chien cluster bomb. Plus 2 CFT (Conformal Fuel Tanks) also seen on the 2 newly built prototype aircraft.
2. Upgrade the mission computers, the electronic counter-countermeasures, the electronic warfare systems, the Active Identification Friend or Foe (AIFF) system and the terrain-following radar.
3. Ground and air testing. If the program is approved, service entry is projected to occur in 2010.

It does not mention an increased thrust engine. I recall reports that the ROCAF was unhappy with the lower powered engines & that the problems persisted despite quick fixes later on. The ROCAF instead preferred more F-16s and Mirage 2000’s, only to be unhappy with the Mirage 2000 as well over spares & limited support from France over Chinese pressure.

Another issue above is the upgrade does not cover advanced systems like an AESA radar. While no panacea, it would if well implemented offer more capability, than the current system which is based on a re-engineered AN/APG-67 design.

Realistically, the best (only) option for the ROCAF are F-35s to face superior numbers & which include heavy platforms (J-11 class). The other option is an advanced Viper variant, but while that could face evolved J-10s it would have a challenge versus Flankers

By that standard every radar out there is “a work in progress”. Including the likes of the AN/APG-79, 80, etc.
The fact is that the first operational RBE2 AESA was delivered in August.

The APG-79, 80 have had a few years with them by now, to release several software builds, fixes and hence can be considered reasonably mature & this after the ostensible production started. The European AESA’s will take some time to get there. The Rafale will need to add more modes & a bit more range if it wants the UAE deal, but even otherwise, it will take some time till its certified across the board, and all issues are resolved. Not that its that big a deal for India, as India too will spend the first couple of years learning about the aircraft it chooses and its capabilities.