Nice idea but I presume they want a cargo ramp not a large side door.

They are replacing HS748 Avros and those Avros do not have ramps either.

So its possible IAF may consider large side door airliners but unlikely.

I am guessing J31 Burrito is Hot Doggie’s new name… ?

New toy for CinC

So then it looks like there wont be any Cats for future Russian carrier?

The picture is hazy, but there seems to be a larger white coloured aircraft in the middle. Or are my eyes playing tricks on me?

How about the Eurocopter Tiger or the Wz-10?

Personally, i would rather see them going for the Ka-52 (since its the best looking one around).

I think you missed SAAB’s statement earlier this year in which they said Gripen E/F would have a lower price than C/D. I believe this is at least in part because the F414 engine used has a lower price than the F404 version produced by Volvo used in the C/D.

In future, perhaps SAAB can import the F414 from India since HAL will be (iirc) license manufacturing it. That might reduce the cost further.

Good post Teer, but i cant stop thinking about the questions that been in media, about matching IAF expectations on power-to-weight and aerodynamic efficences?
what is this problem? is it the requirement or the system that fails? or is it a non-problem?

Its a small craft, and at the moment rather big engine for its size 8-10kN. Why wouldnt this be a match?

LCA TWR should be better than Gripen. LCA Mk1. is slightly lighter (iirc ~6450 kgs empty) and has the max power variant of the GE404 series.

Some aerodynamic (drag) issues have already been resolved but a major one would be resolved in the Mk.2 (by lengthening the plane through a nose plug).

While Gripen will remain an aerodynamically superior plane, LCA should hopefully be a competent platform.

Couple it with the modifications covered here and its a whole new bird.
[IMG]

Those modifications dont seem to be accurate. For example, I am pretty sure they will not be adding in a FBW system to the Jaguar.