Than I must have misread/understood something. If that’s the case I’ll take the mickey and apologize.
Anyway comparing todays fighters with that of yesterday is somewhat dubious, considering the complexity and associated costs. Cold War is over as well and the spending has been reduced considerably. You simply can’t design a combat aircraft as quickly these days as it was done in the past and you may go the way forth and back as well. If 6 years from first flight to entry into service isn’t “that bad” in comparison to an aircraft requiring 2 years (F-15) or 4 years (F-16), how is an aircraft requiring 6 years (F-22) or an Rafale requiring 9 years THAT bad? Ok if we take the demonstrators YF-22 or Rafale A into account as well it will add a couple of years on top of that. There were arguably no such tech demonstrators for the teen/teenski series fighters as such, but these aircraft weren’t even remotely as complex as are those today. I’m yet excited to see how long it will take the T-50 to make it into service. We’ve basically seen development times growing over all the decades, so it’s not too unusual. I agree to a certain extend with the point that if it takes too long it may not become a success, but that’s merely a question of how long it takes the others to keep on track.

It was normal and I’m not whining, but correcting your nonsense.

The ranges of the C7/D models are why the USAF/USN weren’t immediately pressing for the Meteor(or a ramjet AMRAAM).

More likely because other weapons may not fit into the weapon bays of the F-22/35. I’m certain the US would have developed new AAMs for the teens, if there were no Raptors and Lightnings, especially the former. A new weapon not compatible with the new fighter would be a waste, to a certain extend at least.

The point is that you described the MiG-29s development as fast and the programme as being more successful by that in comparison to the teens and that’s simply not true.

Detection range against a fighter sized target for the N-001V has been stated with 130-140 km, definitely not superior to the BARS and is there any source suggesting the ability to engage 4 targets simultaneously? I’ve seen 2 so far. Add the old style displays, significantly inferior scanning performance etc. and I doubt that the N-001 regardless of the version is even remotely close to the N-011M, neither wrt performance nor capabilities.

It is loads of money,
FGFA + AMCA + MMRCA + LCA + LCA MK2 + Su-30MKI & M2000 upgrade,
all to be operational ~2015-2020 or so, in the F/A alone,
and all to be operated 40 years i take it ?
That’s not counting how many UAV IAF intend to induct,
let alone any other assets.

How serious is India on AMCA program ?

Let’s try to quantify expenses

FGFA $30bn times A for 40 years of service
MMRCA + $9bn times B for 40 years of service
AMCA + ? times C for 40 years of service
LCA + ? times D for 40 years of service
LCA MK2 + ? times E for 40 years of service
Su-30MKI + ? times F for 40 years of service
M2000 + ? times G for 40 years of service
UAV + ? times H for 40 years of service

I doubt the M2k or MiG-29UPG will last any longer than 2025. These upgrades are merely a stop gap until the AMCA/MMRCA are available, because these will be the true successors for aircraft like the MiG-23/27/29, Jaguar and M2k. Tejas will replace the MiG-21s. I suppose the the FGFA will ultimately replace the Su-30MKI when it is fielded in numbers. By the time the FGFA is likely to be inducted the oldest Su-30MKIs are 15-20 years old. By the time 200-250 FGFAs are in service ~2030 at the earliest the fleet will be another ten years older. I think that the FGFA is not complementary to the Su-30MKI but in fact its successor in the mid term. Upgraded “medium” fighters/attackers in the IAF will be phased out when enough MMRCA and Tejas are around to allow them to be withdrawn without further declining squadron numbers. I’m yet interested to see when the AMCA gets ready, is there even a timeline?

I think that not everything will be built in India, but to be honest there are no information available. I would expect that they assemble in the first place, but it could be possible that they will be involved in the manufacturing process as well, at least for certain components.

If, the Typhoon is cheaper than the F-35. Yet, just as capable as some would like us to believe. Why aren’t the customers lining up around the block…….:rolleyes:

Did you even bother to read, let alone understand what I wrote? Because your reply is not even remotely linked to what I wrote. But what else can I expect from someone like you :rolleyes: