The current government is very committed to the LCA. The defense minister has recently announced that no matter what at least 140 ac will be bought, of this only 40 will be MK1. I do not think they will allow the IAF to shift its goal posts again regarding the MK2. But the elections are due next year we are hoping the opposition shows the same commitment towards the LCA if it comes to power.

ADA had better make sure the Kaveri engined version is finished by the end of 2009. If a new government in 2010 is less supportive than the current one, failure to meet the Kaveri goal will give it yet more ammunition with which to shoot the program down.

she has to use A/B to break Mach 1 but is capable of supercruise.

Concorde did not need to use afterburner to break Mach 1. Had that been necessary, how could it have supercruised at Mach 2?

From what I have read, it was more fuel efficient to use afterburner to break through Mach 1 and this practice was adopted.

Really, considering the new requirements put forth by the IAF. The LCA MK2 would be a major redisign in everything but name……………So, I to have my doubt about a 2014-2015 time table as being realistic.:(

So do I. From what I have read on this forum the IAF seems incapable of resisting the temptation to amend the specification of the aircraft. No manufacturer can be expected to ever finish developing a product if the customer’s requirement is never frozen.

I think what may remain to be seen now is the amount of empty-weight that will be reduced by the removal of telemetry equipment and conversion of the displays to LCA from the present CRT displays.

In many posts I have come across this reference to telemetry equipment and how it makes the empty weight of the LCA uncertain/impossible to determine.

Did nobody think of recording what telemetry equipment was to be installed and what it weighed before installation? I would have thought such an oversight an impossiblity (apart from that needing to be known for trim, balance calculations etc).

ADA must surely know the aircraft’s empty weight.

i read reports of IAF opting for ASRAAM in Mirage 2000 upgrade deal. does that indicate something about MICA??

Cost? What does 1 MICA cost? What does 1 ASRAAM cost?

Could you clarify that? (Not sure what you’re trying to say there.)

Im pretty sure I got the point but it’s not for me to clarify…

Really, the whole thread is a moot point as the LCA Mk2 will not be ready in time for the MMRCA.:cool:

I agree. There is no point in tendering for business if your offering cannot be delivered within the specified time.

That would be ironic at best when Japan replaces its FJ-15A with F-15FX.
The F-22 would need quite a substantial work-over for export, I think it wasn’t build with export in mind (different to the F-35). Even if the F-22 may be released for export, it is dubious if the ends really meet. Japan will want to have final assembly in Japan, and will have some workshare. Quite unrealistic with the F-22.

Whereas it would be realistic with Eurofighter. I think. What about Dassault – would local assembly be acceptable to them?

Would Japan not want to move onto a more modern frame than the F-15?