ajay_ijnLet us go back to history and check when did US impose sanctions on India
During 1962 war, US actually was ready to deploy its own air force fighters to defend India from full scale war with China. Considering its the peak of cold war, US was searching for military allies.
Then during 65 war, US imposed sanctions on both India & Pakistan, it had little effect on India since she had no US arms but Pakistan suffered for many years.
India-US relations were at all time low in 70s because of 71 war, 74 nuclear test, indias close relations with Soviet Union . During 80s, it was time to patch up somewhat.
Then during 1998, India tested nuclear weapons, US imposed sanctions untill 9/11. LCA program suffered. strangely despite being aware of US policies, India selected a US engine for LCA.
for India (& Pakistan), the worst case scenario is 65 war. if both countries waged war against each other in future which US did not like and continued to fight, there is a very good chance that US would impose sanctions, although it would deter neither India or Pakistan from fighting.
In any case US played a very important role in almost all of India & Pakistan conflicts. the worrying thing, US can play even more decisive and dominant role if India & pakistan had mostly US origin arms.
Pakistan (F-16 sale) suffered all through late 80s and 90s, and India very much knows how she stole both quality/quantity advantage from pakistan when they did inducted F-16s in early 80s, this is despite India suffering from financial crisis in 1991. while Pakistan got Soyabeans instead of F-16s for the payments they made, India was trying to figure how to make the ulimate flanker.
Actually India has the first mover advantage with Flanker, its very critical that we should keep up that advantage, because its the flanker which will lead indias air battle. We should figure how to keep flanker competetive against Eurocanards, because Rafale/Typhoon would always vie for the position of most advanced non-fifth gen fighter.
F-15E, F-18SH already have AESA and advanced BVRAAM AIM-120 (regularly upgraded and updated), Eurocanards will also get AESA+Meteor in the next decade. but what is Su-30MKI going to get in future?
we should definitely plan for that in advance and not ask Sukhoi when our fleet is getting aged because its India which asked Su-30 to be heavily cuztomized with western avionics, PESA and TVC Engine. Now its must be responsibility of the first customer to also figure out upgrades. the only near term future plan IAF seems to have is integrated Brahmos.
Besides the status of Russian PESA Radars, Engines under development. there are also questions about their weapons development, i.e R-77 Ramjet, R-74. their status of development, how much time they are going to take, are they getting funded well, if not we should search other options like Meteor probably.
ajay_ijnSorry, I fail to see cheap or the re-starting of Mig-21 poduction as being a good solution.
Scooter, i was bein sarcastic :p
Both of the EuroCanard are good choices. Yet, the American offer the best overall package…………….IMHO
yes US package, if they offered TOT will be the best, i mean the F-18SH considering its costs are much lower compared to Typhoon/Rafale. I wish Rafale was cheaper, just about everything is perfect with French arms except for their cost.
ajay_ijnMy preference to F 16 or Gripen (not as much) stems mostly from the thought that its single engine and relative cheapness would mean we could induct them in more numbers than the more expensive Rafale or EF.
Mig-35 is even cheaper, we should probably order that. or we can restart the Mig-21 production line which is probably the cheapest and can be inducted in thousands of numbers.
Gripen is cheaper than Rafale or EF but can it deliver the same payload at the same distance as that of Rafale & EF. what if the one engine fails, what about number of hard points availaible, thrust to weight ratio figures. F-16 is no doubt a very good bird but we have to think about it because we will be last user.
the thing i suspect abt so called 5th gen fighter is neither Russians or anyone besides US would be able to develop the fighter, engine, avionics, test , certify , cuztomize and deliver for long long time.
US went through all the pains of pouring money like water into the project, suffering from delays, cost escalations and now they made raptor so advanced that they cannot export it, they have to safeguard it and that is additional cost n burden US will have to take.
There is no certain timeline for PAK-FA. when will it come, will it even get sustained funding, will russia be able to deliver the new engine and AESA on time, will it be comparable to that of atleast F-35 on stealth terms . for F-35 itself, tens or hundreds of billions have been committed and it faces cost escalations and delays. So many air forces around the world are committed to order F-35 besides the thousands ordered by US. will it be same thing for PAK-FA in future?
My point is, all these challenges are yet to be faced by Russia and program should also survive those challenges. Even if it survives there are going to be delays. Then for India too, Govt would generally take many years decide on aquisition, the TOT, the joint production, joint development. So this is going to take time.
ajay_ijnI think what many don’t seem to get. Regardless, how often it is explained in detail. Just because some are not for the LCA. Doesn’t translate into being Anti-Indian. The true is the program is just not working and India needs to change course. This happens to every country at some point! Hey, Russia, Europe, and the US have had many failures or not entirely successful programs. It happens move on……………..As the defense of the Country is far more important than pride! The LCA program is just becoming a unless money pit with no end in sight……………with all do respect to my many Indian Friends.:(
ok i understand ur opnion but what do you suggest.
I was looking at AMX Fighter attack program. I was thinking, what if LCA can be developed into a dedicated ground attack fighter replacing older Mig-27s, Mig-23BNs and ground attack Mig-21s. It wouldn’t need such a powerful engine or even radar for BVR Engagements.
It can be quickly sent into production and would also keep up IAF force levels. Since IAF in past had half ground attack and half air superiority birds, there would be a need for dedicated ground strike fighters.
but a delta wing without canards be good for ground strike?
New Engine, modifications to house the new engine etc
looking at wiki, there is almost no difference between specs of GE F-404 and F-414. So what kind of modifications would be needed or is it just plug the F-414 and its all fine.
ajay_ijnwhy u guyz are dreaming about the death of Indias only fighter program. Its indias hope to develop local aviation industry. with the kind of ambitions India has, its a must to have an industry in place, atleast somewhat similar to Sweden.
Ideally India would want a military industry like Sweden and civil aviation industry like Brazil.
ajay_ijnChinese have been operating the Su 27s/30s before we got ours. It did not matter much did it ? 🙂
multirole two seater flanker was the most capable platform IAF could get in those days at such low costs compared to the Mirage 2000-5 but its not the same with F-16IN in MMRCA.
ajay_ijnWhat experience do the IAF have on operating the Rafale, EF and SH ? So if we go by your estimate Mig 35 is the only viable option.
No i didn’t mean that we need fighter with operational experience but should try to avoid the platform if enemy has some good experience operating it, provided it not the best or the most capable platform being offered. If we are looking at cost as a priority then Gripen is even cheaper.
Is there a given date, when the IAF will decide ????
You got to just look at the red-tape. Each Bid contains 8000 to 9000 pages of technical info abt the fighter. I wonder what all classified info is going to be presented in 9000 page bid.
ajay_ijnits just unfair, i wish F-16 should lose. I always envisaged Eurocanards with AESA+Meteor or SH with its powerful AESA and AIM-120D. I just cannot see IAF, after years delays, forums discussions, speculations, comparisions, ending up with same fighter which our enemy has since 25 years.
lets look at the difference between F-16IN and F-16 Block 50/52 which PAF is gonna get.
1. new engine, 3500 pounds of additional thrust AB
2. APG-80 AESA
3. codeone magazine says F-16IN is also going to have different EW, datalink and HMCS from that of Block 60. Its probably going to have some elements from F-35 Avionics.
what else? AMRAAM, Sniper Targeting Pod, CFTs, A2G Munitions- everything is same. Its not just that Indias enemy has same fighter, but also the experience and skill they attained from 25 years. That is the most invaluable thing.
Can better avionics compensate for lack of pilot/airforce experience in operating the fighter?
ajay_ijnI agree and know that. I was just reporting the fact in so many words. I know that F-16IN will be far superior to both Fizzer’ya ‘s F-16 (MLUs and Blk 52+).
I also reported at the BR Forum the following that I have been made aware of:
My very friendly source in the Indian Air Ministry (Vayu Bhavan) has informed me that initially IAF preferred twin-engine MRCA fighters as their experience with twin-engine Jaguar has been very positive. IAF pilots who have flown the Jag have sung it’s laurels. There have been few reported incidents of one engine flameout(s) on Jags and still the pilot made it back with the load on the other engine. Whereas whenever there has been a problem with the other inventoried single engine fighters (MiG-21/23/27 and M2k) in flight, most of the time the aircraft has been lost or seriously damaged beyond repairs!
But lately, the focus is towards the single engine contender (JAS – with only a very remote chance) and all fingers are pointing towards F-16. The talk is that EF2K and Rafale are above budget specs (and do not carry the same geo-socio-political impact). SH was preferred (by the Navy) but is classified as a good ‘bomb-truck’ with somewhat limited A2A capabilities (even with AESA and Link). LM is enticing IAF with the ‘most sophisticated F-16 ever’ advertising campaign. The tech and flight evaluators cannot wait to evaluate the IN version which is arriving soon.
Mums the word!
F-16IN 4ever!
if Gripen goes out, there is only one single engined fighter, so why the need to have years of evaluation and competition.
ajay_ijnwiki mentions that France is going to order 294 rafales. if rafale is meant to replace every single fighter in French air force and navy then is 294 really enough? or will they upgrade Mirage 2000 by extending its life.
ajay_ijnI would take the F-16 IN any day over the F 18. For one its considerably cheaper and the order can easily go past 200+. There are not many on order elsewhere and you can expect the shifting of production to India so as to ease LMs plant into JSF production.
Most of the additional F 18 empty weight comes from the rough and hardy under carriage needed for carrier landings, since we are not going to use AF planes on NAVY ships, this would mean a lot of unnecessary weight.
I do believe the F 16 IN is the perfect opportunity for the IAF who have missed out on the deal for the serial production of Mirage 2000-5s. Its deterrent value will also be immense against Pakistan especially. 😀
It would also give us a realistic chance of opting for the F-35 if we run into trouble with the PAK FA.
what about future of F-16. almost every F-16 user will replace it with F-35 in the next decade, and at the same time we are going to induct new F-16s. if we start inducting them at say 2014, then where will it be during 2040?. we should be looking at a fighter which is going to stay for long time to come. Since we cannot go for F-35, the main competition is mainly between Typhoon/Rafale/SH.
how can it be detterent value against PAF which has operating same fighter for more than 25 years.
ajay_ijnF 16 is going to win it. 😎
if we wanted to get american birds, which is better?
F-16 or F-18. IAF might also prefer SH like USN because of twin engines.
Coming to payload, despite F-18SH having greater empty weight compared to F-16, we don’t see much of increase in payload carrying ability.
why is that?
ajay_ijnAs far as I know, NO … these modifications are the “normal” main-gear-fairings, every Il-76/78 or A-50 has … and regarding these strange “rounded” ears on the wing-tips, the Chinese KJ-2000 have them too.
IMO the biggest change is the new engine.
Deino
Is it having longer fuselage like MF or just MD with PS-90A engines?, compared to a loaded IL-76, this should be having greater range, speed, climbing ability right?
ajay_ijnSomeone was asking repeatedly as to why there are five birds mentioned in wiki instead of six. So as expected Gripen couldn’t make it, most likely due to its similarity to LCA. I guess the final battle is between SH, Rafale and Typhoon.
ajay_ijnAt last!any pics ? I think IAF should be having 10 Phalcon systems,4 for our western border,4 for the east and north eastern border and two in standby,plus a half sqn of HAL/Embraerar AWACS.
pics from israel.
more pics
http://jetphotos.net/showphotos.php?aircraft=Beriev%20A-50EI%20Mainstay
Sign In
