Some evidence for that please?

-TR1

it’s not as high-end as it sounds. most 4th gen aircrafts with respectable TWRs would be able to go supersonic on dry thrust in clean config and low fuel load. quite clearly, this has little practical value other than fleeing from your enemy. :diablo:

there is a strong chance that INS viraat i.e hermes might be preserved as well. so one falklands veteran might be around for sometime.

Also, the Indians get Erieye. I presume, that they will make the Swedes link them with everything (including russian aircrafts), which means, that maybe linking between russian and western aircrafts is also possible. What’s stopping the IAF from taking advantage of links of the Erieye or of better aircrafts in the same formation and feeding info on the “less performing” Gripen/F16/SH?

that’s pakistan, not India.

why doesn’t the US allow transfer of F-22 to countries like japan and australia that are desperate for it ?

it would also reduce the price tag and allow the USAF to get a few more F-22’s from the re-opened production lines.

That’s also a reasonable explanation. They got (and will) from the Russians technology and now they want to get some western too.
……….
If you want to go “expensive”, i think at least you should prefer the Rafale, for the only reason that you will be able to integrate it easier to “french” bases, where you already have support for Mirage.

it is more of an afterthought to explain the decision to go ahead with MRCA. 🙂 to be fair, they faced a lot of flak from the media as IAF fleet strength was steadily going down with no other solution readily available. the PAKFA was still this mythical beast and people had little confidence in LCA. MRCA was seen as a ‘quick’ way to plug the gap. :rolleyes:
as it is, it will probably be arriving within a couple of years of the PAKFA. 😮

There are already 272 MKIs and 40 Tejas on order, but that’s for sure not enough to counter the huge PLAAF fleet. Tejas is a low end fighter and besides beeing much delayed, will find it hard to counter J10Bs, that means for a real deterrence, India needs something capable inbetween.

other than payload, there is no parameter on which the tejas will lag behind the J-10B. the L in LCA stands for light, not low end. 😉

the point people have been making is that IAF should buy an aircraft that can do self-escorting strikes against PRC. I agree that if we are to waste money on MRCA we should at least get an aircraft that adds some serious capability. ‘saving’ here to buy something like the gripen would prove to be a waste in the longer run, better to spend a little extra and get something really useful.

tiffy is a very good aircraft but doesn’t fit our needs, neither does the mig-35 or F-16. the F/A-18 is nearing its evolution cycle and this is not a good time to get it, to say nothing of US propensity to throw a fit now and then.
that leaves the gripen NG and rafale. gripen NG, should we buy tejas Mk2 equivalents at twice the price ? really ? :p

the revised bloated weight (loaded weight since the EF figure from the brochure is for loaded, I’m not too sure of the others).

wing area : 38.4 m^2
loaded weight : 9600 kg

the original wing loading was 220 kg/m^2

p.s. in addition to TWR and fuselage design, like you mentioned you also have to take into account the effect of the canards.

The Growler wasn’t offered because the MMRCA didn’t have a requirement for a Electronic Warfare Varient. Which, is not surprising considering the Super Hornet was the only one with such a variant. Nonetheless, I think its fair to says that if the Super Hornet is selected as the Winner of the MMRCA. The Growler would be a likely option at a later date. That is unless to care to debate the point???

please re-read. growler-lite was offered which means that growler is not going to be offered.