As interim BMD system before the Indian ones take over.

I wonder what will Raytheon offer ?

At the speed at which this government handles defence procurement it’s quite possible that the domestic system will already be ready by the time the final contract is inked.:D

I don’t think the US will be willing to offer India THAAD given how it opposed Israel’s sale of the Arrow-2 to India. The right to missile defense is reserved for its own allies(especially considering its ‘major non-NATO ally’ Pakistan will throw a major hissy-fit if India acquires such a capability).:rolleyes:

Most likely there will be a competition between the SAMP/T, MEADS and S-400, or the tender will simply vanish into limbo.:D

Was the concept art an official image presentation?

If so, can you please post the link.

Just a fanmade CGI I’m afraid. 😮

That said there is a second engine planned and research has been conducted(and according to rumours, designs patented) for a ‘flat nozzle’ design like the F/A-22’s.

Otherwise, I do agree with you. Without a major re-design / change in nacelles and nozzle, T-50 will not be a full aspect stealth aircraft.

Ditto. Hopefully these very obvious flaws won’t stick out for long.;)

Isn’t the Typhoon significantly more expensive than the Rafale? As such the UAE’s idea of going for the Typhoon because they felt the Rafale was too expensive seems… inane to put it mildly. More likely they are just trying to play hardball.

Then again, maybe they’ll buy the Typhoon anyway out of spite just to punish Dassault at the cost of having to pay yet more themselves?:dev2:

http://www.vz.ru/news/2011/11/18/539700.html

Serdykov announced that on a recent trip to Rostvertol, they agreed to a further delivery of Mi-35M helicopters. Presumably, this is on top of the current order of 22 airframes. I don’t understand why they could possibly need more attack helos given the other two types in production.

The Mi-35M is a combat transport helicopter. It has its own niche that neither the Mi-17/8 nor the Mi-28/Ka-52 can fill on their own.:D

The engines always provide power to the ship. No matter what the propulsion system is, the main engines always provide primary power. The difference here is in how the engines are powered, electrically instead of a physical shaft connection. Also, yes there are auxiliary generators to keep the lights on in case of emergency.

? Ships with mechanical propulsion generally have separate generators for power generation. The INS Vikramaditya, for example, has 12 diesel generator sets which are likely not coupled to the boiler-steam turbine system that powers the propeller shafts. Another example would be the Talwar frigates, which use Wartsila/Kirloskar diesel generators for power and Zorya Mashproekt gas turbines for propulsion.

Reg. the Nirbhay, will all three versions be identical in shape or will the air-launched version have a streamlined ‘flat’ shape like the SLAM-ER and SCALP?

I understand an Integrated Electric Propulsion system like the CVF’s takes care of both propulsion and power generation for the ship.

But…. doesn’t that mean the engines always have to be kept running in order for the ship’s systems to function? Even when it’s cruising at low speed or anchored at one spot?

Or are there auxiliary generator sets for these situations?

A quick google tells me that when folded the Seahawk is only slightly(around a metre) longer than the NH90. Make of that what you will.