India has the MKI does it not?
The MKI can do a wide range of A2G missions.
Besides, we have not seen the FGFA layout yet..

About the T-50 layout, India will have to make do with whatever Sukhoi see fit.
Comprende?

The MKI does a wide range of A2G missions… with Litening pods.

Which would defeat the purpose in a stealth aircraft used for stealthy ground attack roles.

Comprende?

The Pak-Fa will get a penalty in Aerodynamic(in high Mach) if it were to field this big EOTS sensor.
Its Pros and Cons.. as allways…

Like i said, different role and requirements.

A much lower penalty than carrying an external targeting pod.

Oh, it gets better. These Russkies doing civilian research into MWNTs found them to be not only highly absorbent in HF radar waves (micro/X-band), but also “almost radio transparent for [the] low frequency region”. In other words true ‘broadband stealth’:

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=structure%20and%20properties%20of%20multiwall%20carbon&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&sqi=2&ved=0CCYQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fmts.hindawi.com%2Futils%2Fgetacceptedmsfile.aspx%3Fmsid%3D648324%26vnum%3D2%26ftype%3Dmanuscript&ei=qjtGUJu5Joa90QWz84GgBA&usg=AFQjCNEsXGiVbSxE7i4CwblvyfiPV_-6Kw

I can’t believe Witcha posted in the PAK-FA thread and never once mentioned S-ducks!! :eek:- I think I need a lye down!……Maybe they should leave the T-50’s IRST as is- in order to give the opposition a fighting chance! 😉

The last time I mentioned S-ducts on this thread was like two incarnations ago. Since when did I get grouped among the haters and naysayers?:confused:

What, in desperate need for more sparring partners now that they’re growing thinner lately?;)

I’m looking for information on the Gripen’s Cobra HMDS. I haven’t been able to find much information on it besides the fact that it uses Denel Optronics’ optical tracking system(instead of the more common electromagnetic system).

Does it have an ‘X-ray’ feature like the Typhoon’s HMSS? Or will it be more along the lines of the the TopOwl and Elbit DASH?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-19372299
I realise the benefits of having X-ray vision but could the view actually cause the pilots problems being able to look at everything could seriously distract him?

How does this system compare with the F-35’s?

Regarding the AAW hull…is there any independent confirmation, some export material perhaps, that the MFR is indeed an AESA?. The siting, and sizing, of those panels just look completely wrong for an AESA.

Everyone else who can do AESA has latched on to the benefits of light weight and no waveguide dependencies to mount the antenna faces as high as possible…the benefits of such being so crucial and obvious as to not need explanation. You only mount panels low on the superstructure, as with the Chinese and SPY/Aegis designs, if you need to drive the panels from a high power source thats hard to mount high up i.e a passive phased array.

Why do you go to the trouble of building an AESA then throw away some of the biggest benefits of the technology mounting it so low in your hull?.

AESAs need not necessarily be compact and lightweight; see the Russian Gamma-DE. Or large air/missile defence radars like the Green Pine.

It may be that the Chinese wanted a long-range, ABM-capable AESA and so increased the panel size and weight; also their hardware may simply not be as compact and light as Western counterparts; again, like the new Russian AESAs for the S-300/400 SAMs.

In any case pretty much all publicly available literature on this dating several years back has been counting on it being an AESA, so I’m guessing it has an element of truth.:D

That’s what happens when your country breaks apart, and your main southern shipyard and many of the ships in it are in one of the break-away parts.

The Russian Navy still intends to base subs there, so if they’d just throw Ukraine a bone they could finish and use it.