ante_climaxI seem to remember that pilots claimed the IRST of the ML as better than the KOLS-29 IRST used on MiG-29.
No I was just asking about the combat success of IRST and IR missiles. It appears very unproven in actual combat tbf.
ante_climax3. Some poster claimed that MRCA will be in Indian service only till 2040 – NO, it could be in service way beyond 2040. Go look at current MiG 21, 23, 27 life times and upgrades to keep them going, that should give you an idea how Indian MoD operates.
That was what the IAF officials said about the MRCA lifetime. 2040 will not be like 2009. India will be a strong economic power and she will be able to retire the aircraft and induct newer ones in larger numbers. 😀
Get full ToT (may be not the radar) for the F 16 and if the Americans get on our wrong side. May be we should mass produce it and name it something else. Like the Chinese did with the Mig 21. May need to integrate an Indian radar and weapons in the long term but its still very possible. 😎
By the way producing Mig 21s in the Bison standard (or better) won’t be a bad idea either. Just have to find a new turbofan engine for it. It has low RCS and with a more fuel efficient engine, could be a decent platform. 😀
ante_climaxWell, my dear friend that is exactly what I meant. India does no have the vast resourse of countries like the US or China. So, fewer types means larger numbers and hopefully higher quality…………..Personally, three types would be great. Yet, it currently has multiple types in three or four classes…….Just not sustainable in a major conflict.:(
All am saying is when you cannot afford 400 high quality fighters, and when your enemy has a lot of low ones. U go for a mixed group urself.
ante_climaxAppears Nervous to me saying we expect a fair competition a few times. Rafale has a good chance provided full ToT.
ante_climaxClearly, the lack of funding and little experience in Stealth Designs. Is going to make the PAK-FA an extreme challenge. Which, is why I would like to see India team with a American or European Aerospace Company on its forthcoming MCA. Remember, always cover your A$$!:cool:
I don’t think there would be an MCA. Especially not if there is a competant PAK FA. And the Europeans and everyone is going for UCAVs so no point in developing another manned fighter, that may take years to attain IOC.
ante_climaxIndian budget is not limitless unlike U.S or Chinese. We need to operate within out cost envelope as well. So even if we would like to see 600 Mkis and 400 JSF. Its not going to happen. Hence the need for figthers of three different classes.
As our economy improves i do expect a change in this situation.
ante_climaxDeino, as already mentioned by coldfire2005, the intakes have been added (photos were also posted earlier in another thread). They have been test-flown on existing prototypes.
coldfire2005, the IAF had literally been “sitting” on the MCA since 2003 upto 2008, when Dr V K Aatre was the DRDO chief. Since then Dr. Saraswat has completed his term and Dr. Natarajan is nearing his term’s end. Only in 2008, did the IAF approach the DRDO to re-examine the MCA proposal.
Please understand that the armed forces are not as “upright”, straightforward etc. as portrayed in hindi movies. Massive corruption exists in weapons procurement, and it is an “open secret” that money is to be made by keeping the services ‘addicted’ to imported hardware, instead of DRDO. Arms dealer Abhishek Verma (caught in $4 bn Scorpene scam and reason why our ship-building yards were kept idle for 1.5 decades) and former Admiral Sushil Kumar who was caught in the $1.5 bn Barak missile scam are only “tips of icebergs”. The current Army chief has also come under scrutiny for some highly questionable decisions on transfers.
The armed forces of Pakistan work in perfect sync with their defence researchers on all projects like Al-Khalid and JF-17, regardless of their ‘miniscule’ engineering input — and most importantly, are proud of them. The entire Pak public and media is visibly proud of HIT and PAC Kamra, as Pak newspaper reports show (note that Pak media is very free).
In stark contrast, in India the services stay at 2 arms length from DRDO and are NEVER seen co-ordinating with DRDO, to clearly specify as to what exactly do they want. This has led to Arjun ‘saga’, and we may hope that Tejas does not follow. The way the Tejas was developed is “shameful” to say the least. For the MCA, it may be hoped that IAF goes hand-in-hand with DRDO from the drawing board to the assembly line so that it never gets a chance to complain later. And for an organization that faces criticism for not developing what services want on time, DRDO would readily oblige.
I agree with you on the corruption of Armed Forces. But just like in most countries you are branded anti-soldier when you point these out. And what happens is instead of punishing the people involved the government bans entire firms from competing in future orders resulting in lack of procurement of vital hardware. The 155mm Howitzer saga is a good example for this. The Barak deal is under investigation, I just hope we don’t ban Israeli firms.
Why blame the armed forces. All this is because of incompetence of successive governments. The Armed forces should only give their inputs and suggestions and the decision making is to be done by the government, We actually need visionaries in the Defense ministry.
IMO we are giving the armed forces a free reign in procurement decision making as well as delaying procurement processes. :confused:
ante_climaxAll looks fine on paper. Higher thrust Kaveri while the current one is underpowered for the LCA. Like ColdFire said we are looking at a realistic induction date of 2025-30. Skip the MCA and go for 6th gen UCAV.
ante_climaxNew Russian Tech = 1990’s Western Tech 😉
:confused:I don’t think Russians are that backward. All they are lacking is proper funding, really.
ante_climaxHow many passive IR based attacks have resulted in kills ? It does seem a bit over rated IMO.
ante_climaxSome time ago there was talks of developing Tejas into UCAV but higly modified ,if go head is given ADA can come up with help from IAI
I think the new UCAV should be stealthy though like the Neuron and American designs. Not sure if Tejas fits the bill in that aspect. But IAI is the right partner if we go ahead with it. 🙂
ante_climaxScooter, as increasingly greater avionics can be “packed” into streamlined and modularized units, the size will not matter in this regard.
The F-16 is ‘large’ in size only due to it’s capability to carry heavy nuclear weapons and cruise missiles, which require a very strengthened frame, which in turn requires a large size. Otherwise, carriage of conventional weapons does not require jets to be larger than Tejas.
F 16 was conceived as a light fighter. It can carry more now because with the advancement of technology, many things are now reduced in size. It also helps that America manufactures all the Arms, Drop Tanks, EW equipment that are in its external stores. So they can optimize it for a specific jet without compromising much performance. When we manufacture everything for our fighters then it would be the same. I read about the avionics upgrade in the same article that stated no more than 40 LCAs will be ordered from the initial batch.
Well, I think this is were many people (including myself) get it trouble with our Indian Friends. As we don’t see the demise of the LCA as being the end of Indian desire or great need for a Indigenous Military Aviation Industry! We just feel the LCA is not living up to expectation and is not delivering on its promise! (i.e. performance) So, many say just “stop” and go in another “direction”. Like I’ve said before start a new program like the MCA and jointly develope it with the help of say Boeing or maybe a major European Military Aerospace Company. (EADS, Dassault, SAAB, etc.)
We are not going to take the LCA to war with the United States or Europe. Its later versions can still be very decent against the fourth gen Chinese and Pakistani variants such as JF 17 and J 10. That’s all its intended to be and we will see where it goes from there.
It may be wise to skip the MCA altogether and develop the UCAVs. At least then that programme can finish on time may be. 🙂
ante_climaxYou realize there is no scheduled overhaul for the F414s on F/A-18E/F? You cannot get much more maintenance free than that, unless you want to wait for the F-35 and F135 where the computer does all the diagnostics.
That’s what they claim atleast, in the past few months one Hornet crashed and another (a growler) lost an engine and had to make an emergency landing.
And the Gripen also uses F414 which should also be pretty reliable by your stat.
My 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.
ante_climaxFunny guy there! 😀
The F-16 is a really old platform from the 70:s.. and is less capable in all aspects except radarwise(IN) and AoG store at the moment. Also it will not be as upgradable in the future when f-35 has arrived..
That’s pretty bad then as the F 16 is a 70s platform the Rafale and Typhoon should be having more advantages over it than they currently do (at least to justify the price difference). Like I said the Europeans missed the fifth gen boat, how long have they been developing the Rafale for. since the 80s :rolleyes:
Also it will not be as upgradable in the future when f-35 has arrived..
Considering that UAE paid for the Block 60 upgrade (development). If India buys the F 16IN I am sure it will pay for further upgrades in the future.
From the code one magazine article on F 16 evolution
Pratt & Whitney and General Electric have added to the evolution with impressive improvements in engine performance. The original Pratt & Whitney engine on the YF-16 developed about 23,000 pounds of thrust. The engines on the Block 50/52 aircraft develop nearly 30,000 pounds of thrust. The GE F110-GE-132 engine on the Block 60 F-16 is rated at 32,500 pounds of thrust. The next round of engine improvements could boost this figure to more than 50,000 pounds. So, even though the F-16’s overall weight has increased, its thrust-to-weight ratio has improved as well.
More than 50,000 pounds of thrust, does anyone have any idea what engine are they talking about.
ante_climaxGripen Denies It Failed MMRCA Evaluation
this seems all be based on official data, and the local newspaper on leaks(some credibility), roomers or a slander campaign..
I would rather have the Gripen win it if the F 16 won’t. Single engined jets mean less maintenance. And it probably will be cheaper than Rafale and Typhoon as well.
Sign In
