ante_climaxI think if India chooses a US type for its MRCA then the ASRAAM can be used on that as well.
ante_climaxI think if India chooses a US type for its MRCA then the ASRAAM can be used on that as well.
ante_climaxI guess this again signifies the problems with air operations. If they want to stop Hamas they should get down an dirty and launch a land based assault.
ante_climaxI guess this again signifies the problems with air operations. If they want to stop Hamas they should get down an dirty and launch a land based assault.
ante_climaxSee, IAF’s doctrine is to acquire high-end fighters of the class of JSF etc. in numbers of hundreds just like the USAF is doing now. For the purpose of replacing aging fighters with 4++ G fighters, a “mixture” of Su-30 MKI and Tejas is sufficient and adequate because both of them complement each other perfectly.
Can you give me any citations regarding this. So far as we know IAF wants a diverse fleet. But i agree with you that the fewer multirole types the better it would be logistically.
See, Tejas has same number of hardpoints and fuel capacity as non-NG Gripen versions.
Thats hardly the criteria one should use to judge a fighter. What about the performance of the airframes, g loads, radar etc. So far the Tejas MK1 is nowhere near either the F 16 or Gripen.
See, Tejas is required in 150 nos. anyway. In addition to that, 126 Tejas can be inducted in lieu of the so-called MRCA taking the total to 276. Ideally, as per the statement of head of DRDO, Dr. Natarajan, IAF must procure upto 450 Tejas units. If observed, this is standard practice in large air-forces like USAF where there are 400-600 units of 1 single fighter type.
Mr Antony said 140 Mk2 Tejas’ going to be inducted after the first 20-40 MK1. MK2 still don’t have an engine and should also have other upgrades the IAF wants. So realistically 2015 is a good time frame. which many in the forum do not agree to. But I hope to see it getting inducted before 2016.
IAF is not USAF, India is not US. So stop talking about 400-600 fighters of the same kind. Its not going to happen in the near future. We will get there some time in future but not yet. 😀
ante_climaxSee, IAF’s doctrine is to acquire high-end fighters of the class of JSF etc. in numbers of hundreds just like the USAF is doing now. For the purpose of replacing aging fighters with 4++ G fighters, a “mixture” of Su-30 MKI and Tejas is sufficient and adequate because both of them complement each other perfectly.
Can you give me any citations regarding this. So far as we know IAF wants a diverse fleet. But i agree with you that the fewer multirole types the better it would be logistically.
See, Tejas has same number of hardpoints and fuel capacity as non-NG Gripen versions.
Thats hardly the criteria one should use to judge a fighter. What about the performance of the airframes, g loads, radar etc. So far the Tejas MK1 is nowhere near either the F 16 or Gripen.
See, Tejas is required in 150 nos. anyway. In addition to that, 126 Tejas can be inducted in lieu of the so-called MRCA taking the total to 276. Ideally, as per the statement of head of DRDO, Dr. Natarajan, IAF must procure upto 450 Tejas units. If observed, this is standard practice in large air-forces like USAF where there are 400-600 units of 1 single fighter type.
Mr Antony said 140 Mk2 Tejas’ going to be inducted after the first 20-40 MK1. MK2 still don’t have an engine and should also have other upgrades the IAF wants. So realistically 2015 is a good time frame. which many in the forum do not agree to. But I hope to see it getting inducted before 2016.
IAF is not USAF, India is not US. So stop talking about 400-600 fighters of the same kind. Its not going to happen in the near future. We will get there some time in future but not yet. 😀
ante_climaxIndia will have the INS Vikramaditya and INS Vikrant and possibly another Vikrant class carrier in service before 2020.
Atleast two of them will be based on the Eastern Naval Command. Also leasing two Akula class subs and Building two indigenous subs and 6 Scorpenes are to be delivered in that time frame as well.
:diablo: Add the American, Korean and Japaneese build up and like scoot I don’t see how China is going to win an Arms race in the region.
Does anyone have a clue how many AC these can carry. The Varyag was to carry like 12 Su 33s.
🙂
ante_climaxHey, I won’t rate a plane used by a single AF that got a very bad accidental rate be better than a plane used by multiple AFs that essentially has better flight record.
Something may look better on paper ONLY, but a flying coffin won’t be better than anything in reality.
Are you implying that the Mig 21 is only used by the IAF :confused:
ante_climaxHey, I won’t rate a plane used by a single AF that got a very bad accidental rate be better than a plane used by multiple AFs that essentially has better flight record.
Something may look better on paper ONLY, but a flying coffin won’t be better than anything in reality.
Are you implying that the Mig 21 is only used by the IAF :confused:
ante_climaxante-climax, nevertheless the F-teens and MiG-35 are being phased out by their home countries, and are being offered for export in order to leverage a final advantage out of them, i.e. export income. The IAF must not purchase these “leftovers”.
By the same application even the Migs, Jaguars and Mirages of the IAF are slated to serve till the next 2 decades. Still, it is not an incentive for third world nations to purchase Jaguars or older Mig derivatives.
Please note that as per my first post, the roles of F-18, Rafale, MiG-35 and Typhoon (in terms of weapon-load and range) are already met by the serving Su-30 MKI’s of the IAF. Hence, induction of any one of these would be totally needless and redundant.
As regards the Gripen and F-16, they are practically matched by the Tejas.Hence, there is NO scope whatsoever for each of the 6 MRCA contenders, as their capabilities are met by either the Su-30 MKI or Tejas.
Also, they are so expensive, that whatever greater per-hour cost of operation that Su-30 MKI has (against Rafale, Typhoon and F-18) will be more than negated by their high cost price.As per news reports IAF will order 1-2 squadrons of Tejas units after IoC and before FoC (i.e before M2k standard).
Seahawk, as already mentioned by 21Ankush, Tejas’ airframe and flight-controls are far more advanced than 3rd G F-4. Besides, F-4 does not have the level of avionics and number of weapons as the Tejas has.
The west generally phases out their aircraft quite early. The Teen series were so successful and that is the reason why they are taking even this long. While if you look at Russia the Mig 29 and 31 and 25 are going to be in service for the foreseeable future. While the Su 25s are getting an upgrade. Note also that the F 18 E-F is significantly different from the normal hornet and the development began in the 90s only.
Its like this why change a working thing that has got new avionics and radar upgrades. The airframe obviously has life left in them, so the Migs, Jaguars (some of them are not that old) and Mirage 2ks are very capable of meeting our needs for decades to come. Our two potential enemies have majority of their fleets based on much older designs (even tho newer airframes in china’s case). And India is not the USA, we do not have the capacity yet to replace planes every 20 years or so.
While i agree with your post on the Su 30 MKI, I think the IAF doctrine calls for the use of fighters in a High-Med-Lo mix. The MKI and the future PAK FA may be deemed to the heavy class. The latest block F 16s and Gripens (even the non NG) are not matched my the Tejas MK1, I hope it will come near their performance when it comes to the Tejas MK2.
Like I said MKI production is already at full swing and IAF doctrine calls for different tiers of fighters. And Tejas as of yet is not as capable in its current form.
Yes that’s like 20-40 planes, can hardly fill in the 126 (200 opt) MRCA.
As of now Tejas’ radar is not finalized lets wait till the MK1 is out and then we can compare the avionics.
ante_climaxante-climax, nevertheless the F-teens and MiG-35 are being phased out by their home countries, and are being offered for export in order to leverage a final advantage out of them, i.e. export income. The IAF must not purchase these “leftovers”.
By the same application even the Migs, Jaguars and Mirages of the IAF are slated to serve till the next 2 decades. Still, it is not an incentive for third world nations to purchase Jaguars or older Mig derivatives.
Please note that as per my first post, the roles of F-18, Rafale, MiG-35 and Typhoon (in terms of weapon-load and range) are already met by the serving Su-30 MKI’s of the IAF. Hence, induction of any one of these would be totally needless and redundant.
As regards the Gripen and F-16, they are practically matched by the Tejas.Hence, there is NO scope whatsoever for each of the 6 MRCA contenders, as their capabilities are met by either the Su-30 MKI or Tejas.
Also, they are so expensive, that whatever greater per-hour cost of operation that Su-30 MKI has (against Rafale, Typhoon and F-18) will be more than negated by their high cost price.As per news reports IAF will order 1-2 squadrons of Tejas units after IoC and before FoC (i.e before M2k standard).
Seahawk, as already mentioned by 21Ankush, Tejas’ airframe and flight-controls are far more advanced than 3rd G F-4. Besides, F-4 does not have the level of avionics and number of weapons as the Tejas has.
The west generally phases out their aircraft quite early. The Teen series were so successful and that is the reason why they are taking even this long. While if you look at Russia the Mig 29 and 31 and 25 are going to be in service for the foreseeable future. While the Su 25s are getting an upgrade. Note also that the F 18 E-F is significantly different from the normal hornet and the development began in the 90s only.
Its like this why change a working thing that has got new avionics and radar upgrades. The airframe obviously has life left in them, so the Migs, Jaguars (some of them are not that old) and Mirage 2ks are very capable of meeting our needs for decades to come. Our two potential enemies have majority of their fleets based on much older designs (even tho newer airframes in china’s case). And India is not the USA, we do not have the capacity yet to replace planes every 20 years or so.
While i agree with your post on the Su 30 MKI, I think the IAF doctrine calls for the use of fighters in a High-Med-Lo mix. The MKI and the future PAK FA may be deemed to the heavy class. The latest block F 16s and Gripens (even the non NG) are not matched my the Tejas MK1, I hope it will come near their performance when it comes to the Tejas MK2.
Like I said MKI production is already at full swing and IAF doctrine calls for different tiers of fighters. And Tejas as of yet is not as capable in its current form.
Yes that’s like 20-40 planes, can hardly fill in the 126 (200 opt) MRCA.
As of now Tejas’ radar is not finalized lets wait till the MK1 is out and then we can compare the avionics.
ante_climaxRespectfully, how are they to test flight the LCA MK2. If, no powerplant has been selected??? (or did I miss something):o
was talking about the MRCA trials Scoot. Was replying to Abhi.
ante_climaxRespectfully, how are they to test flight the LCA MK2. If, no powerplant has been selected??? (or did I miss something):o
was talking about the MRCA trials Scoot. Was replying to Abhi.
ante_climaxSwiss: Gripen
Indian MRCA: F 16 IN
Brazil : Rafale
Libya : Flanker
Nederlands: F-35
I went with my heart in the Indian comp 😀
ante_climaxSwiss: Gripen
Indian MRCA: F 16 IN
Brazil : Rafale
Libya : Flanker
Nederlands: F-35
I went with my heart in the Indian comp 😀
Sign In
