ante_climaxMiG-35 is on par with all planes the western manufactures can offer, might possibly be even a luttle ahead of them, when it comes to flying and handling and air to air combat.
It would be the perfect cousin the the mighty SU-30MKI. (and Russia is a much more reliabkle partner then the US or the Europeans)
AT WVR probably with TVC. Not in anything else and the notorious service costs of the Mig 29s + the added service costs of the TVC engines.
All eggs in one Russian basket ?
I agree on the last bit though, as far as India is concerned Russians are more reliable than Americans. But things may well be changing :diablo:
ante_climaxKnowing how India works. If the LCA is cancelled the MCA will go down the drain as well. As for the JSF there are no guarantees at the moment, especially if the AF goes for a non American type.
The PAK FA like I have said may or may not be the equivalent of the Raptor. The 230 MKIs are here for the long run as well.
In 2025
PAK FA (hopefully good enough)
MKI (upgraded)
MRCA
LCA
MCA (not optimistic)
ante_climaxA country which buys most of its stuff cannot rely on a single type. But in India’s case the problem is that most stuff is Russian and till recently the Russians were alien to the concept of multi role aircraft. They would have point defense fighters, ground attack fighters, Air superiority fighters etc.
Mig 21-27-29 – so that’s 3 models for which a modern fighter like Rafale or SH or MKI can do,
India however plans to replace them with the MCA sadly the MCA is still 😡
ante_climaxWhich ones you had in mind about that. “Much cheaper” is related to a bigger home market to start with. That gave the freedom to price-in the development costs to win the customer first. The operating costs are something different and that bill will come later.
The Russian designs are not even in need to regain some development costs at all. So the operating costs of that do not prevent exports.
Reply With Quote
Rafale and Eurofighter are more expensive than the Super Hornet. And Super Hornet is a more mature product at the moment. The future is fifth gen, so if I am buying a fourth gen fighter now, out of need, whilst developing a fifth gen fighter jointly, i would go for the tried proven and perfected design with mature Radar, Avionics and HMS. Than something which is still in the would, could space.
As far as operating costs and serviceability is concerned the western fighters have a definite edge over the Russian ones.
Since this is the LCA thread, Choosing the SH would mean potential engine sharing with LCA, It will be much easier to switch from F 404 to F 414 than to make eco cores, and Ej 2000
ante_climaxSince you are so well versed with how democracies work would you please care to elaborate a bit? Especially in light of the fact that the requirement for the MRCA was exactly as you have put above – intermediate plan to fill numbers. Also, the US curtailed the raptors mainly based on cost. India otoh, left the much cheaper mirage 2000 deal (great TOT was offered btw) @ ~ $5 billion for a deal thats over twice the cost! Another highly educated analogy here :rolleyes:
Do you know what exactly they bring to the table? If so, please provide some insight/link to their response to RFPs.
So? The other contenders are not exactly sleepwalking through the contest. By your standards the Gripen or MiG 35 should have it in the bag by now.
Aah, some more emphatic theorizing, please list those reasons since they are so clear to you.
Riight – such as the F-16IN which has not even flown so far, brilliant!
Thanks for sharing your unsolicited opinion, I am sure the IAF/GOI will give it due regard.
Yes tell that to the many airforces in Europe, must be fools in that part of the world to go with anything but US offered options.
1, 1) The Rafale is distinctly smaller than the shornet thereby offering a smaller visual sig in the WVR game (kinda important factor that)
Boss, do us a favor and read up a little more before making absurd claims! In Indradhanush for eg. its large size was one of the main weaknesses of the MKIs vs the typhoons. The typhoon’s ability to quickly accelerate was another decent advantage for it. In DACT between IN shars and IAF fulcrums, the low visibility of the shar caused major problems for fulcrum drivers despite being a far better platform in most other areas a2a. A large platform goes against the rule “First look – first kill” esp. in WVR.
3, The rafale has long ranger IIR MICA which can be used in combo with the OSF to make a fully passive attack
So? What effectiveness has the Raptor demoed in a2a engagements todate? Might as well diss its super duper radar, EW suite, supercruise and stealth features, no? Priceless argument this – “never been seen in a2a combat before, so simply not effective” Damn tacticians should be shot for thinking innovatively.
Yes, such as its ability to supercruise or use IRST I suppose? Btw, dassault has shown its ability to integrate an HMS on its other products.
Yes, we leave it to this brilliant new find on AFM to enlighten us on what every contestants chances are. Pearls of wisdom just being scattered here by the rookie.
Once again I think you should read up a lot more before making blanket statements. I was not referring to Col. Fornoff at all. This topic has been thrashed on this forum for ages. A little reading would have made you understand my point a lot better.
So what exactly is your point bringing in the bison in the context of WVR ? Especially considering that he was clearly referring to the bison’s ability to sneak in and cue a bvr shot thanks to its small RCS and “israeli” radar.
Perhaps. But that does not mean the eurocanards are any less maneuverable than the shornet.
Prove it! Lets see some figures on ITRs, STRs, climb rates and the like for the MRCA contenders. If you don’t have them, please learn to think a bit before making big statements.
USS.
.
You have absolutely not countered any of my statements with valid links of your own have you ? At least some one who is making such claims should provide with relevant links regarding what he is talking. So as far as I am concerned its your word against mine 🙂
I am not an aviation expert or engineer I just am using common sense and historical truth here. The fact remains is that the American types like the F 15 and F 18 and F 16 pioneered most of these technologies you now see in the European fighters, and they are much cheaper compared to the still in development European types.
I may be a rookie but I have no fear or respect for people like you. I will continue to post my views here, And for the matter they are my own 😀
ante_climaxI feel the need to point out, once again, that that quote regarding the Red Flag exercises has been taken entirely out of context. Here’s the line everyone’s quoting:
Now let’s look at it in combination with the part before it:
Kind of looks like the ‘much larger RCS’ is referring to the MiG-21 to me, which is a tad obvious to say the least.
He apparently did not know what he was talking about. About the Mig 21 Radars among other things.
ante_climaxyou should not think that any key technology comes for free…
the french has put some real money on their developens for decades, thats nothing they just give away. This kind of thinking will sit the LCA down even more.
whats the other options? Buy all-F414? is that better for india?
better for LCA anyway
ante_climaxSo what radar does the FC-1 have? Can you provide a source?
Here is your source, eat it
http://www.milavia.net/news/2007/jf-17-arrived-in-pakistan.html
ante_climaxRavi Sharma drives me nuts. And the IAF should keep out of the business of engine selection and rather look at the performance. :dev2:
ante_climaxthe issue isn’t about a radar..just because a fighter has a radar or has dropped some bombs (which is what the PAF will be first testing the JF-17 for as of now, not A2A missiles) it doesn’t become a finished product.
there will be a whole set of combat doctrines, manuals, syllabi, etc. that needs to be formulatd before a fighter is even close to being considered operational. pitting the JF-17 in a fight against any IAF fighter would most likely be suicidal as of now..they’ll have to test it thoroughly, understand its weak and strong points and only when its reached Final Operational Clearance, will it be used in war.
But the Presence of the Radar means it can be done in case of an emergency, in case of the LCA one needs to first integrate a radar which wont be ready in terms of the current conflict.
ante_climaxThe LCA don’t have a radar at the moment I believe. So it would be hard to put them into service, while JF 17 less capable as it is, is almost a finished product.
ante_climaxMig 27 (upgraded ones) and Jaguars are probably going to be used in A2G roles anyway. This cannot be discounted in case of an open war.
ante_climaxThe upgrade consists of Super Kopyo X-band pulse Doppler radar and RVV-AE (AA-12 Adder) beyond visual range missiles and PGMs., new nosecone, new canopy, single-piece windshield and new canopy made of stressed acrylic composites, Sextant’s TOTEM RLG-INS with NSS-100P GPS embedded GPS receivers, El-Op HUD, infrared search and track system (IRST) from Russia’s URALs optical-mechanical plant, two Sextant MFD-55 LCD displays, autopilot, radar warning receivers (RWR), digital flight data recorder, new liquid air cooling system, HOTAS controls, stores management system, digital air data computer system, short range radio navigation system, new HF/VHF/UHF radios, twin conformal Vympel flare dispensers (26mm, 120 rounds) and a new electric power supply system. Reportedly the new RWR to be fitted, is an indigenous system developed by DRDO and goes by the name Tarang(this RWR is also used aboard the Su-30MKI)
The Indian Air Force (IAF) is now adding stealth modifications to an existing $340m programme to upgrade 125 of its MiG-21bis fighters to MiG-21-93 standard. Extensive tests to demonstrate Russia’s ability to upgrade Indian fighter aircraft with stealth capabilities took place in front of Indian defence ministry officials at the Sokol aircraft plant in Nizhniy Novgorod on 29th May 2000. The demonstration was highly successful and is understood to have resulted in the Russian government and RSK MIG urging the IAF to adopt the stealth modifications across its MiG-21-93 fleet.
The core of the demonstration saw two MiG-21bis–one upgraded with stealth technology and one without–being tracked by what is believed to be a Mig-31 in a controlled test of radar-absorbent materials (RAM) and coatings developed at the Moscow Institute of Applied and Theoretical Electrodynamics. During its flight the radar signature of the upgraded Mig-21bis was shown to be between 10 and 15 times weaker than the regular MiG-21bis.
This was the Janes article quoted by the user stealth spy in 2005. The Janes link is no longer active.
ante_climaxBased on size and the Janes article that the Bison has 10 – 15 % lower RCS than the normal Mig 21, which also has a very low rcs.
Anyway it was dicussed in this very forum years ago, and unfortunatley for me that Janes link is no longer active.
ante_climaxWhat is your source on “Bison has lower RCS than JF-17”?
I am sorry i cannot provide you with any source. Its a logical assumption and you can prove me otherwise perhaps ?
Sign In
