dark light

ante_climax

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 931 through 945 (of 2,160 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Finally official: China copied Su-27SK. #2452352
    ante_climax
    Participant

    Its only shallow individuals who take one look at the exterior and make conclusions based on superficial analysis and wishful thinking to suit their own axe grinding needs.

    The J11B looks like a Su27, but so does a Su35.

    The J11B is not a clone of anything as some would dearly wish, it is the result of taking an inspired airframe and stripping out all the soviet era baggage to replace it all with the best SAC can produce at a reasonable price, in order to give the Flanker a fighting chance against J10s and so justify their continued existence within the PLAAF.

    The J11B is not a clone of the Su27, it is a refinement of it, much like the Su35 is, and that is why the Russians are so worried. Maybe not because the J11B is better then the Su35, but because it represents a serious alternative to the Superflanker that no clone of a cold war era SK could ever hope to be.

    I would say the Sukhoi head is right, that no ripoffs can match the original. How can people still defend making illegal copies amazes me.

    Two years ago i went cheap and bought a Chinese ‘Sunny’ ‘Walkman’ instead of the Japanese Sony Walkman. Now the former looked just as good but I would like to say the music coming out was a lot inferior. 😉

    in reply to: IAF – News & Discussion – II #2452387
    ante_climax
    Participant

    Su-30 carries 8 tons internal fuel and 5 tons weapons (it can’t carry fuel pods) for ANY mission profile. F-18 can easily match this by 5 tons of weapons + 1.5 tons of fuel pods + 6.5 tons of internal fuel. The Rafale too can easily match this by 5 tons weapons + 2 tons of fuel pods + 6 tons internal fuel. It will still have hardpoints to spare. Same is the case with Eurofighter Typhoon.

    Really. I would like to see sources that it cannot carry external fuel pods. May be because its range is so good with internal fuels that it do not need to.

    Here it says otherwise.

    http://www.milavia.net/aircraft/su-30/su-30_specifications.htm

    ante_climax
    Participant

    Now if only some one could mail Dassault. 🙂

    in reply to: Finally official: China copied Su-27SK. #2452449
    ante_climax
    Participant

    If you mean modern Chinese missiles. You are right the Darter is the latest to be copied by the PLAAF.

    in reply to: Aero India 2009 #2452453
    ante_climax
    Participant

    The Russian Navy is buying the MIG 29 K as well as confrimed by reports. Now two squadrons or more there will put the total number of orders close to hundred. Then the RuAF is ordering MiG 35s. Like I said India-Russia can order more than enough to support its funding. It is not like making a new fighter, its a rather evolutionary design.

    @ Otaku.

    Those customers you mentioned are likely to go for an Su-27 derivative than a MiG 29 derivative.

    in reply to: Indian navy – news & discussion #2043494
    ante_climax
    Participant

    The F35 B will still have a huge advantage because its STOVL. I can see only the Navy operating the F 35Bs. The Navy is practical and goes for the weapon that suits it needs. They went for Harriers not Yaks. 🙂

    ante_climax
    Participant

    I think i would take that. Straight from the goat’s mouth. My apologies for offending anyone by believing on the contrary. Many thanks to Satorian for his effort.

    in reply to: IAF – News & Discussion – II #2452480
    ante_climax
    Participant

    Such conditions would be meaningless for the US and be seen by most countries as unacceptable. An end user agreement is about assuring that the buyer is the end user and will not pass them on to another user. As India is not a recognised nuclear power by USA they might also want to assure that the aircraft is not modified for nukes.

    Also as I said one possibility is a split order between the air force and the navy there each get their own type. If you believe that India would not be allowed by any seller to do that your opinion on India is quite low.

    India is now a recognized nuclear power (albeit through backdoor) and only U.S.A will put restrictions on things like Nuclear Carriage. As you pointed out Mirages are doing that job at the moment.

    No my opinion of India is not low. Neither is my opinion of America. But their export control rules are strict and the Parliament (congress) unlike in other nations have the right to review and change deals in retrospect.

    Signatory

    Above news is good news 🙂

    in reply to: Aero India 2009 #2452483
    ante_climax
    Participant

    Even if we are talking Mig-29K’s vs Mig-35’s.(?) Does the question really change??? As besides India purchasing a small number of Mig-29K’s for its Carriers. Who else would possibly be interested……….:confused:

    Sorry, the future prospect for the Fulcrum are just not very good……..Which, like a said is no disrespect to the type. Just the reality of the situation.:o

    Small number of MIG 29Ks ? It may be small compared to the massive MRCA but it is not Small at all when you consider how much planes most countries buy. It includes 16 initial purchases (which were already paid and signed for). That number is expected to reach between 35-40 + in the future. I do not consider that a small purchase. I remember the French offering us 40 Rafales outside the MRCA deal.

    🙂

    in reply to: IAF – News & Discussion – II #2452913
    ante_climax
    Participant

    What I have heard is that the RFP is not in any way clear on wether the MRCA is intended only for IAF or could be for the navy too. Remember that this is politics and in politics everything is possible.

    I cant see how USA would be able to decide where aircraft are being operated, rather it would be quite stupid of them to do so. What they want is to restrict it from being sold to third part and want inspections to ensure that. Probably they also want to control that no unapproved modifications are made, such as preperations for carrying nuclear wepons.

    Actually they were clear about their inspection to see if the Aircraft we buy are being used in their intended role. I think for the Navy to use the AFs hypothetical Super Hornets it would need a U.S approval of some sort. Or to buy new Aircraft from the U.S as part of a new deal. The way the MIG 29K news is going I think the Navy would commit to that platform for the time being.

    in reply to: IAF – News & Discussion – II #2452915
    ante_climax
    Participant

    I very much doubt the US wouldn’t want India to operate Super Hornets from its Carriers. As a matter of fact the US would likely welcome such a move. As combined Naval Operations would be much easier. Its worth noting that US Naval Forces would likely operate with India on a much later scale and USAF would in general terms. Especially, in a time of crisis or conflict…………So, Indian Land Based and/or Naval Based Super Hornets. Would work well with USN and RAAF Super Hornets counterparts………..

    Yes but for that there would be a new RFP or selection which won’t be related to the MRCA.

    in reply to: Indian navy – news & discussion #2043682
    ante_climax
    Participant

    I think they may well be interested in the JSF in the future in its B version. I really do not believe they would be interested in the SH now.

    in reply to: IAF – News & Discussion – II #2452949
    ante_climax
    Participant

    I don’t think we have any plans to operate AF planes on Navy platforms. And any order for the Navy will be a new order with new RFP etc. The MRCA is intended only for the Airforce. If I am not wrong if the SH is selected the U.S will make us sign End User Agreements that would prevent it from being deployed in Naval platforms. So any further purhcases of the same order will have the same terms.

    in reply to: Indian navy – news & discussion #2043708
    ante_climax
    Participant

    Which, leads me to believe that the current N-LCA would require a similar redesign along the lines of the forthcoming LCA MK2. Personally, I really have my doubts if the N-LCA is worth it. As India already has the Mig-29K and could have another type if the Super Horent or Rafale were selected for the MMRCA. So, its possible India could have three Naval Based Fighters! (Mig-29K, N-LCA, Super Hornet or Rafale) Seem like a little overkill to me………..:(

    If you have the LCA MK1 and the N LCA MK1 working then it would be much easier to make an NLCA MK2 once lca Mk2 is out. I don’t think it would involve that much cost or delays.

    Anyway I think the Vikramaditya and first IAC is going to operate Mig 29Ks the third IAC may operate the NLCA MK2.

    The Super Hornet will be an Air Force purchase if selected and I don’t think we have plans to let AF planes operate from Navy platforms ie. provided the SH can. The Rafale M is different from the normal Rafale.

    Like I said the AF procurement plan has not much to do with that of the Navy. The Navy is by far the more practical of the two services.

    in reply to: Aero India 2009 #2452966
    ante_climax
    Participant

    Yet, who will buy it??? As India is a along shot for the Mig-35 and China doesn’t want it……..with most other likely exports customers going to its cousin the Flanker. Honestly, the odds of the Mig-35 winning any worthwhile contracts are not so good……Regardless of the merits of the design.:(

    Actually she was talking about the Mig 29 Ks. As of now Indian Navy is committed to it, the price for the additional planes was a sticking point. throwing in the AESA and RuNavy ordering them will decrease the price for India.

Viewing 15 posts - 931 through 945 (of 2,160 total)