ante_climax[QUOTE]
Has India ever re-sold French, British, or Russian Equipment to a Third Party!/QUOTE]
Yes like it says to Myanmar. Which was not a very nice thing to do. But I do not run our government.
There was a Dhruv ALH sale which India has denied (it has a lot of Western equipment) it caused furore
Moreover, the sticking point is that countries cannot dictate where or against who we use our weapons.
ante_climaxIts pretty clear that India isn’t happy with end-user agreement. and for US foreign military sales, its mandatory. TOT means a lot more agreements have to be signed and hence more delays to sort out issues if US Aircraft is selected. worrying thing for India here is delay, politicians simply will delay it for years saying that things haven’t been resolved with US. if Congress is elected next time, they won’t simply walk away without delaying the whole thing for many years.
Like I said, the contract is theirs to win or lose, at a time of grave economic crisis. Let them decide whether to shoot themselves in the foot or not.
I am optimistic like Boeing and Lockheed that everything would be ironed out soon :).
ante_climaxEven striking a Super Carrier is considerd an attack on the U.S. So with the U.S Millitary and civilian population in Japan, China will never dare do it.
ante_climaxWhy should China start a conventional war with Japan, when it has a nuclear option at all? 😉
Because Nuclear option will only ensure MAD ( mutually assured destruction ) this is why the shift to conventional weapons happened during the cold war as well.
ante_climaxConspiracy theories aimed at disturbing the Indo-US Alliance. There is nothing new in the article. These sorta things take their time, but any thing like squeezing India won’t work.
As I said the Impetus is one these people. Give us good terms or we walk away as simple as that.
ante_climaxI never claimed it has nothing to fear. At first during the cold war the emphasis was on nuclear weapons, when both parties had comparable systems the focus again shifted to conventional warfare and systems. It will be hard for Japan (unless she starts now) to stand against China in a conventional war. In that case the F 22 makes a lot of sense, as one can take down like 10-15 flankers 🙂
ante_climaxRussia and China are atomic powers and can force their will on Japan everytime, when Japan has no longer the atomic-shield of the USA.
Wishful thinking this that Japan will ever be outside the U.S atomic shield. If so it will have its own weapons or friends which have them. 🙂
ante_climaxIAF MIG 21s and PLAAF Replicas are going to be in service for another 10 years atleast.
ante_climaxHaan baba, so if the year of the introduction of Tejas Mk. II and MRCA is the same, then why not 126 more Tejas’ ? Is it that necessary to entertain these foreign companies ? Is it a promise etched on stone, “we will buy only foreign MRCAs” ?
Note that all 126 won’t be delivered in 2013; only the first lot of 10 or so will be. These will be off-the shelf ones.
There are no guarantees the 2013 date for the Tejas may be delayed, IAF cannot wait that long or risk it. HAL cannot even deliver the Hawks on time (read in the news section). It would be unwise not to go for the MRCA.
He was clearly asked about the role of the PAK-FA and he replied and meant exactly that PAK-FA will replace the MRCA.
No he was just referring to the capabilities of a fifth gen aircraft. The words have totally different meanings. I can do this or that don’t mean I will do this or that.
A mere 4 years when MRCA inductions began, and already the replacement aircraft will start getting inducted ? I don’t think Major knew what he himself was talking.
He did not say the PAK FA will replace MRCA. What he said is when we are talking fifth gen you are talking about an aicraft that CAN replace the MRCA. It may eventually, but initally it will be replacing Mig 29s, Mirages, Early batch MKIs etc, and by 2030-40 it will replace the MRCA.
See, the thrust of Eurojet or GE-414 will be o the order of 90-100 kN, which is significantly higher than the current 79 kN of F-404, or 83 kN of F404-IN20. So-termed “better avionics” shall be taken care of ‘open architecture’ system of Tejas so that it can retain and absorb the latest avionics developments in the coming years. This has been stated numerous times by Dr. Subramanyam of ADA.
Otherwise, why would IAF entertain 35 year old F-16s and F-18s ?
You have answered your own question there. The added thrust is a safety net so radical resign won’t be needed in the future. F 16 and F 18 offered to India have significantly higher thrust engines than their predecessors to cope with added weight that comes with added capabilities.
Similarly, when EADs made it’s offering of Tejas, it considered all relevant aspects for the same.
Besides, it is estimated that Tejas’ nose is of the size of F-16.
I cannot emphasis the need to keep Tejas an Indigenous project. The Elta Radars should be an interim option before the MMR and a future AESA MMR takes over. I am only supporting a foriegn engine for LCA because i don’t want to see the project die because of more engine delays.
ante_climaxI remember watching ‘Wings of the Redstar’ in Discovery where they were saying that the MIg 23 is an intercepter and a poor dogfighter.
ante_climaxI have said it before and I would say it again. Abhimanyu your commitment to the Tejas programme is commendable, but you are not yet touching on ground realities. The ACM has pointed out that the MRCA is not a replacement for the MIG 21s (LCA will do that job). It is going to replace the MIG 23s and some of MIG 27s, which points to an aircraft with good strike capability. The Tejas has only began its trials with live bombs recently, and there is a long way to go before it could be compare to some of the strike platforms offered in the MRCA, especially the Super Hornet, Viper and Rafale. Even the EF has made more progress than the Tejas with A2G weapons. There is no final decision on the radar of the Tejas yet, and MK2 acc to ACM will only be ready by 2013, the year the selected MRCA will enter squadron service.
In my view, the above statement is the most “baffling”. The MRCA is expected to be in service till 2040 at least. Thus, a replacement as he says would imply a plane that would be one that would mature fully around that timeframe, which in turn would be the consequence of slower development time. Only the MCA fits that criterion.
But the PAK-FA that Major is purchasing, would enter service in 2015 (as per his own earlier statements). So, how does it exactly reconcile replacing the MRCA that he wants to induct only 2 years earlier ????
Besides, note his confusing statement once again, “we can’t talk of fifth gen. before 2018”. He should be asked about the 2015 estimate that he himself gave of inducting the PAK-FA. Most importantly, he should be asked about the MCA, which the IAF will be developing along with DRDO starting very soon (and not 2018).
The ACM is right and you are wrong. He says CAN replace the MRCA, not WILL replace, there is a difference. Have you not read the reports that the Indian version of PAK FA will only be ready by 2017, it is in the PAK FA thread. So Yet again the ACM is right with his time frame. The PAK-FA is not an Indian project his estimates change as per the Russian estimates change, they are saying 2017sh now. The IAF is developing the MCA with ADA and not DRDO, as of now its a paper plane, when we talk about MCA we are talking 2020+ at least.
The above statement is not only confusing, but also laughable. It exposes Major’s utter lack of knowledge.
He must be reminded that the GE-F404 has 79 kN of thrust. The IAF threw a lottery figure of 100 kN that it thinks is “sufficient” for Tejas.
The IAF may want a better engine on the Tejas. So it does not matter if its 75KN or 79KN, the main indication to why it needs this is from the IAFs demand that better avionics must be integrated with the MK2 Tejas, which may cause added weight, compensated by the higher thrust engine. Also just being above the required 75KN of thrust does not give enough room for future integration of avionics, weapons etc.
EADs has already conducted preliminary study for the same and have made their offering accordingly. Another example of compacted radar is the variant of Bars variant being installed on MiG-35 also.
Bars variant being installed on MIG 35 ??? The Radar on Mig 35 is Zhuk AE it is NOT a Bars variant. Is the LCAs nose as Big as the MIG 35s ? If we are buying a factory radar we may as well buy the Elta 2052.
ante_climaxProlly not, we already have too many types. And logistics costs will be huge for a split order. The only one would make sense that way will be an order of Gripens and SH.
Both share the same engine, so can the LCA.
ante_climaxAccording to ACM fifth gen fighters are to be discussed only after 2018 I meant induction IOC etc. So why start a thread now. By then Kaveri would be ready one would assume.
ante_climaxAESA obsession is getting too much. MKI will get Ibris-E and later AESA upgrades. Tejas will get a native AESA at some point. The ELTA 2052 being considerd is also an AESA. MIG 29 up may eventually include Zhuk AE.
ante_climaxI think if Major wants AESA only, he must order individual AESA rdars for existing fighters in the IAF like Su-30 and even Tejas (as per Col. Ajai Shukla, Tejas was offered AESA radars by EADs last year).
It would be more economical than ordering entire jets, simply because they come pre-installed with AESA radars. It may be proof of how “hare-brained” the MRCA scheme may be (pardon the use of the word).
Err will AESA radars increase fighter numbers :confused:
Sign In
