The F 18 E/F offered to the IAF is the same version as the one operated by USN, Boeing is already marketing Growler lite ( without EA ) and considers India as a potential export customer. None of the European AF have a comparable platform.
The F 16IN will be the most advanced F 16 ever better than the UAE one.
The Eurofighter Nations are offering India full program partnership, something they didn’t even consider with regards to the Saudis, so if India selected the types the next tranches will probably have a lot of Indian inputs. It will be equal to the European versions and better than Saudi ones.
The Rafale F3 is offered with 100% ToT according to the Dassault V.P sales, :diablo:
The Gripen IN will be better than any Gripen currently in service :rolleyes:
Matt its you who need to wake up. tak tak tak 😎
name some technologies India has been given by the west which is truely world leading..
:rolleyes:
The F 18 E/F offered to the IAF is the same version as the one operated by USN, Boeing is already marketing Growler lite ( without EA ) and considers India as a potential export customer. None of the European AF have a comparable platform.
The F 16IN will be the most advanced F 16 ever better than the UAE one.
The Eurofighter Nations are offering India full program partnership, something they didn’t even consider with regards to the Saudis, so if India selected the types the next tranches will probably have a lot of Indian inputs. It will be equal to the European versions and better than Saudi ones.
The Rafale F3 is offered with 100% ToT according to the Dassault V.P sales, :diablo:
The Gripen IN will be better than any Gripen currently in service :rolleyes:
Matt its you who need to wake up. tak tak tak 😎
name some technologies India has been given by the west which is truely world leading..
:rolleyes:
The main problem is the Kaveri engine.It is impossible to design a plane for an engien that does not exist, but is always expected to be better then the one you currently have available.
If India would now sign up a deal for F414 and decide that this is the engine of LCA ´, then maybe it can be saved.
Indeed a excellent point, India should have signed for a JV for whatever shortfall the kaveri is having right 2-3 years back when K-9 final came out that is, but then again the places it is facing shortfalls are serious prop. technologies that i doubt if any engine manufacturers are willing to part to India, even if they agrees to there are budgetary issues perhaps?
I guess this time Aero India will bring more information on what is actually happening with kaveri.
The LCA project started in 1983 with main goal to replace the old MiG-21s in the 1990´s. If it then took 5 or 10 years for the designers to finally come up with a design and the government to give the final go ahead was just too bad for India, the end result was the same. The LCA never did replace the MiG-21s in the mid 1990s.
Now, 25 years after the LCA project started not a single MiG-21 have been replaced by it. And if the LCA ever comes to series production (like right now despite it does´nt even meet the most basic requirements) the first operative LCA squadron may enter service in 2015 and replacing the MiGs.
That is only 20 years behind schedule…
A success? Not in my book.
If the only reason to start the LCA project in 1983 was to create an indigenous aviation industry not even then is it a success. There are faster and cheaper ways to get there.I know it´s not the easiest thing in the world to create a fighter, the industry that lies behind it and all that from almost scratch and I off course applaud India for making that decision decades ago. But that does´nt change the facts when it comes to the LCA project. I think that if India had chosen another path in 1983 (like a tight collaboration with an experienced western aviation company) they would have achieved results faster and cheaper. And the know-how gained from such a project could very well have resulted in a indigenous next-generation fighter being in the pip-line at the moment.
Maskirovka I agree with most of what your saying but not the timeframe, Tell me how do you start a project without a funding? It bogs down to the differences in how PSU and companies like Boeing et al work, when they says work started that means work started with all up funding (that is at companies risk), when we say work started its not started till there is a official sanction or budget for that matter.
And as i said comparing the timeframe if you go by, LCA was never stated to reach IOC/FOC before 2010 right on its very first flight which one known in 1999-2001, so yes by basic timeframe if you go by its late, whereeas if you go by when the thing flew first and add up 6-8 years back for its design and developement (with the fact we did not had the infrastructure), i dont think its that late for a country who is making its first plane after HAL’s adventure with a lot of planes was officially scuttled.
But it definitely remains to be seen what happens to LCA after it reaches IOC, only then I can agree with you that somehow somewhere it has failed to meet what it was supposed to do. I’ll keep my fingers crossed till then.
Mashkirovka, I dont know what timeframe of thirty years you were talking about, to me it got its first stage of funding for feasibility study only in 1991 then FSED was done by 1999 or so and second phase of funding provided with a first flight around 2001 iirc.
I can only hope for the best for LCA, but IMO LCA’s cockpit is just fine enough, who cares as long as it works?
The datalink incompatibility is actually a good thing, also I dont think India used their CDL and that is incompatible as well.
Being incompatible does not means it cant show the same amount of data the NATO standard Link 16 does.
And regarding doing post stall manuevers, maybe the Indians wanted to do it that way onlee, You never know :diablo:
Huh.. Well I guess I will leave you to your alternate world of Fantasy and make believe…….. or read the interview again
Here is the original design intended LCA parameters:
Flight Envelope:
AoA: 35 deg.
Roll-rate : 290-300 deg/sec
Sustained load G-limit : 9/-3.5g
And what proof you have that this is the official ASR in all envelopes? 😮
I better rest my case by saying in ASR, its not as lame as to mention “we need 9/-3.5” without mentioning height, load et al.
35 AOA? 😀 You mean simulation? It was always known that 20 to 22 degrees of AoA has been demostrated.
Read this also which corroborates what is being not said by subramanyam;
LCA needs new engine to be worthy of combat
This should not be read “out of context” as you guys say always, obviously in different domain. 😉
Unless it is … forced like Arjun MBT, pleading the govt “intervention to ensure “indigenous efforts” are “appropriately rewarded”😀 (not My words but DRDO)
Half knowledge with a passion to flamebait is dangerous.
The pictures by ajay Shukla are very nice indeed….the build quality also looks good!
^^^…. maybe because the other thread was closed??.. regrdless this radar news is interesting..as there are quite some tinkers regarding what radar it is going to be.
It seems that to certain peoples even after repeatedly having all sorts of data published viz timelines et al , they tend to get at their own constructed theories. how do even someone come to some of these ill-logics I’m reading in this page. Even constructing ill-logic needs some base to start with properly.
People tend to go around circles inspite of archives, guess they just act too smart or they are really braindead that to ignore so vast logical resources. Basic differences between Phase 1 funding i.e from 1991 to 2001 and Second Phase funding from 2001 onwards are so hard to properly read by or what?
thers no comparison between Cavour and Vikramaditya, Cavour IIRC has much much better EW/ECM/ECCM et al than Vikramaditya……..
The current Agni series lacks range.
Not really, Please look up on Agni a bit, the Agni 2 and AT ranges was always underreported, true range being told by some biographies, and the Agni 3 is a new platform altogather to develope a new generation of missiles, in that sense Agni 3 with 2 stage is the precedeeser of the full fledged ICBM Agni 4 with a third stage, the Agni 3 already has more than 5k range [mentioned in host of interviews], it was tested in dampened trajectory, something of which you can make out if you see the launch pictures.
Range is a non issue for India, but this Sagarika range is a bit puzzling, lets wait for whats actually cooking. 700 kms doesnt cuts the ice or is enough to do the job…
Somehow i have always always felt, with the kind of money IN is spending, the whole thing of carrier has been messed up, the best thing would have been teaming up with France and UK for their CVF design and procure 2 of them in long term.
Thing just got a bit complicated, as i think there is a need for bigger carriers from IAC 2, well lets see how the thing turns out finally, afterall when gorshkov deal was thought out none of these options were available thus easier said than done.
FI is a very reliable website on their news they reports, infact the most reliable news website i have ever came by.
AGNI-III with reduced Payload can reach 4500Km with ease ,AGNI-III+ will be bring a great addition to the Agni Team
I dont even think range is even an slightest issue here, the Agni 3+ will have a comfortable ICBM range, the way of saying that just below 6000 kms is just political gimmick, we have been hearing these range being underreported from decades, didnt the range of Agni 2 as officially revealed differed from the actual range later revealed by Kalam saab and Chengappa? 😀
Also the very first interview after the succesful Agni 3 test, where Avinash Chander head of Agni 3 programme, replies to the question of the range upon being asked by a reporter w.r.t some other counterpart, he being diplomatically said “We have the capability to match the range also, and it is a not a concern for us”. 😉
Here are some picture previously unseen of PAD and AAD courtesy Ajay Shukla,

