IAF deadline? Source please….

The IOC validation of the aircraft is completed as of December. Please refer to the ADA director’s interview posted some pages back in this thread.

The final clearance might take more time than expected, forcing IAF to look for some other options.

Deadline: as in the time IAF expects to have a certain number of aircraft/squadrons which will either replace older planes or augment the existing ones.

Not one of those missiles are fast enough to avoid defensive fires, but ALL of them are fast enough to light up like a christmas tree on defensive sensor systems and provide comparatively enormous warning/reaction time.

It is noteworthy that even the builders of the “superior” supersonic missiles have invested heavily in “Harpoonski” subsonic missile copies.

🙂

Perhaps a look at the weight and size of the missile should answer your question.

Yes, but when they weigh so much that most of your aircraft can’t carry them, & those that can can only carry one or two, while the stealthy subsonic missiles can be carried by everything down to light fighters & helicopters, you’re going to be firing far, far fewer of them. That makes it easier for the defence. Also, spotting them a long way out reduces that time advantage. A low-observable subsonic sea-skimmer will be a lot closer before it’s seen.

A Su-30 could carry (pylons permitting) 6 NSMs in place of a single Brahmos. That allows saturation attacks. A Tejas could carry infinitely more NSM, as it couldn’t possibly take off with even one Brahmos.

The Moskit has even fewer potential launch platforms.

Note that some navies, e.g. the RN, prefer submarine-launched torpedoes for large targets. They may be even slower than the slowest missiles, but by the time you hear them coming, it’s usually too late to do anything.

AAW Ships like the Type-45 have very evolved and powerful sensors and the required computing power, can a surface skimming LO missile be effective in hiding itself up close with in the visual/radar horizon?

How many nations consider their AF’s for striking naval targets?

In my opinion, that would be a bigger disaster for India then not having an H-Bomb as possession of H-bomb would mean that even a single (that survived the preemptive strike)nuclear warhead will be able to do damage that would require dozens of simple A-bombs.

Well that would be true if the aim was to use the weapons as war fighting options, a weapon.

As long as India is limited or restricted with in the region the only two threats that it will face will be PRC and Pakistan.

Of these two therats Pakistan is a small sized nation with no lead in ballistic missile (in numbers) or other modes of delivering the nuclear weapons, and PRC has a exceptional lead which can not be met. So the only place where nuclear weapons can be viewed as weapons of the actual war is Pakistan, and for that option what targets would require the destructive target of a H bomb?

As a deterrent, what does a nation targets in a second strike? (population centres, water and food supply centres?
If a nuclear warhead is detonated over a city, the city is destroyed no matter what level of damage occurs, i guess what i am saying is this, if India has a nuclear warhead, its more important how many warheads and how many missiles are available, more important than if the warhead is 50KT or 500MT.

Pokhran II not fully successful: Scientist
Times of India
Two things are clear; that[B] India should not sign CTBT and that it needs more thermonuclear device tests,”

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/NEWS/India/Pokhran-II-successful-insists-Kalam-/articleshow/4941553.cms

Pokhran II successful, insists Kalam

“After the test, there was a detailed review, based on the two experimental results: (i) seismic measurement close to the site and around and (ii) radioactive measurement of the material after post shot drill in the test site,” Kalam said.

“From these data, it has been established by the project team that the design yield of the thermo-nuclear test has been obtained,” said Kalam, who as director general of the Defence Research and Development Organisation, spearheaded the nuclear tests in 1998.

Someones is lying, something should be done…..

India should make it clear that no matter what happens she will never sign the CTBT, NPT or any other of these fancy deals with the N-5 dominant positions.
And if the government is ready to scap the Nuclear, face some sanctions, and waste a lot of money, it should test bigger thermo nuclear devices.

Thank you, you two….

See, Tejas Mk.2 is unlikely to adopt the GE-F414 from the current GE-F404-IN, because it will involve many changes to the airframe (stated by ADA officials). This is because the F414 is much larger than the F404. Hence, it was unexpected that Gripen – NG adopted the GE-F414.

The make of the avionics are different in Gripen and Tejas, but the functionality is the same. The Tejas Mk.1 is equipped with Litening target pod (the one on Israeli F-16 Sufa), Tarang RWR, radar jammers, datalinks and a highly modularized core avionics computer from the Su-30 MKI. The Tejas Mk.2 will feature IRST, increased sensor fusion and possibly an AESA radar.

Larger in what way?

F 404
Max dia: 35 Inches
Length: 154 Inches
Dry weight: 2,195 lb.

F414
Max dia:35 Inches
Length: 154 Inches
Dry weight: 2,445 lb

http://www.geae.com/engines/military/f404/f404-400.html
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/systems/f414.htm

Bangalore: India has sought bids from General Electric Co. and Eurojet Turbo GmbH to supply an engine for Tejas, the country’s first light combat aircraft, after an almost two-decade effort to develop a local version failed to deliver a sufficiently powerful engine.

http://www.livemint.com/2009/07/20220906/India-seeks-bids-from-GE-and-E.html?h=B

There is a good chance that the engine would be the F414, because of the F404

The news media were reporting about working out of EUM agreements between India and USA to clear the way for some of the big deals (C-130J, P-8I, harpoon etc.), and upcoming deals like MMRCA.

http://www.ndtv.com/news/india/india_us_regard_each_other_as_world_powers_krishna.php

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jRH6s5a6ZntZB_tSTQ0UYVfN5cww

Along with the clearance of two nuclear sites meant for US reactors with secretary of state Hillary Clinton quoted as saying

facilitate billions of dollars in US reactor exports and create jobs in both countries as well as generate much needed energy for the Indian people

With the billions of dollars probably getting US content with some rewards for its help in lifting the ban on nuclear supplies (really they were the only ones powerful enough to do that), Will the government put no pressure on the MoD and InAF to select a US bird?