Just found at “LiveFist” with a model from the Aero India 2009 showing a Su-30MKI fitted with the ASTRA (sadly only as a model).
What surprises me are the dimensions … ๐ฎ I thought the ASTRA has roughtly the size of an AMRAAM. :confused:
http://livefist.blogspot.com/2009/02/astra-bvraam-on-su-30-platform.html
Can anyone correct me ?
Cheers, Deino
Just found at “LiveFist” with a model from the Aero India 2009 showing a Su-30MKI fitted with the ASTRA (sadly only as a model).
What surprises me are the dimensions … ๐ฎ I thought the ASTRA has roughtly the size of an AMRAAM. :confused:
http://livefist.blogspot.com/2009/02/astra-bvraam-on-su-30-platform.html
Can anyone correct me ?
Cheers, Deino
I posted this on my MAKS trip report – in August 2007…..
…with the caption….“Interestingly, the Su-33 carrier fighter was being closely investigated by a Chinese delegation – make of that what you will!!”
Ken
Ahhh … I thought I missed a recent confirmation.
But to be honest, it’s still a so far unconfirmed rumour – besides the fact that China is surely interested in that type – that they will buy them in Russia. As far as I listened or followed the szene this rumour was superseded by the next one, which sayd they tried to redesign / modify the J-11B with elements from a prototype of the Su-33 they received via Ukraine …. and now the latest rumour that a new type is under development at SAC. :confused:
So I would say … let’s wait and see … ๐
Deino
…Also, Russia is already upgrading the Su-33 for China. So, it would have to invest very little in its development. As China is picking up the tab……….:D
…If the China and Su-33 deal is true at all…
รhhhmm … did I miss anything !??? :confused: Any source for that ??
It would be completely new to me if China ordered the Su-33 directly in Russia.
Deino
Anything new about IAPR volume 26 ?
I think it is the time now …..
Or not ? :confused:
I don’t expect it before end of March … or even later ! ๐
Deino
http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=3947599&c=ASI&s=AIR
Well, let’s see if the Russians are happily selling their stuff to China in the future. ๐
Sorry guys, but “Andrei Chang, a China military specialist at the Kanwa Defense Center” … that says as much as You read an article written by Dr. Carlo Kopp ! ๐
Deino
Nice comparison, but let me add some corrections …
Note : Tejas assumed is Tejas Mk.1 JF-17 is as described on the website of PAC Kamra.
…
Tejas : Undergone weapons trials. Dumb bombs, drop tanks, missiles carried.
JF-17 : Undergone weapons trials. Dumb bombs, drop tanks, missiles carried.Tejas : Elta radar.
JF-17 : Chinese KLJ-7 radar for the first serial block.
Yes …. surely we would be interested in more !
Deino ๐
Thanks a lot for posting … but what machine is the one with the green radome ????
Deino
Second attempt …. I’ve never seen a green radome on a LSP-LCA !
Deino :confused:
Lets hope a production F 16IN will be ready for the trials as well. ๐
Why … ??? I don’t think that LM will develop and build a machine only for that competition … maybe the will bring one of the F-16E/E with some modifications but surely not a production model.
Deino
…
Birddog, the above statements are inaccurate. As per the ’88 report posted by yourself, ADA director VS Arunachalam Tejas has stated that Tejas was yet to begin design phase as of 1988. It was only “conceived” in 1978 and only “sanctioned” in 1983. Mere “conception” and “sanctioning” are bureaucratic formalities only, and do not indicate start of a project, as Dr. Arunachalam has said.It may be mentioned that China too has failed completely in making the indigenous engines for it’s flagship J-10 fighter jet, and the FC-1 (a private venture with Pak). This, despite the fact that the WS-10 engine is an unauthorised copy of Russia’s AL-31.
Upps … that may be right, but esp. in contrast to India, China choose at the right time an engine and decided to go forward with that. Now many years later You are correct, the WS-10 is still not a proven powerplant for the J-10, but anyway there are nearly 200 examples flying with the AL-31FN. India on the other side ‘doctored’ IMO much too long with the Kaveri, choose an interim powerplant without enough “room” for improvements (esp. thrust) and has now to decide again for a second interim engine, the EJ-200 or F414, wich will delay an already delayd programe even more.
But besides that, the WS-10, esp. the WS-10A has nothing to do with the AL-31F/FN as one can clearly see on the one show at the latest Zhuhai Airshow.
Deino
Just a question regarding the choice of engines for the Tejas Mk. II … if I’m correct, then both updated versions of the EJ-200 or the F414 are under consideration ….
ADA to equip Light Combat Aircraft with more powerful engines
….
“We are looking to procure either the GE-414 from US or European consortium Eurojet’s EJ 200 to fly with the LCA Mk II version,” Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA) Director P Subrahmanyam said here.
…
“Request for Proposals (RFP) is just about to go out and very soon it would be floated,” the ADA Director said. The present GE 404-IN 20 engine, he said, was the interim solution as a power-plant for the LCA.“Since the beginning, we knew that the present engine would be the interim solution as it is adequate for the IOC aircraft. We are looking to get the higher derivatives of GE-414 or EJ-200,” he said, adding “we told them (GE and Eurojet) that whatever you have on your drawing boards, we will go ahead with that”.
…http://www.deccanherald.com/Content/Feb62009/national20090206116934.asp?section=updatenews
But why is then the Kaveri/SNECMA still in the running for the MCA ??
ADA to develop MCA in association with IAF – โMCA will have stealth featuresโ
…
ADA Director P.S. Subramaniam later said that the MCA will have stealth features and the IAF has come forward to evolve the specifications of the aircraft, which could be described as the next generation fighter aircraft. He said the MCA is likely to be in the 20-tonne category, with a twin-engine aircraft, powered by the Kaveri-Snecma engine.
…
Wouldn’t it be better to choose a single engine and fit both fighters with it ?
Deino
PS: I think we should open a new tread for the MCA only !