Seems to me that Dassault has proven itself to be a reliable partner for India last time they needed to use their Mirages for real…

right now, Dassault’s major problem is that India seem to be asking to have HAL build the aircraft, which in itself is not really a problem for Dassault, but wants Dassault to be responsible alone for anything that may happen… if HAL doesn’t fit the bill, it would be Dassault who’d have to bear the responsability, which is simply something that no sane person on this planet or elsewhere would accept (especially considering the amounts of money involved).

Dassault can be held responsible for what they do @ Dassault, but what happens @ HAL and out of Dassaults control is up to HAL to bear the responsability for… If India can’t trust its own people for the job to be done (and take the responsability for it), how could Dassault?

D-21 was launched from the SR-71 in flight, needed to reach MAch3 to be able to fly on its engine (ramjet) that provided its thrust at high speeds only (or it wouldn’t even ignite). With 6.65t of thrust it provided it had to just maintain flight. Your aircraft will have to make do with an engine that will have to accelerate it past the sound barrier, maintain supersonic flight, and yet all that while loosing somewhere about 80% of its thrust once up there at altitude (not much air for a turbofan that high up)

oh, and by the way, it was a single use, reconnaissance drone filled with fuel and one single camera. It would fly in a straight line and self destruct once back

your engine will have to breathe (not easy in your concept, as there’s not much space for air to enter inside, increasing difficulty with thin air at altitude), you’ll have to have a cockpit with plenty of nice stuff (heavy) in order for your pilot to sit there and stay alive (for the beginning at least), you’ll need to have landing structure (gear and solid structure to stand landings at least during trials… as once in service it may not land all that often ^^ ), you’ll need to have space for weapons with supporting structure (heavy again), etc..

ah, as for rockets you want to use, the D-21 when launched from a B-52 needed a booster bigger than the ship itself to reach sufficient speed (highly supersonic) to start its own engine… what do you think your two small rockets (where will you place them?) will be able to do?

again, there’s no free lunch… it just doesn’t happen

I figure the key elements in STEALTH are:

1. design ( deflecting surfaces )
2. material ( absorbing the radar signals )
3. size ( smaller aeroplane is by harder to detect )

I figure designing is hard…but making the plane smaller is relatively untried territory so far.

Faberge Eggs were small…I’d try to study them first.

er, “size”… not really. look at the radar reflectors on the F-22 or similzr devices on leisure sail boats… even small, they strogly reflect radarwaves to make the thing visible.

LO needs research -> costs money

decent performance needs technology (research) -> costs money

the gripen, in swiss evaluation had trouble scrambling and intercepting an airline-type target over swiss territory, and it’s a world beater in “bang for the buck department”. there’s no free lunch, and MAKO, while a nice trainer (T-38 replacement) would struggle to provide a sufficient level or performance to act as an air force’s unique aircraft

would Eurofighter trust HAL to produce Eurofighters?
obviously Sukhoi trusts HAL to build MKis

it’s just that Sukhois were supposed to be mostly built in india, yet, they were mostly made in russia…. HAL not being able to do its part as it should have been for too long…

now they seem to do fine, but it took them more time than expected

on another hand, anything flying supersonic will make so mild turns that any missile sent its way inside its flight envelope has a good chance to hit

then there are electronics.. missiles like the R-27 series may have long legs in some versions, but as far as efficiency goes… er… what’s the latter to go far if you can’t see (and hit) anything?

Well..I am still a bit irritated by this remark.

The Gekko flies faster than a Me-163 Komet with just the turbofan…and 3 times faster ( assumably ) than the Komet on rockets.

What makes it a coffin..it has Martin Baker Mk15 fitted in and all ?

Care to specify/elaborate ?

ejection seat doesn’t mean a certified safe escape (especially at supersonic speeds). Besides, the Mk15 is to be used for speeds not exceeding 300kts… about M0.5…

TVC helps only inside the G-limits… if speeds are sufficient for the fighter to reach its maximum G, TVC or not makes little difference… and if its slow enough to use TVC, it’s sitting duck for an incoming missile…

the only advantage of TVC is in supersonic trimming, and somewhat increased maneuverability at very low speeds, speeds where no sane pilot wants ever to be in a fight..

er, be my guest… anytime 😀

for the answer, reread my previous post… no way it does what you say… matter of physics… for example:

– drag isn’t just about frontal section, especially supersonic drag

– your turbofan will have pretty much zero thrust at such altitudes, as there’s little to no air to generate thrust from

– your rocket boosters will be visible in IR and UV as soon as they come above the horizon (which means, basically, for a Mig-31 cruising @ 60000ft and which has its horizon some 500km ahead, as soon as they are ignited, even on the ground)

so, you’ll have to glide (no thrust to speak of), against high drag (high speed), with very low inertia (low mass), with a shape that can maintain anything resembling lift only at very high speeds at such altitudes… no way it does what you imagine, sorry