vikasrehmanInfact with repeated answers to their queries they refuse to accept published information from the manufacturers ADA and HAL or even the intents of the users being the IAF. Infact they screamed and hollered the word failure….failure….failure for so long that they can’t and won’t see past it.
I see it as their fear to accept what will be a potential and insurmountable threat…and they hope they can dismiss it with often repetitive statements.
Primary aim of LCA was to replace ageing IAF fighters. I dont think anyone here is referring to LCA project as a failed one. In contrast what some people are saying that if LCA fails to achieve its primary objective, i.e. inducted in sufficient numbers, it would be considered a failed project in spite of all the benefits it has generated. One may use Lavi as an example. It gave birth to Israeli aviation industry, which at present is going from strength to strength. Yet one can’t say that Lavi was a successful project.
On another point, IAF is considering procurement of additional MKIs. Various otherproposals such as MMRCA and upgrades are also under consideration or being implemented to keep the force level up. Now if LCA had been around already as was envisaged initially, do you seriously think that IAF would have considered keeping its old Mig-21s in service up to 2015/20? If LCA was on par with gripen as many have suggested over the years and coming soon, don’t you think HAL would have been a serious contender for MMRCA RFP just like SAAB’s Gripen is likely to be for the very same competition? Besides that why would IAF need to go abroad to shop if they had something of the same calibre at home and available at almost half the price. Heck the GOI would have included it in the competion just to increase her chances on negotiations table, if she shared these sentiments for LCA.
vikasrehmanWell, If it were just India vs China, India would establish air superiority over the PLAAF.
How so?
What does today’s IAF has besides MKI which is markedly superior to China’s 300 off flnakers?
That is where you are wrong. I can accept that the SU-30K or the SU-30 MKK is an upgraded SU-27 but not the MKI.
So MKI is a totally new design?
Again Vikas you let your emotions cloud your thinking. Name one parameter in which the J-10 is better than the MKI and I will agree with your opinion. Can the J-10 find the MKI earlier, is it more manouverable, can it carry a larger payload, can it match the avionics etc…….
No emotions involved here:)
I said J-10 is a new machine, most likely superior to flankers as shown in exercises between the two (according to chinese forums) and was referring to chinese flankers.
vikasrehmanUltimately if the LCA does not become one of the IAF’s mainstays then it has failed as that was the projects initial aim. The J-10 on the other hand has entered operational service, has impressed the CIA (who also report that improved versions are in an advanced stage of development), and sufficient engines have been ordered for some 300 examples.
Sealordlawrence posted thia and entire discussion has been revolving around this point and also whether LCA is better than J-10 or vice versa. Besides USAF having their own agenda in hyping an aircrafts’s performance as someone pointed out earlier, i dont see anything else worng with the above statement. Does anyone else and if so why?
vikasrehmanThe Mig-29/35s and the M2k are probably way superior to J-10. And in time that may be proven. Till then we will continue to hold differing opinions.
So by this logic, LCA is also superior to J-10…since LCA is in Gripen’s class which is somewhat equivalent to M2K/Mig-29/35???
vikasrehmanThe point is to have a parallel acquisition path to the LCA so that three production lines (MKI, MMRCA, LCA) are churning out planes faster than the IAF is retiring them. 100+ Mig-21/23/27 and Jags are on their way to reaching the end of their technical lives in a few short years.
You don’t need three different types to have three lines. Instead more than one production line can be used to produce any of above mentioned types…to increase production rate.
vikasrehmanSince people have been talking about LCA, i’ll move away from the on going question and ask a real question.
We expect RFPs to be issued soon for MMRCA, and unless im mistaken Gripen is believed to be one of the contenders??? Since most here believe LCA to be in Gripen class, and if so, would HAL also receive an RFP for LCA???
vikasrehmanOr perhaps they could not get opportunity of research in there own country due to limited seats as US has vast population and foreign students.
I don’t think you have any idea about science research.
While China is definitely trying to gain knowledge through sending their stundents abroad and probably does not have as much facilities as there should be, your comments are touching racial line.
Now this pure nonsens. u havent proved that facilities are less.
Read my post again before you comment.
this German thing has blown out of proportion. At best it just accelarated weopons program of US/Russia just like J-10 with foreign help.
but it didnot create culture of research and insititutions infact German war has inflicted huge men and monetary damage to USSR. they have to relocate factories to east and spread research centers through out the country later on which may not nessary best for research as scientist may not want to relocate.
Accelerated weapons programmes. Does this mean Nazi scientist were ahead and US/Russia consumed their advanced knowledge to better their own programmes? And your last comments once again indicate that you have no knowledge regarding science research.
vikasrehmanIndias air and battlefield superiority over china is questionable as it is.
concluded something and I questioned it. Are you ready to take it back? If not then why are you denying something that you have written a little earlier on this very page?
Vick, what’s your take regarding this issue? Could India establish air superiority over China or vice versa as of today?
So can there be a guarantee that future versions of the J-10 will come even close to the current or evolved MKI? Or will the MKI keep increasing its superiority over the J-10? Since the IAF is currently flying higher tech, how is it so simple that J-10 will rapidly evolve while the MKI and others just remain stagnated?
That’s a good question. One has to realise that MKI is basically a very very heavily upgraded SU-27 just like F-16 Blk 60 is a heavily upgraded falcon. While upgrades are meant to enhance an aircraft’s performance, each design has some inherent flaws which simply cannot be removed with these upgrades. US was not stupid to invest billions of dollars into brand new designs-JSF/F-22. In comparison Russia has been forced to keep upgrading its old design mainly due to lack of finance. Whether MKI would further evolve primarily depends on Russia’s willingness. If they do not find enough money to properly fund a true 5th gen fighter in F-22/JSF class, then MKI would further evolve into a meaner machine. In comparison, J-10 is a new machine, most likely superior to flankers as shown in exercises between the two (according to chinese forums), and would go through many upgrade as indicated by Janes’ article on Super J-10.
vikasrehmanand that 130m is based on 183 aircraft it is not based on 3000 aircraft.
No doubt F-22’s unit price would come down significantly wrt JSF if more units are produced, but i dont think difference is gonna be as huge as u think.
OTOH, a few years back JSF’s flyaway unit price was usually quoted as around $35 mil.
http://specials.ft.com/ln/ftsurveys/industry/sc22322.htm
If JSF’s unit price tag exceeds $35m – little more than the cost of today’s Lockheed Martin F-16 – Pentagon planners have warned that the project may become unaffordable.
Today, it is normally said be around $50-60 million and i have seen even higher figures going up to $80-90 million for when it enters full production/operational status.
complete nonsense. why would they do research in US? If they know how do research they will never be in US at first place. Russia was the same closed society like China.
Utter nonsensical rhetoric. Throughout my academic career i met hundereds of Amercian research students in UK working on different projects. Does this mean they can’t conduct their reserach in America? While China is definitely trying to gain knowledge through sending their stundents abroad and probably does not have as much facilities as there should be, your comments are touching racial line. Americans/Europeans/Russian used a lot of research work originally done by Nazi scientist and built up on it. Does this mean that the latter were better scientist or what u refer to as ‘producers of knowledge’ and the reset were mere ‘consumers’?
vikasrehmanmoney, talent, infrastructure?. and u forget the important thing software and R&D skills.
Those three are pre-requisites to developing software and R&D sector.
It is not short cutting R&D. it is called copying because u are making a product inferior to original. and there is no evidence that it shortens time as u cannot make without it. so that question does not come.
Is J-11B inferior to original SU-27s that China bought or J-11s sh manufactured.
Instead of simply re-inventing the wheel one would undoutedly get further by standing on the shoulders of giants.
Finally…here is a recent article from Janes.
http://www.janes.com/defence/news/jni/jni061219_1_n.shtml
Designed as a nuclear delivery system, the DF-21 can also be fitted with a conventional payload. If made to work, such a weapon would be a ‘carrier killer’ without equal.
Now the question is how did this happen? Its in R&D stage yet, for which you need both R&D skills and software.
vikasrehmanSo I think we wont hear anything more of the Sino-Pak AEW effort anymore.
Rest assured. You would.;)
vikasrehmanIf you were using terrain following radar, then you would most likely be flying at low level, which would severely limit the range on your BVR missile, as the aircraft could not impart much kinetic energy on the missile. For the longest range on your BVR missile you need to be high and fast, like the Raptor.
Every pilot is aware of the advantages of speed and altitude vis-a-vis BVR engagement, and this is exactly what they try to achieve when they become aware of a threat. You wouldn’t fire one in terrain following mode unless there is no other choice.
vikasrehmanMaybe they are trying to copy the Indians and one of something from every country?
Hope not…but it sure seems that way.
vikasrehmandude, Pakistan selected Chinese radar, this is quite well known. prototype 4 is using entirely Chinese avionics
To add to it, first batch of PAF JF-17 (50 or so machines) would be equipped with all chinese avionics including radars.
vikasrehmanFollowing is a link to PAF mirages…all sorts of details.
http://www.pakdef.info/pakmilitary/airforce/index.html
PAF has been upgrading its mirage fleet since mid-late 90s under the designation ‘ROSE’ (Retrofit Of Strike Element). As of 2004, 14 Mirage 5EF were to receive ROSE III upgrade, and apparently more mirages are bieng planned to put through such upgrades.
Sign In
