dark light

vikasrehman

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1,186 through 1,200 (of 1,386 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: China's News, Pics and Speculation Part 5 #2660525
    vikasrehman
    Participant

    New chinese radar means new weapons ?. Are the chinese engines ready for service ?.

    I believe one of the primary reasons for indigenisation of SU-27 tech is to be able to use chinese weapons as well as russian…or perhaps solely chinese equivalents of russian weapons. As for the engine progress, it was a while back when the testing of these engines started…crobato or someone else should be able to tell u a lot more on this.

    in reply to: China's News, Pics and Speculation Part 5 #2661445
    vikasrehman
    Participant

    IIRC, Chegdu stopped their work on F-7MF prototype evaluation (having done 20 or so flights) to concentrate their efforts on FC-1 after the latter performed quite well in its initial tests. Pakistani decision to go for chinese avionics for at least first 50 units may indeed turn out to be an attractive incentive for china as it leaves the engine to be the only main imported entity…an issue which hopefully can be resolved over time either with licenced production or a more powerful derivative of Kunlun series.

    in reply to: China's News, Pics and Speculation Part 5 #2662125
    vikasrehman
    Participant

    plawolf

    also, the J7G does not have the nose space for a bison-like radar to allow for proper use of BVRAAMs (the italian grippo for the PAF J7MGs have a reported range of 23km IIRC, so you can probably fire off a missle at 18km if your lucky, but why you’d want to waste good BVRAAMs like that is beyound me).

    Tracking range is around 23 miles (around 37 Km) not 23 Km for Grifo-7. In near future at least, most BVR fights probably would occur within an envelope of 20-40 Km range…considering the geography of course.

    in reply to: Indian AF – News & Discussions – Jan 2005 #2607130
    vikasrehman
    Participant
    in reply to: Indian AF – News & Discussions – Jan 2005 #2607142
    vikasrehman
    Participant

    India’s fighter aircraft engine project running late

    Published by:Associated Press
    Date: 21/01/2005

    It will take at least four more years for India to build its own fighter aircraft engine, a senior defense ministry official said Friday. “Not before 2009,” M. Natarajan, scientific adviser to the defense minister, said when reporters queried about the status of the project launched in 1989.

    The original timeframe for the project – named Kaveri – was to test the engine in an aircraft in June 1996. It was expected the military would start using it three years later. But, bureaucratic delays, technical shortcomings and eventually U.S. trade sanctions in the aftermath of India’s nuclear tests in May 1998 delayed the project.

    On Friday, Natarajan, who also heads India’s military design projects, said the first flight test of the jet engine will be conducted in the first quarter of 2007. Several flight tests will be needed before the engine can be put into operation, he added.

    In 1982, India embarked on an ambitious plan to build its own combat aircraft and fit it with a locally designed jet engine. The Light Combat Aircraft plan is yet to be realized 23 years after being conceived. The project has seen nine prime ministers.

    A prototype of the aircraft is being tested with GE 404 engines made by General Electric of the United States. The aircraft is now expected to be inducted into India’s air force only by the end of the decade. India’s air force was hence forced to buy more Russian aircraft to meet its needs. India’s primary fighter aircraft are the Russian MiG range. About 70 percent of the country’s military hardware are of Russian origin.

    Meanwhile, the estimated cost of developing the Kaveri engine has surged to 28 billion rupees (US$640 million, €493.71 million) from the initial 3.82 billion rupees (US$87 million, €67.11 million). In early 2003, the Indian government once more revised its cost from 13 billion rupees (US$297 million, €229.11 million) to current levels.

    Natarajan defended the delay saying designing a jet engine was a complex affair. “We have done sufficient bed-testing (on the ground) and the engine has reached 98 percent of its expected thrust levels. It is showing good promise,” he said.

    in reply to: Indian AF – News & Discussions – Jan 2005 #2607144
    vikasrehman
    Participant

    I do agree dat recent heavy upsurges in indian defence budget have more to do with China than Pakistan…even with current force level, indian armed forces (especially the navy and AF) are better equiped than their pakistani counterparts. More importantly though, a major global power (which india want to become) requires modern armed forces, which may be the number 1 reason for a heavy drive towards modernisation.

    in reply to: Indian AF – News & Discussions – Jan 2005 #2607644
    vikasrehman
    Participant

    but the Defence Ministry argues that its traditional edge over Pakistan is being eroded and it wants to regain that

    I wonder who is making these analyses?

    in reply to: Indian AF – News & Discussions – Jan 2005 #2608376
    vikasrehman
    Participant

    But note that that unit cost is for the French, for any outside sales, it wud be higher than that.

    One should not that India wants to buy these machines with ToT, and if so, most of them would be built in India thus bringing the unit price down considerably. However, with ToT one usually has to pay hefty amounts for licence production as well as setting up all the facilities etc…and overall its quite difficult to work out how much IAF would save per machine if these are to be built in india instead of buying them from France. I also have a feeling that the $8-9 billion figure also covers weapons/initial training etc???

    in reply to: China's News, Pics and Speculation Part 5 #2613162
    vikasrehman
    Participant

    Latest news from Kanwa (though it may not be latest for some here) quotes a source saying that J-10A has entered batch production and a second production line is currently under construction. PLAAF is satisfied with its performance and the factory plans to manufature 50 per year ‘after the production of the fighter turns onto the regular track’.

    vikasrehman
    Participant

    US also supplies happily to both sides, when it suits her interests…Israel/Egypt and Turkey/Greece being primary examples.

    vikasrehman
    Participant

    However in INdia’s case, it feels like it can derail the F-16 deal or delay it at least, it has been delaying it for years now and wants to continue to do so,

    When it comes to US, neither India nor Pakistan matter. Wot matters is US interests. Its only wishful thinking dat India can derail Pakistani efforts to get F-16s or dat Pakistan can stop India buying Phalcon. When it serves US, she would sell Phalcon to India and vice versa. Neither Islamabad nor Dehli matter. Wot matters is US interests. 🙂

    in reply to: Israel, India to hold joint air force maneuvers #2625766
    vikasrehman
    Participant

    The key weakness in the Lancer was inadequate BVR armament, the Derby is not a true BVR missile as compared to the R77.

    How about integrating R-77 with Israeli radar?

    in reply to: Pakistan News and Discussion thread #2627703
    vikasrehman
    Participant

    Anubis

    I’m astonished at India’s current attitude, and even more astonished that no one has questioned them about their SU-30MKI purchases.

    Im not 🙂 Im sure if Pakistan (or any other country) was in india’s shoes, they would also do the same thing.

    in reply to: Pakistan News and Discussion thread #2627725
    vikasrehman
    Participant

    In the same way, why is IAF buying SU-30, LCA and Mirage 2000 for? There is only ONE answer, they are meant to be used against Pakistan.

    And others, in particular the MKI…just look at it its phenomenal range.

    in reply to: China's news, pics and speculation part IV #2630588
    vikasrehman
    Participant

    CHINA CONTEMPLATING NEW CONTRACTS FOR SUPPLY OF FIGHTER JETS FROM RUSSIA

    MOSCOW, December 20 (RIA Novosti) – Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov met with his Chinese counterpart, Cao Gangchuan, in Beijing last week. According to media reports, a bilateral commission co-chaired by the ministers then signed a protocol setting forth guidelines for military cooperation between Russia and China through the year 2010.

    Officials at Russia’s Defense Ministry and state-owned arms conglomerate Rosoboronexport have not confirmed the information so far. But the business newspaper Vedomosti quotes sources close to aircraft manufacturing companies as saying that the protocol envisages, among other things, the signing in 2005 of a long-awaited contract for the supply of 24 Su 30MK2 fighter jets to China’s Navy. Also next year, the sides are reportedly planning to sign a contract to carry on with the licensed assembly of Russian Su-27 fighters in China.

    The signing of the protocol marks an end to a pause in Russian-Chinese arms trade, military experts note. Talks on cooperation in the defense sector stalled this past spring as China said it would now import only the most advanced of Russian armaments while Russia insisted on the extension of contracts for the supply of older arms models. This conflict prompted China to push for the lifting of the embargo on arms imports from the European Union, which had been imposed back in 1989.

    But the EU is still unwilling to develop military cooperation with China. And even if the arms trade embargo is eventually lifted, European countries will not sell fighter jets and war ships to China anyway, ceding to pressure from the United States.

    The first contract for the supply of 24 SU-30MK2 naval fighter jets, worth a total of over 1 billion dollars, was signed in January 2003. The agreement for licensed assembly of SU-27 jets, providing for the supply of spare parts for 200 aircraft, had been concluded seven years earlier. As of the beginning of 2004, 105 of the 200 sets were delivered.

    Some 40 percent of Russian arms exports via Rosoboronexport fell on China’s share last year, the Center for Disarmament Studies reports. In 2002, the figure was 58 percent.

Viewing 15 posts - 1,186 through 1,200 (of 1,386 total)