IAF Mirage 2000

[nongaddarliberal]

Seeing is believing.



BTW that F 35A had it's combat software still being worked on. The above clips demonstrate an F 35A closest to the final configuration.

Yup. Early f 35 maneuverability was limited by the software. They didn't allow to fly the plane to it's potential. Subsequent software upgrades have allowed the F 35 to fly like it was intended to. The engine thrust on the F 35 is also more than most twin engine fighters, at 190 KN.

 

[Assassin 2.0]

For example the USN is set to retire USS Nimitz. India can negotiate for a 25-year lease while it shoulders the cost of refurbishing and refuelling it. With Nimitz India can operate either SH or Rsfale Ms with Growlers, E-2Ds and Ospreys.

(Sorry OT)

Best thing would be another vikrant class IAC1 type of aircraft carrier. Because if we went on buying xyz from other nations then our capabilities which have generated over the years will be lost. Whole infrastructure to build aircraft carrier will be lost. So government will not do that.

 

[Assassin 2.0]

As I have been saying all along this diplomatic autonomy mentality is baffling. It has setback India's development and rise for decades. Had India opened up earlier to the West then it will be richer now and in a much stronger position. I mean look at China. So without intending to demean any memory here, I say Nehru is a high-headed jack a$$ while Deng Xiaopeng is a pragmatic realist.

American weapons are the most cutting edge, cheapest for their capabilities, best maintained with professional after market service, with the widest available weapons options, with the widest and best support from US military, and US provides bigger diplimatoc and economic clout.

It's no brainer really. But I guess there are still a lot of Nehruskies in India until now.

Then there would have been east Pakistan another bigger cancer for india. India used soviets for good and break the Pakistan. In 90s india and Pakistan was on same level and American interest was quite high with Pakistan because Pakistan was easy way to keep influence on Middle East. Pakistan was helping them to deal with Chinese. Pakistan was eventually keeping soviet proxy india in check.

So strategic gain always come ahead Pakistan gained many things in 90s from American they were richer etc. But once they started the war they lost everything. India on the other hand believes on more strategic and long-term approach.
With Americans we could never have become a nuclear power and east Pakistan would have existed targeting our southern borders. And then why the same great Chinese left alliance with Americans when it was Giving them profit making them more richer? Because now they have aim to create there own economic cloud to be the dominant force this is how world works no big country wants to be dependent on someone. Even the son over the time stops listening father and starts challenging.

What makes you think that india needs only Americans now? You know you just keep blabbering your fairy tails of this and that shit. Which any indian diplomat will tear. having strategic autonomy is most crucial thing for india. The words you speak are not part of our forgein policy the words i speak are foundation part of our forgein policies. Everything depends on gains nothing else. India is not siri lanka xyz tiny states which change there policy daily. India will hit 5T in 2024, 10T in 2030 and then plateau out to 3% GDP growth after that. 10 years of sprint still pending which gives india much more money much bigger economic cloud and much much bigger military. India have already started to develop its own weapons future of our industry have indigenous weapons. If india and US alliance didn't happened from 1990-2019 then in 2030 happening that will be impossible sweet heart. When you are weakest then you need people when you are doing good you can take much more efficient use of those people.
India seeks a interdependent relationship with US.
Everyone was thinking that india will block sales from russskies instead of that we gave them 2 billion $ credit.
India is working to develop its own influence on the world.

 

[AmoghaVarsha]

Nope we have been improving on Mirage 2000 since decades with Israel and integrated Russian missiles too. They were the reason mirage is still useful at a very low cost.

The original OEM charged 42-45 million dollar to do upgrade which doesn't even include an aesa or engine upgrade.

Look at the upgrades and tell me which one country would have given all of it plus guaranteed the integration.



Sent from my HD1901 using Tapatalk

 

[AmoghaVarsha]

Anyone has any idea about the specs of the new radar?

Sent from my HD1901 using Tapatalk

 

[Flying Dagger]

Best thing would be another vikrant class IAC1 type of aircraft carrier. Because if we went on buying xyz from other nations then our capabilities which have generated over the years will be lost. Whole infrastructure to build aircraft carrier will be lost. So government will not do that.

Indigenous one infact no harm if we take some more
time and go for 65T class.

As I have been saying all along this diplomatic autonomy mentality is baffling. It has setback India's development and rise for decades. Had India opened up earlier to the West then it will be richer now and in a much stronger position. I mean look at China. So without intending to demean any memory here, I say Nehru is a high-headed jack a$$ while Deng Xiaopeng is a pragmatic realist.

American weapons are the most cutting edge, cheapest for their capabilities, best maintained with professional after market service, with the widest available weapons options, with the widest and best support from US military, and US provides bigger diplimatoc and economic clout.

It's no brainer really. But I guess there are still a lot of Nehruskies in India until now.

Are you from Philippines ?

 

[Flying Dagger]

Look at the upgrades and tell me which one country would have given all of it plus guaranteed the integration.



Sent from my HD1901 using Tapatalk

You look at that dude.. in 2020s we will be getting an upgrade with no AESA no meteor integrated

We had Mig 29 UPG deal with new engines at <15 million a piece .

USA is offering upgrade packages for Korean F 16 and Japanese F 15 at much better VFM .

 

[asianobserve]

Then there would have been east Pakistan another bigger cancer for india. India used soviets for good and break the Pakistan. In 90s india and Pakistan was on same level and American interest was quite high with Pakistan because Pakistan was easy way to keep influence on Middle East. Pakistan was helping them to deal with Chinese. Pakistan was eventually keeping soviet proxy india in check.

So strategic gain always come ahead Pakistan gained many things in 90s from American they were richer etc. But once they started the war they lost everything. India on the other hand believes on more strategic and long-term approach.
With Americans we could never have become a nuclear power and east Pakistan would have existed targeting our southern borders. And then why the same great Chinese left alliance with Americans when it was Giving them profit making them more richer? Because now they have aim to create there own economic cloud to be the dominant force this is how world works no big country wants to be dependent on someone. Even the son over the time stops listening father and starts challenging.

What makes you think that india needs only Americans now? You know you just keep blabbering your fairy tails of this and that shit. Which any indian diplomat will tear. having strategic autonomy is most crucial thing for india. The words you speak are not part of our forgein policy the words i speak are foundation part of our forgein policies. Everything depends on gains nothing else. India is not siri lanka xyz tiny states which change there policy daily. India will hit 5T in 2024, 10T in 2030 and then plateau out to 3% GDP growth after that. 10 years of sprint still pending which gives india much more money much bigger economic cloud and much much bigger military. India have already started to develop its own weapons future of our industry have indigenous weapons. If india and US alliance didn't happened from 1990-2019 then in 2030 happening that will be impossible sweet heart. When you are weakest then you need people when you are doing good you can take much more efficient use of those people.
India seeks a interdependent relationship with US.
Everyone was thinking that india will block sales from russskies instead of that we gave them 2 billion $ credit.
India is working to develop its own influence on the world.

I my history is correcy Americans first approached India after WW2 when Cold War was starting. But Nehru was playing this pathetic holier than thou game. The Americans from Truman to Eisenhower to Kennedy courted India. Had India only earlier accepted American overtures the Pakistanis would not have been as more tfnatious as what it managed and would have been broken up much esrlier. China too would not have easily invaded Indian territory. But Nehru naively wanted to be above power politics not thinking that international relations is naturally power politics. So the Americans got the next best thing in South Asia, Pakistan, and China was bolder in acting against India. India on the other hand had no choice but to side with USSR.

 

[Assassin 2.0]

I my history is correcy Americans first approached India after WW2 when Cold War was starting. But Nehru was playing this pathetic holier than thou game. The Americans from Truman to Eisenhower to Kennedy courted India. Had India only earlier accepted American overtures the Pakistanis would not have been as more tfnatious as what it managed and would have been broken up much esrlier. China too would not have easily invaded Indian territory. But Nehru naively wanted to be above power politics not thinking that international relations is naturally power politics. So the Americans got the next best thing in South Asia, Pakistan, and China was bolder in acting against India. India on the other hand had no choice but to side with USSR.

That's how history works we cannot change it. But we can utilize the consequences of those choices correctly. India have come long ahead nehru era. Things are totally different. India's diplomacy is multi dimensional.

And only a idiot can think Americans would have been a fair partner to india in 90s when they were running to gain influence on earth. India on start started a fair approach with Americans they didn't respected it and turned pro Pakistani. Just cause we rejected there imperial approach with us.
Come back to 21st century. India is gaining more from Russia and Brazil. Brazil thought Christian brother's in white house will make sure there economy will keep sailing and they are forever stuck in this trap. Russia thought communist brother will bring me back to glory and now they are just a side kick power.

India on the other hand is having fun deals with both of the countries utilizing things for our gains. Both with Chinese and Americans. Both are after india to have a deal. Because ideological or alliance approach with superior power will always overshadow your ideology or loyalty to alliance best is to wait and try to develop yourself slowly slowly.
It's best to stay connected with multiple powers.

 

[Neptune]

Look at the upgrades and tell me which one country would have given all of it plus guaranteed the integration.



Sent from my HD1901 using Tapatalk

The upgrades are not that extensive and at 45 million per aircraft as well as France demanding 15 million annually for maintenance the deal is moronic. Any country, Israel, Russia, South Africa, etc would do a similar upgrade hands over fist while doing cartwheels at that outrageous price.


Russia offered the latest IRST OLS-UEM (same as on Mig-35) upgraded engines, data-link, new cockpit LCDs, increased internal fuel capacity, and integrated the long range R-77, as well as many other upgrades for 15 million per. India had to go to Russia and Israel to make the Mirage more potent. France offered a capable upgrade but at that price it was a shame and should have at the very least offered upgraded AESA, engines or Meteor.

Israelis integrated R-73s into Mirages which was slaved to Israeli made Dash helmet mounted display, the Mirages were also capable of using Israeli Spice-2000 precision bombs with the help of the Israeli Litening targeting pods. The French offered an upgraded radar, electric warfare suit with various systems such as radar warning receiver, flare dispenser, etc, navigation and communications upgrades and video recorder. The Indian Mirages are very capable now but not necessarily because of France.

 

[asianobserve]

That's how history works we cannot change it. But we can utilize the consequences of those choices correctly. India have come long ahead nehru era. Things are totally different. India's diplomacy is multi dimensional.

And only a idiot can think Americans would have been a fair partner to india in 90s when they were running to gain influence on earth. India on start started a fair approach with Americans they didn't respected it and turned pro Pakistani. Just cause we rejected there imperial approach with us.
Come back to 21st century. India is gaining more from Russia and Brazil. Brazil thought Christian brother's in white house will make sure there economy will keep sailing and they are forever stuck in this trap. Russia thought communist brother will bring me back to glory and now they are just a side kick power.

India on the other hand is having fun deals with both of the countries utilizing things for our gains. Both with Chinese and Americans. Both are after india to have a deal. Because ideological or alliance approach with superior power will always overshadow your ideology or loyalty to alliance best is to wait and try to develop yourself slowly slowly.
It's best to stay connected with multiple powers.

I don't even know how you define "fair" in international relations... All that matters here is national interest and which party, organization, power or country/ies can best deliver it in partnershipnor close alliance with you.

Anyway, America, due to its vast military budget will always have the more cutting edge weapons and more rubost military umbrella and support. Also, due to economies of scale its weapons and upgrades will always come out cheaper or vastly more capable for similar price.

 

[AmoghaVarsha]

You look at that dude.. in 2020s we will be getting an upgrade with no AESA no meteor integrated

We had Mig 29 UPG deal with new engines at <15 million a piece .

USA is offering upgrade packages for Korean F 16 and Japanese F 15 at much better VFM .

Do the french even have an AESA except the RBE2 AA? That is used on Rafale and was not functional when this deal was signed.

Integration is an issue without OEM.

Sent from my HD1901 using Tapatalk

 

[Foxbat]

American weapons are the most cutting edge, cheapest for their capabilities, best maintained with professional after market service, with the widest available weapons options, with the widest and best support from US military, and US provides bigger diplimatoc and economic clout.

I think you should tell that to USAF and Navy F-4 and and F-105 pilots of the Vietnam war who were shot down by cheap, obsolete Mig-17s and Mig-21s flown by peasants from a 3rd world country. Ask the IDF if the
AT-3 Sagger was the cheapest and most cutting edge after they knocked out 100s of their million dollar tanks in the Yom Kippur War or the Indian Navy when it used tiny Russian missile boats to sink Pakistani Navy destroyers in their home port.

Also tell the PAF and Venezuelan Air Force amongst others about "widest and best support from US military" for their F-16s.

 

[Flying Dagger]

Do the french even have an AESA except the RBE2 AA? That is used on Rafale and was not functional when this deal was signed.

Integration is an issue without OEM.

Sent from my HD1901 using Tapatalk

The deal was made around 2011 same time line when they offered AESA equipped Rafale to us.

That radar could be adjusted for mirage 2k

They started sending kits to HAL in 2018. And If they didn't offered AESA atleast cost of the upgrade should have been much lesser.

They aren't letting us have meteor on mirage either to make sure Rafale sale doesn't hurt or cut down.

 

[asianobserve]

I think you should tell that to USAF and Navy F-4 and and F-105 pilots of the Vietnam war who were shot down by cheap, obsolete Mig-17s and Mig-21s flown by peasants from a 3rd world country. Ask the IDF if the
AT-3 Sagger was the cheapest and most cutting edge after they knocked out 100s of their million dollar tanks in the Yom Kippur War or the Indian Navy when it used tiny Russian missile boats to sink Pakistani Navy destroyers in their home port.

Also tell the PAF and Venezuelan Air Force amongst others about "widest and best support from US military" for their F-16s.

The 100 series and succeeding fighters of USAF, USN and USMC were definitely more cutting edge than Soviet supplied Mig15, 17 and 21. But where the Americans erred in Vietnam was in that tactics and training. They simply were not trained to exploit their aorcrafts', sensors' and weapons advantage. Instead, they would engage in a turning fight with often older but more agile Russian fighters so they get shot down. Yet the US for es still has an impressive record over Vietnam.

Anyway, as a result of the Vietnam experience the USN started Topgun program and the USAF started Red Flag for dissimilar trainings. The record therafter speaks for itself and don't give me that crap Cope India story. It was a diplomatic stunt for the US. What better way to make friends than to make him feel good.

Well you cannot blame the US for witholding support to Iran, Venezuelz and even PAF. They are either vocslly and directly or indirectly undermining American interests. Why would you supply cutting edge weapons to your enemies who will use that sgainst you or your allies (against India primarily in the case of PAF)?

 

[Foxbat]

The 100 series and succeeding fighters of USAF, USN and USMC were definitely more cutting edge than Soviet supplied Mig15, 17 and 21. Yet the US for es still has an impressive record over Vietnam.

Well you cannot blame the US for witholding support to Iran, Venezuelz and even PAF. They are either vocslly and directly or indirectly undermining American interests. Why would you supply cutting edge weapons to your enemies who will use that sgainst you or your allies (against India primarily in the case of PAF)?

If 100 series "were definitely more cutting edge than Soviet supplied Mig15, 17 and 21" but less agile, then why were the succeeding F-16, F-15, F/A-18, F-22, F-35 designed to be more manoeuvrable like the Migs? Why did they copy the inferior and obsolete aircraft for the next 40+ years and continue to do so?

"Yet the US for es still has an impressive record over Vietnam." That depends on who you want to believe, just like the Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq! If you look at Vietnamese Air Force Claims closely you will see a repeating trend: at times a claim cannot be corroborated against aircraft losses from US records. However many times an aircraft is shown lost due to SAMs, technical problems, or even fratricide on the same date or 1-2 days before or after. This trend is often repeated in other conflicts, in the Gulf war of 1991, the Iraqis claim a few aircraft shot down by their air force (apart from the famous F/A-18 shot down by the Foxbat which was admitted by the USAF after 10+ years). Tornadoes have been claimed to be shot down by Mig-29s but the RAF claim it was due to SAMs.

Fun Fact: The USAF claims more Mig-15s shot down in the Korean War than the total number ever deployed:biggrin2:

"Well you cannot blame the US for witholding support to Iran, Venezuelz and even PAF. " aren't you contradicting your previous statement "widest and best support from US military". Should it not be "widest and best support from US military as long as they feel like it". What will the IAF do if the US withdraws support? use the aircraft as decorations at airports?

Also you conveniently ignored my examples of Russian weapons like SAM's and ATGM's in the Yom Kippur war and Osa Class missile boats used by the Indian Navy in the 1971 war to sink Pakistani destroyers in their home port.

 

[asianobserve]

If 100 series "were definitely more cutting edge than Soviet supplied Mig15, 17 and 21" but less agile, then why were the succeeding F-16, F-15, F/A-18, F-22, F-35 designed to be more manoeuvrable like the Migs? Why did they copy the inferior and obsolete aircraft for the next 40+ years and continue to do so?

Agility is only one thing. A Zero or P-51 would be more agile in a turning fight than either Sabre or Mig-15. But would you consider Zero or Mustang citting edge over Sabre or Mig-15?

Especially in today's technological realities, agility is only second class capability. The mantra is "see first, shoot first."

"Yet the US for es still has an impressive record over Vietnam." That depends on who you want to believe, just like the Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq! If you look at Vietnamese Air Force Claims closely you will see a repeating trend: at times a claim cannot be corroborated against aircraft losses from US records. However many times an aircraft is shown lost due to SAMs, technical problems, or even fratricide on the same date or 1-2 days before or after. This trend is often repeated in other conflicts, in the Gulf war of 1991, the Iraqis claim a few aircraft shot down by their air force (apart from the famous F/A-18 shot down by the Foxbat which was admitted by the USAF after 10+ years). Tornadoes have been claimed to be shot down by Mig-29s but the RAF claim it was due to SAMs.

Fun Fact: The USAF claims more Mig-15s shot down in the Korean War than the total number ever deployed:biggrin2:

In the realm of probabilities the figures of USAF is always closer to the truth than Soviet's.

"Well you cannot blame the US for witholding support to Iran, Venezuelz and even PAF. " aren't you contradicting your previous statement "widest and best support from US military". Should it not be "widest and best support from US military as long as they feel like it". What will the IAF do if the US withdraws support? use the aircraft as decorations at airports?

Of course the US is entitled to withold support if a country is already using US weapons against American units, interesys or allies. It's called self-defense.

Also you conveniently ignored my examples of Russian weapons like SAM's and ATGM's in the Yom Kippur war and Osa Class missile boats used by the Indian Navy in the 1971 war to sink Pakistani destroyers in their home port.

Soviet and now Russian wespons in general will always be behind its Western counterparts. The Soviet doctrine has always relied on quantity as quality. But Russia cannot afford that now. Unfortunately again for Russia, it cannot also rely on quality since the West has put an embargo on sensitive electronics that it has relied upon in its current military rebuilding. In the meantime wualified engineers are leaving Russia for greener pastures abroad (and some stayed behind gets incinerated by stupid ideas like nuclear powered cruise missile).

 

[BON PLAN]

??? I'm afraid not...

Mais le périmètre technique comprend aussi l’adjonction d’un radar de pointe RDY3, issu du RC400 vendu à l’export par Thales. Cet ensemble radar-missile permettrait à l’avion de pouvoir opérer seul, sans protection aérienne sur un territoire basse intensité (Sahel, Djibouti,…),

https://www.european-security.org/?q=articles/2012/07/12/la-rénovation-du-mirage-2000-d

article de 2012.... c'était ce qui était imaginé, et puis.....
Non, le M2000D RMV n'aura pas de nouveau radar, et de ce fait ne recevra que le MICA IR et pas EM.
http://psk.blog.24heures.ch/archive/2017/07/02/la-modernisation-des-mirage-2000d-863912.html

 

[Neptune]

Agility is only one thing. A Zero or P-51 would be more agile in a turning fight than either Sabre or Mig-15. But would you consider Zero or Mustang citting edge over Sabre or Mig-15?

Especially in today's technological realities, agility is only second class capability. The mantra is "see first, shoot first."



In the realm of probabilities the figures of USAF is always closer to the truth than Soviet's.



Of course the US is entitled to withold support if a country is already using US weapons against American units, interesys or allies. It's called self-defense.



Soviet and now Russian wespons in general will always be behind its Western counterparts. The Soviet doctrine has always relied on quantity as quality. But Russia cannot afford that now. Unfortunately again for Russia, it cannot also rely on quality since the West has put an embargo on sensitive electronics that it has relied upon in its current military rebuilding. In the meantime wualified engineers are leaving Russia for greener pastures abroad (and some stayed behind gets incinerated by stupid ideas like nuclear powered cruise missile).

The US continues to purchase low quality Russian rocket engines in which if failed for decades to make an equivalent. They (Lockheed) then purchased Russian components for US made satellites and then hired Russian engineers from the Yak-141 to help with F-35 development. The US now purchased Israeli active protection systems for Abrams while low quality Soviets had this technology since the 1970s and fielded a new generation active protection system on the T-14 tank. And low quality Mig-15s flown by Soviets shot down dozens of quality US and western aircraft many of which were flown by US aces from ww2. one Mig-15 pilot having 22 kills while another having 19 kills in their low quality aircraft.

These 3 pilots (there were many more Soviet aces) had at least 60 kills against well trained US aces in quality American machines:



The Soviets kept it a secret for decades, yes they could have went public and claimed they were the best, they could could have claimed the had the best aircraft and pilots and then put down enemy pilots and aircraft but they simply kept quiet. Propaganda goes a long way. NATO got a rude awakening in Korea and Vietnam when it actually faced modern well trained enemies.

 

[asianobserve]

The US continues to purchase low quality Russian rocket engines in which if failed for decades to make an equivalent. They (Lockheed) then purchased Russian components for US made satellites and then hired Russian engineers from the Yak-141 to help with F-35 development. The US now purchased Israeli active protection systems for Abrams while low quality Soviets had this technology since the 1970s and fielded a new generation active protection system on the T-14 tank. And low quality Mig-15s flown by Soviets shot down dozens of quality US and western aircraft many of which were flown by US aces from ww2. one Mig-15 pilot having 22 kills while another having 19 kills in their low quality aircraft.

These 3 pilots (there were many more Soviet aces) had at least 60 kills against well trained US aces in quality American machines:

View attachment 39851 View attachment 39852 View attachment 39853

The Soviets kept it a secret for decades, yes they could have went public and claimed they were the best, they could could have claimed the had the best aircraft and pilots and then put down enemy pilots and aircraft but they simply kept quiet. Propaganda goes a long way. NATO got a rude awakening in Korea and Vietnam when it actually faced modern well trained enemies.

US purchase of Russian engines was not due to lack of expertise in the US to man8facture rocket engines. It hsppened after the collapse of the Cold War when Russia had lots of surplus rocket engines. Later on the practice was continued because Russian engines were cheap.

But rocket engine in the US is very advanced. Just look at SpaceX, Blue Origin and all American space start ups. Where do you think their tech came came from?