Imported Single Engine Fighter Jet Contest

[WMD]

why the comparison between two diff. class fighters,
one costs probably around 60 mil in flyaway condition, the other around half of that.
and both probably will never see any action against each other, ever.

 

[pankaj nema]

Number of blk 52 originally available with pakistan was 18. Soon all of their F16s will be upgraded to this standard. So by 2015-17, they will have over 60 F16 Blk 52. J10 deal is in dire straits, due to budget constraints, possibly J10s will be not brought at all and pakistan will wait for J21

Only 18 F 16 will be Block 52 standard

The Rest of them will be Block 40 After MLU

Even the MLU programme is held up after the recent spats with USA

And the Paki Block 52 is INFERIOR to the Singapore Block 52 + which is being extensively
used by IAF to practice against

J 10 is held up because of AL 31 re sale DISALLOWED by India

J 17 Block 2 will only feature marginal improvements and an Internal refuelling probe

Block 3 will have Upgraded avionics but even Block 2 has not been unveiled so far
so block 3 remains just a dream

 

[manishhot]

I want to know about ew suite of mark 2.

 

[DivineHeretic]

Number of blk 52 originally available with pakistan was 18. Soon all of their F16s will be upgraded to this standard. So by 2015-17, they will have over 60 F16 Blk 52. J10 deal is in dire straits, due to budget constraints, possibly J10s will be not brought at all and pakistan will wait for J21

The upgraded pak F16 A/B will match the new block 52? F16.net quotes that after mlu these aircraft would be closer to block 40 standard. And they have the best info as far as f16 is concerned. But anyway, my understanding was that Pak had the option of ordering another 18 b52s in addition to the ones purchased.

But as far as the J10 is concerned, you could be right. They have barely enough money to continue inducting the JF17s, and at the same time repair and/or replace the damaged SAAB AWAECs.

 

[pankaj nema]

http://trishul-trident.blogspot.in/2012/07/users-insist-on-radical-makeover-for.html

If ALL the goodies mentioned in this article are selected then LCA mk2 will be absolute
kick A$$ fighter

And easily eat up Block 52 of the PAF

 

[pankaj nema]

The upgraded pak F16 A/B will match the new block 52? F16.net quotes that after mlu these aircraft would be closer to block 40 standard. And they have the best info as far as f16 is concerned. But anyway, my understanding was that Pak had the option of ordering another 18 b52s in addition to the ones purchased.

But as far as the J10 is concerned, you could be right. They have barely enough money to continue inducting the JF17s, and at the same time repair and/or replace the damaged SAAB AWAECs.

The MLU programme is held up

The chill in US Pak ties post OBL killing has badly affected PAF

And now the US leaving Afghanistan Pakistan will surely get some PARTING KICKS

 

[pankaj nema]

The MLU programme was NOT COMPLETED

Pakistan is now trying to revive it

US Ambassador to Pakistan Richard Olson met Pakistan Air Force Chief Air Chief Marshal Tahir Rafique Butt at Air Headquarters in Islamabad to discuss the country's F-16 programme.

According to a statement by the PAF, "various areas of further cooperation" were also discussed. After the meeting, the US Ambassador accompanied the PAF Chief on a visit to Shahbaz airbase where he was given an on-site briefing of the F-16 programme.

Sources in the PAF said that the US Ambassador discussed the refurbishing of 45 F-16 jets by Turkish Aerospace Industries, under a deal that was signed in 2010. In 2012, 3 upgraded F-16 jets were already delivered to Pakistan.

Besides the F-16s, Ambassador Olson also discussed a mid-life upgrade of older combat jets in the Pakistan Air Force fleet.

A statement by the US Embassy in Islamabad read: "Both sides affirmed their mutual commitment to a strong defence relationship which they agreed should focus on achieving common objectives".

This discussion was held under the pretext of the US Foreign Military Assistance programme.

http://www.terminalx.org/2013/01/us...-paf-chief-butt-to-discuss-f16-programme.html

 

[maomao]

Lca neither take on viper nor j10. If Lca is that good, why iaf is not retiring mig21. When the world is developing. 5th Geni. Fighter we are talking about 3rd Gen fighter like lca

IAF has already placed orders and LCA is in its development stage! Soon LCA will fire missiles and we will see smoke coming out of lower backs of many!

 

[ersakthivel]

I understand the role RCS plays in detection. What I am asking is how do you know that Tejas will detect F16 before itself being detected by F16? Have you calculated any detection ranges for them? If yes, post them, otherwise stop making such a stupid claim.

from your posts it is apparently clear you don't know anything worthwhile about the role of RCS in modern air combat.try reading up some material.

And just google what is the RCs of RAFALE and TYPHOON which were designed before the design phase of LCA , and confirm to your self they used the same methods used by ADA to arrive at lesser RCS.

Also your stuffed self can satisfy yourself with the knowledge F-16 will have atleast thrice the RCS of TEJAS in clean config.If you have any doubt compare the RCS of TYPHOON , RAFALE to F-16. And how these bigger planes managed smaller RCS than F-16.

All the experts on this forum unanimously agree that you are a moron.

There are a gang of morons in these forum spewing venom on DRDO products with shit headed knowledge is my conclusion long time ago.

How do you know that? Did you read it anywhere or performed any calculations yourself?

How did makers of RAFLE and TYPHOON announce that their fighters have the least RCS among 4th gens?
How come people all over the world accept that?
SO why should ADA chief's statement that TEJAS has the lowest RCS among non stealths be treated as unsubstantiated statement.

Morons are the guys who apply different standars to different issues. Not me. I accept the claim of the makers of all the three above plane makers. Because unlike budheads like you they have a reputation to defend.

No they are not. EW suite of blk 60 is one of the best around.

That's the statement of the makers of the F-16. When you believe it how come you doubt that ADA chief's statement that TEJAS has the smallest RCS among non stealths?

But not going into that. What i meant was, just detection and shooting isn't the game, there is no guarentee that the missile will hit the target. F16 is better in Missile CM than HAL Tejas.

If there is no guarentee that the missile will hit the target, Do you think all the 5th gen stealth fighter makers are fools to rely on these long range BVR shots with low stealth payloads?

Utter BS
BVR was available in the days F16 was designed. Why did its designers go for maneuverability over RCS then? Why did Russians sacrificed stealth for maneuverability in PAK FA?

In the seventies the RCS reduction concept was not that important a consideration as it is now is my statement.

why are fighters still made to be extra maneuverable? What is the significance of ITR and STR and Wing loading and TWR?

maneuverablity is always desired. But Rcs reduction ensures first BVr missile shot/

Also you didn't my other question, when was meteor announced for Tejas?

ADA chief has said that in interview to AJAI SHUKLA(thin source according to your exalted self) that TEJAS mk-2 will have interfaces to carry METEOR. And as far as I know makers of METEOR are have not black listed HAL from their buyers list.Since every european defence majors are salivating at the prospect of Indian defence market they will sell meteor to HAl if asked is my my humble estimation.

 

[vishwaprasad]

I thought that LCA was being developed for IAF with 40 planes in mk-1 and 80 plus planes in mk-2 version with firm orders for engines being placed.

Or Am I wrong? Since it is being developed in Asia which country's airforce is going to induct it if not IAf?

IS it being developed for PAF or PLAF?

lol...I know that it is not being developed for China or Pak...they wont accept it even it is offered to them but thats a different story....I just said that even Mk1 is not yet ready for the induction and we are talking about Mk2 taking on Block 60??? thats laughable...even both blocks whatever being offered to air force that is just to save face and nothing else...if it can take on block 60 type fighters then we wont go burning 20 billion plus dollors on Rafales....we would have simply inducted Tejas and waited for PAK-FAs...and don't tell us what ADA chief says about its RCS and what kind weapons, radars it will have...as per him LCA will even hit the targets on MARS with pin point accuracy but fact is we are not yet able to induct MK1....so comparing such a non existent fighter with F-16 is an insult to F-16 who has 4500+ fighters flying around the globe serving to 25+ air forces, 100+ kills on the account, combat proven and carries AIM-120, AIM-9X, JDAM, JSOWs which are the world's most potent weapon systems even today....

and yeah seriously if you think that avionics, EW suits on LCA is any way comparable with those on F-16 even block 52s then you seriously need to visit doctor....if LCA can successfully defend our skies from Thunders, Mirage 3 or 5 then I will say its a good start for the nation who has made its first ever fighter jet....for strikes behind enemy lines and to deal with the likes of Vipers inside enemy air space we will need bigger boys which we have and will have in the form of FLANKER-RAFALE combo for that....

 

[p2prada]

Mirage-2000 upgrade will raise it from late 3rd gen levels to early 4th gen levels. As of today, the Mig-21 Bison is superior to the IAF Mirage-2000 and Mig-29. After the upgrade, both will beat the Mig-21 Bison in tech specs. It will be equivalent to the F-16 Block 50/52 and not the more advanced F-16 Block 60.

The Singapore upgrade package is actually an all American fleet wide upgrade plan (minimum 350 F-16 Block 50s) with AESA and some other 5th gen technologies. It is being done due to delays in the F-35 program. It is certainly a more advanced upgrade to the F-16 B60 if we consider the timeline, but once the B60 comes up for MLUs (if it ever does since UAE likes junking their aircraft early), the tables will turn again.

LCA Mk2 is not planned to be a B60 equivalent, that's more in the league of aircraft like J-10B and Gripen NG. LCA Mk2's first and foremost priority is to meet IAF's current gen requirements with some extra goodies like AESA radar. Until last year even AESA radar wasn't part of the project. Specs-wise, the Mk2 is still at the level of a F-16 B52 or Mirage-2000-5 Mk2, inferior in load carrying capacity, possibly with similar range, but better sensors.

LCA Mk2 isn't something like a Gripen C with AESA, neither is it at the level of a F-16 B60. It is something in between, and it is primarily meant for roles that are not completely in tune with what Gripen and F-16 B60 were made for. Meaning we are inducting superior aircraft (MKI and Rafale) compared to Gripen NG and F-16 B60 for 4.5th gen requirements. At the same time the LCA Mk2 will be expected to protect our current 4th gen strike fleet during sorties.

 

[ersakthivel]

lol...I know that it is not being developed for China or Pak...they wont accept it even it is offered to them but thats a different story....I just said that even Mk1 is not yet ready for the induction and we are talking about Mk2 taking on Block 60??? thats laughable...even both blocks whatever being offered to air force that is just to save face and nothing else..

The above statement is your own subjective opinion. According to the test pilots and IAF guy MUTHANNA (chief of NTSE) ,"Tejas is a fine flying machine and deserve to be in squadron service .And senior naval test pilot said mk-1 can fulfill all the IAF needs right now even without mk-2.

ANd mk-2 is principally being developed to cater to the needs of Naval version which requires more powerful engines to ofset the higher weight of landing gear and strengthening of the airframe to absorb the landing stress. Since the excess weight won't be there for IAf Tejas it will lead to much higher performance. That is the principal reason for IAF to opt for more mk-2."

.if it can take on block 60 type fighters then we wont go burning 20 billion plus dollors on Rafales....we would have simply inducted Tejas and waited for PAK-FAs...and don't tell us what ADA chief says about its RCS and what kind weapons, radars it will have...as per him LCA will even hit the targets on MARS with pin point accuracy but fact is we are not yet able to induct MK1....so comparing such a non existent fighter with F-16 is an insult to F-16 who has 4500+ fighters flying around the globe serving to 25+ air forces, 100+ kills on the account, combat proven and carries AIM-120, AIM-9X, JDAM, JSOWs which are the world's most potent weapon systems even today....

The F-16 was in PAF from the eighties itself. It is foolish to expect the IAF to give lower specs to ADA for LCA , so that LCA would be handicapped against F-16.

TWR of mirage is less than 1 even after the costly upgrades , it will remain so. TWR of LCA Tejas is 1.07 may go up further if more weight reduction measures are taken up as per CEILMAC recommendations , for TEJAS MK-2 TWR will be significantly higher.

Right now mk-1 itself is equal or closer to MIRAGE (in parameters other than range and weapon load), MK-2 will have significantly more capacity than Mirage-2000.

Mirage-2000 itself is capable of taking on F-16. So I see no reason why LCA Tejas cannot be compared to F-16.

http://blogs.defenceaviation.com/aoa/mirageupgrade.html

But given the fact of declining aircraft strength of the Indian Airforce and rapid improvement in capabilities of its rivals more particularly China, India has no other option but to go for the upgrade. The upgrade will make the Mirage-2000 comparable to the most advance American fighters like the F-16 Block-60 and F/A-18 Super Hornet. Improvements like the helmet mounted display, full digital cockpit, better EW capabilty, etc. If India wants to have the same capability by buying new jets than it will have to spend almost $4-5 billion, that twice what it is spending now. Ofcourse the aircraft will last twice as long

See the original requirement for MMRCA was just for the same old Mirage -2000 (Since to avoid the single vendor situation and time delay due to financial crisis in the 90s , the tender evolved into multi vendor bidding based contract. These facts were listed out by none other than Vice admiral RAMAN PURI who was incharge of MMRCA procurement during his service.

http://www.hindu.com/2008/03/09/stories/2008030955051000.htm

As recently as in 2005, the IAF's requirement for 126 new aircraft was only for an upgraded Mirage 2000. At Rs.120 crore to Rs.140 crore a plane, compared to at least double that amount for any of the aircraft types now bidding for the 126 MRCA, is not the LCA a highly cost-effective fighter for volume induction into the IAF?

As for development costs, the LCA has remained well within the sanctioned $1.2 billion — which is about the lowest anywhere. Time overrun in the strict sense is only by a year or two, despite the sanctions. A first-of-type aircraft of this degree of complexity has not been developed anywhere in the West or in Russia in less than two to three decades.

The F16 series that was inducted into the U.S. Air Force in 1975 is today at Mark 60. That is how aircraft of this level of complexity are improved after induction. That this imperative applies even more to the LCA has to be recognized.

Comments appeared in the media in 2001 quoting IAF sources to the effect that what the ADA had achieved was just a flying machine that was yet to be weaponized. Considering the nature and scope of the approval accorded in 1993, what else was to be expected? Using the money sanctioned for two TDAs, the ADA built four.

Full-scale development, for which another 2,000-plus crore was finally sanctioned, thus started only in late-2001. Some 1,200 hours of flight testing was to be undertaken to secure Initial Operational Clearance (IOC) from the IAF.

At that point, apart from the weaponisation requirements the project had to undergo extensive redesign to accommodate an air-to-air missile chosen by the IAF, which was considerably heavier and longer than what had been specified till 2000. The IAF had again changed its mind.

This necessitated the complete redesign of the wing structure, using only composite materials in order to keep the weight within limits. The period of this redesign was also utilised to upgrade the avionics, to a completely open architecture.

Consequently, in "generational terms" the LCA is a fourth generation-plus aircraft with full networking capabilities. This made it more than comparable to anything the IAF had, and possibly would have, even after it acquires the 126 Multi-Role Combat Aircraft (MRCA) now on tender, with first deliveries due eight years hence.

He him self has said that even after the induction of MMRCA winner TEJAS will remain cutting edge of IAF. So it is your opinion vs his opinion.

SO IAF thought the older Mirage-2000s themselves are capable of taking on F-16s. SO there is really no reason why Tejas mk-2 won't be upto the job with significantly lesser RCS than Mirage, and higher TWR than Mirage -2000 )

Contrary to your misinformed opinion ADA chief didn't create any hyperbole on TEJAS, He just listed out the facts about LCA TEJAS that's all.
All those 4500 fighters are the design of 1970s and will be retiring soon , no cutting edge as you make it out to be.F-16 and Mirage -2000 are just peers. You can go to any F-16 Vs Mirage-2000 forums and check for yourself.

F-16 is no moonraker as you make it out to be.

and yeah seriously if you think that avionics, EW suits on LCA is any way comparable with those on F-16 even block 52s then you seriously need to visit doctor....if LCA can successfully defend our skies from Thunders, Mirage 3 or 5 then I will say its a good start for the nation who has made its first ever fighter jet....for strikes behind enemy lines and to deal with the likes of Vipers inside enemy air space we will need bigger boys which we have and will have in the form of FLANKER-RAFALE combo for that....

Seriously what is your level of knowledge on LCA mk-2's EW suit? Then lets determine who needs a visit to the doctor.

SO try to compare stuff spec for spec , not based on legends and reputations. F-16 was designed in the 70s and set to go out of production soon. Noway it is an unbeatable fighter in 2020.

 

[ersakthivel]

Statements like,"LCA mk-2 is not equivalent to F-16 block 60 or anything else",
and

"LCA Mk2 isn't something like a Gripen C with AESA, neither is it at the level of a F-16 B60. It is something in between, and it is primarily meant for roles that are not completely in tune with what Gripen and F-16 B60 were made for"


are purely subjective with no relation to RCS, TWR, wingloading , ITR and long range bvrs.

Anything that has the capability to carry METEOR or other missiles of the same caliber,and most modern ASEA radar and with superior TWR and RCS can take on any 4.5h fighter in defensive role, even without the support of AWACS and other stealth surveilance assets. Especially the numbers will surely favor the TEJAS mk-2 as it has complete composite outer skin with open architecture for avionics , ew suit and bvrs and will be upgradable in tranches with all the goodies from AMCA program through out it's life time.

If these assets are taken into account there is no way you can say Teajs is inferior to any modern 4.5th gen within it's unrefuelled range.

Every fighter has a role and the range and weapon load is dependent on the role. The role of LCA Tejas is to defend the forward airspace and provide close air support to troops with potent flight specs.

It's role is not to fly for hours and penetrate deep into enemy space with high weapon load. But it can prevent any other 4 plus gen fighter from carrying out the "deep penetration into enemy space with high weapon load" types missions even with it's shorter range and lower weapon load as all typical air to air missions don't involve carrying tons of weapons like bomb trucks.

To it's advantage MK-2 has comparable signatures on all spectrum of detection devices compared to any 4 plus gen fighter , with good asea radar and long range BVRs with high TWr and good ITR.

SO it can very well do the job of any Russian or US or french 4 plus gen super stars with in it's range .Given it's lower cost there will be more number of fighters on the air compensating fro the lesser weapon load.

Opposing super stars have more in number ASEA radars and EW suits of Teajs squadron to contend with ,along with equivalent bvrs in cost wise comparision. So to jam all more in number the asea radars and shoot down all more in number Tejas fighters just because they are Russain or american superstars is just fantasy.

F-16 is finishing it's service life at the end of it's product life cycle and Tejas is at the beginning of the product life cycle just beginning it's service life.

 

[ersakthivel]

The job of TEJAS mk-2 is not to protect the current dilapidated , obsolete MIgs and JAgs of IAf. It can carry out all the roles of MIG-23, 21, 27 and Jags in a stand alone capacity with double the weapon load and more potent flight specs like higher TWR, ITR ,long range BVRs , with state of the art avionics and ASEA radars, which are not present on any of the above obsolete 4th gen fleet of IAF.

So it is a joke to say Teajs is only used to escort these junks on suicide mission across the border, as none of the to be junked museum pieces have any capacity to come back in one piece in the event of facing even a JF-17.

Do people expect Tejas mk-2 pilots to behave like Taliban suicide bombers flying in between the PAf missiles and MIg-21s, 23s,27s and Jags, since they cannot defend themselves in their individual capacity. If this is the job explicitly specified for any young man joining IAf as Tejas mk-2 pilot, it is a sad day for the country.

Saying that updated mig-21, 23, 27s and jags are comparable to Tejas mk-2 is like applying make up to an egyptian mummy and expecting it to come back to life.

 

[vishwaprasad]

The above statement is your own subjective opinion. According to the test pilots and IAF guy MUTHANNA (chief of NTSE) ,"Tejas is a fine flying machine and deserve to be in squadron service .And senior naval test pilot said mk-1 can fulfill all the IAF needs right now even without mk-2.

ANd mk-2 is principally being developed to cater to the needs of Naval version which requires more powerful engines to ofset the higher weight of landing gear and strengthening of the airframe to absorb the landing stress. Since the excess weight won't be there for IAf Tejas it will lead to much higher performance. That is the principal reason for IAF to opt for more mk-2."

So if MK1 can fulfill IAF's needs without even MK2 then why are we going to burn 20+ billions on Rafales in the first place??? reason is since LCA is our first ever made fighter we are inducting it and nothing else...on IAF part it is actually being done half heartedly....and those test pilots can say anything but I am sure if same pilots are sent on bombing mission on PLAAF base in Tibet and choice is given them between F-16 block 52 or 60 and Tejas then I am sure those same pilots will prefer Viper....

The F-16 was in PAF from the eighties itself. It is foolish to expect the IAF to give lower specs to ADA for LCA , so that LCA would be handicapped against F-16.

TWR of mirage is less than 1 even after the costly upgrades , it will remain so. TWR of LCA Tejas is 1.07 may go up further if more weight reduction measures are taken up as per CEILMAC recommendations , for TEJAS MK-2 TWR will be significantly higher.

Right now mk-1 itself is equal or closer to MIRAGE (in parameters other than range and weapon load), MK-2 will have significantly more capacity than Mirage-2000.

Mirage-2000 itself is capable of taking on F-16. So I see no reason why LCA Tejas cannot be compared to F-16.

IAF obviously wont give lower specs in comparison of F-16 to ADA but what the choice they have with our domestic capacity?? Do we equal to LM, Boeing, Dassault, Mikiyon??? you will get only what you are capable of....its called NO CHOICE but to leave with it...

Mirage 2000 is a fighter of the country who is in fighter jet making business from world wars era....Just because we wanted fighter in the class of Mirage not necessary we will be successful in it with our first experiment... and please don't tell MK2 will be significantly capable than Mirage...first we are all struggling to see Mk1 induction in the service....

and I appreciate Mr.Raman Puri for saying that even after the induction of MRCA, Tejas will remain CUTTING EDGE technology.....after all he is also an Indian and he has to care about the sentiments of our scientists and people like you.....

jokes apart if even after the induction of Rafale LCA will remain CUTTING EDGE tech then there is no need of wasting billions of dollors for this slow going economy these days....

Seriously what is your level of knowledge on LCA mk-2's EW suit? Then lets determine who needs a visit to the doctor.

Where is MK1 first??? has it joined service??? let it first join then we will see what is inside MK2....right now to me its not a real fighter...

 

[ersakthivel]

So if MK1 can fulfill IAF's needs without even MK2 then why are we going to burn 20+ billions on Rafales in the first place???

That is a question everybody is asking. My answer is with 400 close to junk fighters in line for replacement IAF needs new platforms with longer range and weapon load with excellent air to air capability along with strike roles with lower RCS . LCA is designed as shorter range , more of an air to air fighter for defending the forward air space and supporting troops with ground strike on forward areas..So they compliment each other not competing against each others

reason is since LCA is our first ever made fighter we are inducting it and nothing else...on IAF part it is actually being done half heartedly....and those test pilots can say anything but I am sure if same pilots are sent on bombing mission on PLAAF base in Tibet and choice is given them between F-16 block 52 or 60 and Tejas then I am sure those same pilots will prefer Viper....

Every one knows why IAf is half hearted on LCA. I don't want to comment, while gung ho to import 126 mirage-2000s as late as 2005.Bombing missions of Tibet is a deep strike role for other fighters of IAf. Who will guard the Indian air space against 1000s of PLAF and PAF fighters in case of combined assault while these heavies are bombing deep?That is the role of the LCA Teajs in case you haven't known till today.

IAF obviously wont give lower specs in comparison of F-16 to ADA but what the choice they have with our domestic capacity?? Do we equal to LM, Boeing, Dassault, Mikiyon??? you will get only what you are capable of....its called NO CHOICE but to leave with it...

IAF ordered AKASH even when they had a choice of PATRIOT, The avionics of SUKHOI-30 MKI is done here under domestic management. Sukhoi is going to be produced 100 percent from raw material stage here locally.

SO they know what is the domestic capacity. IAF knows ADA has the capacity to deliver AMCA. And the country's security is equally guaranteed by the imported fighting fleet of IAF and various nuclear ballistic missiles developed here locally.

you don't have to put a hollier than thou attitude on IAF's intentions behind half hearted support for LCA.Do you think cheng du is equal to LM , Boeing / Then why are they designing J-20s and 30s?

Mirage 2000 is a fighter of the country who is in fighter jet making business from world wars era....Just because we wanted fighter in the class of Mirage not necessary we will be successful in it with our first experiment... and please don't tell MK2 will be significantly capable than Mirage...first we are all struggling to see Mk1 induction in the service....

I am too tiered of this world war two blah blah. Talk specs and capacities in modern times.Had enough of it ARJUN MBT thread.

Mirage neither had fully composite skin, LCA does, Mirage has lower TWR, LCA has higher.Mk-2 is going to have ASEA, Right now Mirage does not.

During it's induction Mirage did not have the capacity to fire the 120 km range bvr. But Tejas mk-2 will have it in the first serial production version itself.WHY?Don't post like a hermit Rip Van Winkle.

Just compare the time line of TYPHOON , RAFALE to that of LCA and make an objective analysis, not subjective inanities littering your post.

and I appreciate Mr.Raman Puri for saying that even after the induction of MRCA, Tejas will remain CUTTING EDGE technology.....after all he is also an Indian and he has to care about the sentiments of our scientists and people like you.....

Raman Puri's credibility does not get enhanced by your or my appreciation.It is you who needs to give source for your expertise on Teajs. He is no politician standing for elections to care for the sentiments of local populace.He was the head of procurement committee which over saw the MMRCA tender evolution. SO he knows what he speaks and wouldn't accept risk his reputation to support non existent domestic sentiments.

jokes apart if even after the induction of Rafale LCA will remain CUTTING EDGE tech then there is no need of wasting billions of dollors for this slow going economy these days....

See my first quote in the same post for answers.

Where is MK1 first??? has it joined service??? let it first join then we will see what is inside MK2....right now to me its not a real fighter...

If you don't know where is MK-1? Go google.

 

[From Realm of D&T]

Have you been kicked out of PDF???

You do dislike PDF? if Yes, then be warned, many PDFers may join DFI in coming days.

ON Topic> Comparing F-16Block to LCA Mk2 is wrong idea, as both belong to different class

F-16 is MWF while LCA is LWF.

If they both enter fight,one against one,chances are high that F-16 will kill the LCA.

But if they hunt each other in numbers, outcome will vary, depending upon factors like, pilot skills, AWACs help, number of fighters etc.

 

[vishwaprasad]

That is a question everybody is asking. My answer is with 400 close to junk fighters in line for replacement IAF needs new platforms with longer range and weapon load with excellent air to air capability along with strike roles with lower RCS . LCA is designed as shorter range , more of an air to air fighter for defending the forward air space and supporting troops with ground strike on forward areas..So they compliment each other not competing against each others

So that means you agree that LCA is useless if we decide to send it on bombing missions inside enemy air space...Means I am Tiger but only in my house...If I go out I am a common man...to challenge LCA enemy will have to enter our air space which our Flankers, Rafales and air defenses will make very difficult for enemy and after that Tejas will jump if somehow enemy manages to come inside....means you agree that its out of the capacity of LCA to do the initial dirty operation on enemies and LCA is not qualified for this...BTW F-16 is good at doing dirty work in the beginning....

Every one knows why IAf is half hearted on LCA. I don't want to comment, while gung ho to import 126 mirage-2000s as late as 2005.Bombing missions of Tibet is a deep strike role for other fighters of IAf. Who will guard the Indian air space against 1000s of PLAF and PAF fighters in case of combined assault while these heavies are bombing deep?That is the role of the LCA Teajs in case you haven't known till today.

LCA alone and that too against 1000s of PAF and PLAAF combined (with likes of Vipers, J-10,J-11s, MKKs) attack while our bigger fighters are out on bombing?? hmm very bad idea in my honest opinion.....we will need to keep some heavy fighters along with them for home defense....

AF ordered AKASH even when they had a choice of PATRIOT, The avionics of SUKHOI-30 MKI is done here under domestic management. Sukhoi is going to be produced 100 percent from raw material stage here locally.

SO they know what is the domestic capacity. IAF knows ADA has the capacity to deliver AMCA. And the country's security is equally guaranteed by the imported fighting fleet of IAF and various nuclear ballistic missiles developed here locally.

That is always appreciated....I have full respect for our scientists for what they have achieved...Nukes, Missiles, Space program....LCA is good effort but still its too early to comment on its capabilities against the things like F-16 especially 52 and plus versions....

you don't have to put a hollier than thou attitude on IAF's intentions behind half hearted support for LCA.Do you think cheng du is equal to LM , Boeing / Then why are they designing J-20s and 30s?

Chinese do not have a choice...they do not have access to top of the line western stuff and Russia many times supplied them down graded stuff...I never said they are equal to LM, Boeing....and we are certainly not even as good as Chengdu....

I am too tiered of this world war two blah blah. Talk specs and capacities in modern times.Had enough of it ARJUN MBT thread.

Mirage neither had fully composite skin, LCA does, Mirage has lower TWR, LCA has higher.Mk-2 is going to have ASEA, Right now Mirage does not.

During it's induction Mirage did not have the capacity to fire the 120 km range bvr. But Tejas mk-2 will have it in the first serial production version itself.WHY?Don't post like a hermit Rip Van Winkle.

Just compare the time line of TYPHOON , RAFALE to that of LCA and make an objective analysis, not subjective inanities littering your post.

Please do not tell what M2K was not having initially....it flew in 70s and it was also a talk of the town in those days...current M2K flying with France, UAE have everything that requires in true 4th generation fighters...even our M2K will have those after upgrades....so it was the M2K then and it is the M2K today...thing is we decided to make fighter in the class of Mirage in 83 and today in 2013 we are yet to see it in the service so pleas stop comparing it with even M2K...

If you don't know where is MK-1? Go google.

I googled and just came to know it is yet pass FOC

 

[Agnostic_Indian]

we don't know exact spec of teajas mk2 so a comparison is not possible, but I expect f16 blk 60 to be better.

 

[average american]

Kongsberg NSM anti-ship missile test - YouTube Its going to be hard to take down cruise missiles.

Joint Strike Missile

A multi-role version of the NSM is in development. This missile is called Joint Strike Missile (JSM) and will feature an option for ground strike and a two-way communications line, so that the missile can communicate with the central control room or other missiles in the air. This missile will be integrated with the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II "Joint Strike Fighter". Studies have shown that the F-35 would be able to carry two of these in its internal bays, while additional missiles could be carried externally.

According to Kongsberg, this "multi-role NSM" is the only powered anti-ship missile that will fit inside the F-35's internal bays.[9] Lockheed Martin and Kongsberg have signed a joint-marketing agreement for this air-launched version of the NSM, as well as an agreement committing both parties to integrating the JSM on the F-35 platform.[10][11] The project is funded by Norway and Australia.[12] Kongsberg signed a contract for the first phase of development of the JSM in April, 2009, which is scheduled for completion within 18 months.[13]

Improved features for the Joint Strike Missile include:
Shape changed to fit in F-35 internal bay.[14]
Ability to attack sea and land based targets
Aerial launch platform (F-35)
Improved range over NSM to 280 km [15]
Long-term, production start in 2013

The JSM will have multicore computers running Integrity real-time operating system from Green Hills Software.[16]