The enlightened
Regular Member
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2012
- Messages
- 420
- Likes
- 207
LCA program really started only in 1993. Till then, we were basically figuring out the project definition and had almost gone bankrupt in 1991.
'Make in India' for 90 medium combat jets
- Thread starter Anshu Attri
- Start date
this idea popped up in my head a couple of minutes ago while i was browsing through the Dassault Mirage III related sites, the PAF ROSE upgrades and i felt that i should just share it.
i should warn you that it's unconventional and might sound totally outlandish .
the IAF fighter inventory can be basically divided into three parts- low, mid and high.
towards the lower end of the spectrum we have ~250 MiG-21 of which 100 will be retired by the year end reducing our squadron strength from the existing 37 to 32 whereas we need optimally 42 to fight a two front war on both the borders. the rest 150 which have been upgraded to Bison standard will continue to serve till 2025.
Tejas though looks promising has caused a lot of unpleasantness between the IAF and HAL/DRDO. My best guess is that it will still take another 7 years at best for it to mature into a capable platform ie. till 2022. In the meantime we have nothing to plug the gap. And the less said about PAK FA/FGFA the better. i simply don't see the fighter fulfilling its true potential before 2025.
now the MRCA deal was intended to provide us with an interim replacement for the MiG-21 and the MiG-27 (whose retirement shall commence from 2017 onwards leaving us without any CAS capability but I have taken that up in another post- http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/posts/1064901/) and at the same time augmenting the mid segment comprising the MiG-29 and Mirage 2000 (both shall remain in service beyond 2025).
but as we have seen due to the usual dilly dallying by the Indian establishment and the French turning greedy (pls refer my earlier post http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/posts/1064832/) we ended up buying only 36 which is clearly insufficient. even these jets will take 2-3 years (best guess not before 2017) to be delivered and become fully operational.
hypothetically had we concluded the MRCA deal successfully, and after the initial 18 jets were bought off-the-shelf it would have taken us at least 3 years to setup the production line and related infrastructure and another 2 years for the first aircraft to roll out i.e. no new Rafale till 2020 best case scenario.
so technically till 2020 we have no replacements and we are down to 32 squadrons which will get much worse when the MiG-27s start retiring. so it's a two pronged problem in the sense that-
1) existing aircrafts (Eurofighter/ Rafale/Gripen) are just too expensive for a one-on-one replacement of the MiG-21 and MiG-27 and it's too late to buy and build a new fighter from scratch.
2) projects under development such as the Tejas and PAK FA still have a long way to go (min 10 yrs) before fully satisfying the IAF requirements
What we need is a stop gap measure that is inexpensive and readily available within 1-2 years.
An obvious solution would be to produce more Su-30s but that would make the air force too homogenous and frankly would be something of an overkill.
My radical proposal is to buy second hand fighters. yes you heard it correct. second hand jets upgraded to the latest standards that would cost a fraction of today's new build jets and can be delivered within no time provided the aircraft is in decent condition.
An obvious candidate and my favorite is the MiG-29 Fulcrum. The MiG-21 was finally replaced in the Soviet Air Force by the MiG-29, not the MiG-23. Around 1600+ Fulcrums have been produced to date and the majority remain in service. Surprisingly a huge number of airframes approximately around 1/3rd of the total produced or ~500 are in storage with various air forces around the world. Ukraine has around 100 in storage while Russia has close to 200 maybe more as no one knows the actual strength of the RuAF. Of course most of these aircrafts might have been cannibalized for parts and spares and might be in poor condition. but what matters most is the air worthiness of the airframe which can be rectified quickly with an overhaul. Russian aircrafts like the iconic AK-47 assault rifle are built like a hammer to operate under the most adverse conditions and as such their airframes are built keeping 40+ years of service in mind which can be achieved through complete overhauls at regular intervals.
IAF has been operating the MiG-29 for the past 25 years and the readiness rate of it's MiG-29 fleet is ~ 77-79% which is comparable to USAF and NATO forces. Su-30MKI has a dismal readiness rate of 53%.
This is possible as India already possesses extensive Repair and Overhaul facilities (RoH) for the MiG-29 unlike the Su-30MKI. Also we already have the licence for producing the latest series 3 Klimov engines for the Fulcrums. In case of the Sukhois everytime there's an engine problem it has to be sent back to Russia as there are no RoH facilities for the aircraft in India thereby reducing its availability rate. Also since MiG-29s would be replacing MiG-21s this would in no way further increase the Russian content of the air force.
Cons:
1) it all depends upon the actual condition of the aircrafts in storage with Russian, Ukrainian and other East European countries. for all i know their condition might be beyond any feasible repair.
2) 15-20 years of service at best
3) Cost and time overruns as with the Admiral Gorshkov carrier. but aircrafts should be comparatively easier to sort out.
My suggestion in no way undermines or encourages the discontinuation of the Tejas or the PAK FA/FGFA program. It is just a stop-gap measure till 2025-2030 time frame when both these projects come fully online.
So guys let's hear your views on this one!
i should warn you that it's unconventional and might sound totally outlandish .
the IAF fighter inventory can be basically divided into three parts- low, mid and high.
towards the lower end of the spectrum we have ~250 MiG-21 of which 100 will be retired by the year end reducing our squadron strength from the existing 37 to 32 whereas we need optimally 42 to fight a two front war on both the borders. the rest 150 which have been upgraded to Bison standard will continue to serve till 2025.
Tejas though looks promising has caused a lot of unpleasantness between the IAF and HAL/DRDO. My best guess is that it will still take another 7 years at best for it to mature into a capable platform ie. till 2022. In the meantime we have nothing to plug the gap. And the less said about PAK FA/FGFA the better. i simply don't see the fighter fulfilling its true potential before 2025.
now the MRCA deal was intended to provide us with an interim replacement for the MiG-21 and the MiG-27 (whose retirement shall commence from 2017 onwards leaving us without any CAS capability but I have taken that up in another post- http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/posts/1064901/) and at the same time augmenting the mid segment comprising the MiG-29 and Mirage 2000 (both shall remain in service beyond 2025).
but as we have seen due to the usual dilly dallying by the Indian establishment and the French turning greedy (pls refer my earlier post http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/posts/1064832/) we ended up buying only 36 which is clearly insufficient. even these jets will take 2-3 years (best guess not before 2017) to be delivered and become fully operational.
hypothetically had we concluded the MRCA deal successfully, and after the initial 18 jets were bought off-the-shelf it would have taken us at least 3 years to setup the production line and related infrastructure and another 2 years for the first aircraft to roll out i.e. no new Rafale till 2020 best case scenario.
so technically till 2020 we have no replacements and we are down to 32 squadrons which will get much worse when the MiG-27s start retiring. so it's a two pronged problem in the sense that-
1) existing aircrafts (Eurofighter/ Rafale/Gripen) are just too expensive for a one-on-one replacement of the MiG-21 and MiG-27 and it's too late to buy and build a new fighter from scratch.
2) projects under development such as the Tejas and PAK FA still have a long way to go (min 10 yrs) before fully satisfying the IAF requirements
What we need is a stop gap measure that is inexpensive and readily available within 1-2 years.
An obvious solution would be to produce more Su-30s but that would make the air force too homogenous and frankly would be something of an overkill.
My radical proposal is to buy second hand fighters. yes you heard it correct. second hand jets upgraded to the latest standards that would cost a fraction of today's new build jets and can be delivered within no time provided the aircraft is in decent condition.
An obvious candidate and my favorite is the MiG-29 Fulcrum. The MiG-21 was finally replaced in the Soviet Air Force by the MiG-29, not the MiG-23. Around 1600+ Fulcrums have been produced to date and the majority remain in service. Surprisingly a huge number of airframes approximately around 1/3rd of the total produced or ~500 are in storage with various air forces around the world. Ukraine has around 100 in storage while Russia has close to 200 maybe more as no one knows the actual strength of the RuAF. Of course most of these aircrafts might have been cannibalized for parts and spares and might be in poor condition. but what matters most is the air worthiness of the airframe which can be rectified quickly with an overhaul. Russian aircrafts like the iconic AK-47 assault rifle are built like a hammer to operate under the most adverse conditions and as such their airframes are built keeping 40+ years of service in mind which can be achieved through complete overhauls at regular intervals.
IAF has been operating the MiG-29 for the past 25 years and the readiness rate of it's MiG-29 fleet is ~ 77-79% which is comparable to USAF and NATO forces. Su-30MKI has a dismal readiness rate of 53%.
This is possible as India already possesses extensive Repair and Overhaul facilities (RoH) for the MiG-29 unlike the Su-30MKI. Also we already have the licence for producing the latest series 3 Klimov engines for the Fulcrums. In case of the Sukhois everytime there's an engine problem it has to be sent back to Russia as there are no RoH facilities for the aircraft in India thereby reducing its availability rate. Also since MiG-29s would be replacing MiG-21s this would in no way further increase the Russian content of the air force.
Cons:
1) it all depends upon the actual condition of the aircrafts in storage with Russian, Ukrainian and other East European countries. for all i know their condition might be beyond any feasible repair.
2) 15-20 years of service at best
3) Cost and time overruns as with the Admiral Gorshkov carrier. but aircrafts should be comparatively easier to sort out.
My suggestion in no way undermines or encourages the discontinuation of the Tejas or the PAK FA/FGFA program. It is just a stop-gap measure till 2025-2030 time frame when both these projects come fully online.
So guys let's hear your views on this one!
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2015
- Messages
- 1,059
- Likes
- 598
An obvious candidate and my favorite is the MiG-29 Fulcrum.
Ukraine has around 100 in storage while Russia has close to 200 maybe more as no one knows the actual strength of the RuAF.
IAF has been operating the MiG-29 for the past 25 years and the readiness rate of it's MiG-29 fleet is ~ 77-79% which is comparable to USAF and NATO forces.
---
My calculations were even more dismal i.e we have just 200 SU30s + 60 Mig 29 for total of 13-15 squadrons in reality.
Everything else is plugged in with air defence, the mig 29 idea sounds golden especially as we can then sell the mig 21s to nepal/vietnam to plug in holes in our anti-han wall.
They've said that Pak/China total will have 1500 4gen+ by 2020, probably 750-850 deployed against us so around 40 squads.
Let's say we need 25 squads to protect ourselves, meaning atleast 35-40 due to lowered avail.
There's no way to plug that gap with current production rates within 5-7years. 2nd hand seems best, & can even be used to weaken potential geo-political rivals i.e deplete e. euro NATO airforces.
Other advantage is the mig-29 can also serve on our carriers.
Let's see what Dec Visit Brings.
Even mroe so, let's see what UN General Assembly in few days brings.
Ukraine has around 100 in storage while Russia has close to 200 maybe more as no one knows the actual strength of the RuAF.
IAF has been operating the MiG-29 for the past 25 years and the readiness rate of it's MiG-29 fleet is ~ 77-79% which is comparable to USAF and NATO forces.
---
My calculations were even more dismal i.e we have just 200 SU30s + 60 Mig 29 for total of 13-15 squadrons in reality.
Everything else is plugged in with air defence, the mig 29 idea sounds golden especially as we can then sell the mig 21s to nepal/vietnam to plug in holes in our anti-han wall.
They've said that Pak/China total will have 1500 4gen+ by 2020, probably 750-850 deployed against us so around 40 squads.
Let's say we need 25 squads to protect ourselves, meaning atleast 35-40 due to lowered avail.
There's no way to plug that gap with current production rates within 5-7years. 2nd hand seems best, & can even be used to weaken potential geo-political rivals i.e deplete e. euro NATO airforces.
Other advantage is the mig-29 can also serve on our carriers.
Let's see what Dec Visit Brings.
Even mroe so, let's see what UN General Assembly in few days brings.
Mig 29 did not fare well against F16 during serbian war.
dude there's a huge difference between the East European forces of the 90s and the IAF of the 21st century.
Also note that it's Serbia not Yugoslavia that we are talking about. The breakup of former Yugoslavia resulted in the formation of 6-7 new republics and the ensuing turmoil and chaos severely weakened the Serb's capability and resources to fight a high intensity war. Not to mention the fact that the Serbs had already fought 4 draining and highly damaging wars in a short timeframe of 8 years before NATO intervened in 1999:
1) the 10 day war with Slovenia in 1991
2) Croatian War of Independence from 1991-1995
3) Bosnian War from 1992-95
4) Kosovo War from 1998-99
Also note that from 1991-2010 Serbia was under a UN arms embargo. How could one expect a severely depleted Serbian Air Force to stand up against the might of the combined arms of US/NATO forces?
Inspite of such gaping odds the Yugoslavian/Serbian SAM batteries still managed to shoot down an F-117 stealth bomber and an F-16C (pls refer- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoltán_Dani). And that's why I am not a big fan of stealth and believe that it is so overrated. With proper tactics and equipment stealth can be easily and effectively countered. What ultimately matters is agility/manoeuvrability, situational awareness, readiness rate and battlefield endurance.
Fact- neither the F-22 nor the F-35 can singlehandedly win you a war. Please don't quote me figures from the Arab-Israel wars or the Gulf Wars as the Arabs are totally incompetent opponents. Even after 70 odd years of getting their rears whooped continuously neither have they developed the skills nor the rationale/innovative mindset nor do they have their own public's support to fight a face-to-face war. The only thing they are good at is insurgency and guerrilla warfare. This despite the fact that all Arab countries were armed to the teeth by their Western/Russian allies.
No matter what aircraft you are flying be it a simple MiG-21 or the complex F-22 without the supporting infrastructure and sound doctrine/tactics you will always be beaten by opponents who have more supplies/resources, better trained personnel, agile tactics/strategy, better situational awareness and resolute public support.
Legacy MiG-29s do have a number of shortcomings namely:
-extremely limited range which is not any better than the MiG-21 thereby turning it to a point defense fighter
-poor radar range and limited rearward cockpit visibility
-high cockpit workload
-traditional smoky Russian engines with low MTBO (mean time b/w overhaul)
However a lot of these problems have been addressed with the SMT upgrades. The IAF's 69 MiG-29 jets have been upgraded to the latest UPG/SMT standards which brings a lot of improvements in terms of internal fuel capacity/combat radius, radars and uprated engines. Besides as mentioned in my earlier post a lot of the spares/parts and the engines are now locally produced in India.
I still highly stress that the MiG-29 is perhaps the most competent dogfighter in the IAF inventory. In terms of close-in combat performance the order in terms of performance would roughly be-
MiG-29>MiG-21>Su-30MKI>Mirage 2000
In terms of raw kinteic WVR dogfight performance perhaps its only rival would be the Eurofighter Typhoon. What truly sets it apart is its:
-amazingly exceptional agility/manoeuvrability
-ability to operate in harsh conditions from poorly prepared airfields
-ability to slave the high off-boresight heat seeking missiles to the Helmet Mounted Sight (which Western forces are still trying to copy through the JHMCS) and
-the surprisingly advanced for its time IRST/OLS as a viable alternative to the radar for detecting aerial targets (which is still absent on USAF fighters and has only recently been added to the Rafale and EuroFighter with questionable performance).
A very good reference- http://bharatrakshak.wikia.com/wiki/MiG-29
Immanuel
Senior Member
- Joined
- May 16, 2011
- Messages
- 3,555
- Likes
- 7,476
The best dogfighter today in IAF's inventory is the Su-30MKI. The Rafale is waste of time and currency. 36 aircraft won't bring any added advantage. We just need to order more Super MKI around 60-70, these can be delivered by 2020-2021. 60-80 LCA mk-1A (with AESA & 800-1000kg weight reduction) can be ordered while MK-2 get's ready, to be delivered between 2018-2022. All this really takes is to speed up Super MKI upgrade with AESA, new cockpit layout, new OLS and uprated engines. The MOD should invest on expanding the LCA line to produce at the very least 36-42 aircraft per year by 2020. so that at least 2 LCA sqds of 16 fighters can be delivered every year for India's needs while we can deliver 4-10 to potential export customers.
More Mig-29 is not an option, even the Mig-35 is not an option. what can be done during MLU of the Mig-29K is to upgrade them to Mig-35 standard i.e with AESA and other mig-35 avionics.
More Mig-29 is not an option, even the Mig-35 is not an option. what can be done during MLU of the Mig-29K is to upgrade them to Mig-35 standard i.e with AESA and other mig-35 avionics.
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2015
- Messages
- 5,005
- Likes
- 8,881
Yes I agree with you....but IAF has lust towards foriegn maal...what shall we do with them?
We should have started rolling more super sukhoi and lca untilll we ge PAK-FA
guru-dutt
Regular Member
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2015
- Messages
- 475
- Likes
- 356
thing is according to some rumours PMO and MOD have given dassualt a choice that they buy rafale in the existing number of M2Ks in indian innoventorry and make a deal with UAE for there M2Ks they want to replace with rafales
in addition to that the 40-80 LCA MK1 from day one be given a EL-2052 instead of El/M-2032 radar upgrade and a 500+KG wieght reduction whats more the latest gen 5 Lightning LDP and latest version of Python, Derby and I DerbuER which will not require any structural changes
as for MKI all of MKIs(270+42) will be given a new pilot friendly cokpit, AESA based Radar, EW suites and internal self protection jammers + new more reliable variant of AL-41 engines with more power genration capacity(for AESA) russians are asking more for it so here again IAF could go for improoved israeli latest gen AESA till indian AESA is ready
as for the 90 make in india dassult which now has a couple of orders doesnt wants to part with its technologies as they are way too expensive (specialli the wepons package)
as for AMCA the work going on it is on such a scale that most here have no idea
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2015
- Messages
- 5,005
- Likes
- 8,881
They say work is going on!! but no information/ update about it...Typical lazy boyz.
Our government institutions are totally Fu#ked up..We need young professionals into R & D...Plz give us a chance..We Beg
guru-dutt
Regular Member
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2015
- Messages
- 475
- Likes
- 356
the main reason why NaMo brought MP as DM was AMCA who actualli personalli is monitoring AMCA developments on day to day basis..... in short ADA/HAL me danda uoopar tak hai or they will face what last DRDO chief saraswat facedThey say work is going on!! but no information/ update about it...Typical lazy boyz.
Our government institutions are totally Fu#ked up..We need young professionals into R & D...Plz give us a chance..We Beg
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2015
- Messages
- 5,005
- Likes
- 8,881
Ok
But work should be speed up...I think HAL has manufacturing plants at pune, hyderabad and bangalore..
What are the approx. birds rolled out annually by these plants?
I think 20-22 each..Am I right?
guru-dutt
Regular Member
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2015
- Messages
- 475
- Likes
- 356
20-22 is the right timeline but still a very long way to go the good part is the so called latest pictures we are looking on the net about its wind tunnel results are at least 6-7 months old
but if NaMo gets one more term we just might be in a position to get 6-8 birds per year from 22 onwards
Immanuel
Senior Member
- Joined
- May 16, 2011
- Messages
- 3,555
- Likes
- 7,476
IAF top management needs to be handled by the MOD, MOD is the ultimate decision authority on who gets what. IAF top brass can bitch a bit but, the brave IAF pilot will put up a glorious fight whether he is forced to fly the ancient Mig-21 or the sparkling new MKI. Now the LCA is the ideal replacement of the Mig-21 and more Super MKI can only add to the strength that it already delivers. As for PAKFA, we can buy 60 off the shelf to be delivered by 2020-2021 and many more I.e around 140 with 'make in India'. Rafale is not needed.
Immanuel
Senior Member
- Joined
- May 16, 2011
- Messages
- 3,555
- Likes
- 7,476
I think if we wait for the LCA mk-1A, we'd have to wait another 2 years because dropping the weight is a delicate exercise along with testing the AESA which will be ready for trials early 2016. In the mean time we can order more MK1s, we now have 40 on order, order another 20. Convert the 1st 3 sqds into stage 4 LIFT trainers: 2 sds for the IAF and 1 sqd for the. LCA Tejas MK-1 is the ideal LIFT trainer.
Stage 1: Pilatus/HTT 40
Stage2: Scorpion (Cancel IJT)
Stage3: Hawk
Stage4: LCA MK1 LIFT
I think, the Idea for the LCA should be begin mass production while expanding its production rate, its a learning process. Deliver 60 LCA mk-1 LIFT trainers by 2018-2019. Already Order 80 LCA mk 1A (with AESA + weight reduction), deliveries between (2019-2022). Begin production of MK-2
guru-dutt
Regular Member
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2015
- Messages
- 475
- Likes
- 356
no we cant wight we need AESA enabelled LCA from day 1 as al bakistanies will soon be getting Blk II & III JF-17 which will have chinese AESA + even a squad of J-20 and maybe couple of J-31s
and a non AESA LCA wont make a cut + orders have not yet been given for 40-80 EL/M-2032 instead of them we can simply order same ammount of EL-2052 with same antenna dimensions and wieght catagorry as EL/M-2032 we tested on LCA (some say its onli 50-75 KG havier) and we have already a LCA prototype testing AESA radar on it + it wont be difficult to intigrate Lightning LDP and Python/Derby and owther israeli & indian air to ground munations on it
as for speeding up the production rate make no mistake sooner than later private compnies like L&T , TATA and Mahindra will be given liecense to produce its parts which will be assembelled by HAL
Immanuel
Senior Member
- Joined
- May 16, 2011
- Messages
- 3,555
- Likes
- 7,476
No option here, LCA mk-1A isn't ready, the AESA will only begin flight trials next year and the weight reduction exercise will take another year before testing can begin. In the mean time I-Derby-ER, Python-5, IFR will be tested shortly from the MK-1 which is expected to receive FOC by March. Why wait further for the LCA mk-1A. In the mean-time IAF should accept the MK-1 as a LIFT trainer which will act as an excellent last stage trainer and only improve the pilot's training and survivability. Production rate cannot be increased from day 1, it takes time.
Off course private suppliers will be roped in but in the mean-time HAL needs to increase production to 16 by end of next year and MOD needs to push for increasing that rate to 30 per year by 2018 and by 2019 to 36-42. By then the MK-1 LIFT Trainers would be delivered I don't see the LCA mk1A being delivered anytime before 2019, it would be a great achievement if Mk-1A is available for flight testing by 2018. We do not need LCA enabled with AESA right away, the first sqds will not be based anywhere near the Baki border and the bunder flying with an AESA is still a Bunder. Even the Mig-21 bison will run circles around it.
guru-dutt
Regular Member
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2015
- Messages
- 475
- Likes
- 356
whome are you calling bander sirji ?
now you are right and first squad will be of MK1 level its already in process but whats stopping us in speeding the testing of israeli AESA on LCA ?
the test of indian LCA1P designation are already going on why not one more prototype to be given to test israeli AESA ?
ya sure things will onli settle till late 2018 but if we play it right now we can save at least six months which is enof to formulate a joint publick private partnership wich in effect will speed up mass production
refer my previous posts
i know that my idea was outlandish to begin with but what i was suggesting was an immediate stop gap measure which is economical and at the same time deliverable within 18-24 months. but that's a best case scenario considering that Russia doesn't turn Judas and the Indian MoD doesn't drag the negotiations for another 5 years and by that time it becomes useless.
know what...let's build more LCA Tejas regardless of whether the IAF likes it or not no matter how much it bitches.
unless we build our own fighters, fly them, repair them, make mistakes and learn from them; how could we expect to build better aircrafts in the future! Khud karenge nahi toh seekhenge kaha se...
look at the Chinese they have been building reversed engineered rip-offs of the MiG-21 since the 1960s. Earlier variants were inadequate and of poor build quality and did not meet PLAAF requirements but they persevered with it.
Chengdu kept on building more copies using modern tooling and materials, flying it, continuously tweaking it, modifying it and in the late 80s introduced the double delta wing J-7E variant which at its time was superior to the IAFs MiG-21bis variants not only in terms of range and avionics but surprisingly also agility/maneuverability. It forms the backbone of the PLAAF besides being a huge export success.
Another good example is the Chengdu J-10. Nobody knows what its real capabilities are or how maneuverable it actually is. For all i know it might just be a highly hyped crappy mid-weight fighter approaching nowhere near the capabilities of the IAF's MiG-29 or Mirage 2000. Still China's built 250+ of these jets in 4 variants and they don't seem any likely to stop in the near future.
Like the Russians the Chinese also follow a similar philosophy of inducting new aircrafts into the force during the final prototype stages itself, rushing it into mass production and then refining it and ironing out its deficiencies over the next 10-12 years. I guess by this logic the J-10 has now matured into a capable platform. This is at complete odds with the American/European philosophy where only the actual production variant is given the final operational clearance and hence the massive delays and cost overruns in the F-35 program. Apparently IAF also follows an approach similar to the Western model hence it's unhappiness with the initial Mk1 variant of the LCA Tejas.
Last edited:
LETHALFORCE
Mod
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2009
- Messages
- 29,882
- Likes
- 48,595
It is twenty years still waiting for India to acquire or build a warplane!
blue marlin
Regular Member
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2015
- Messages
- 589
- Likes
- 121
might i give a good suggestion, and i realistic and viable one at that. ditch the LCA and go for the gripen.
