Search results

Dude this is off topic , but i have to ask , what does the NG have that the Mk2 does not. I though the important bits were all there , Radar and engine. Sure you can say the NG is superior , but i don't see the difference as being that of the next mk Volvo-Rm12 that's just a GE-404 variant ...

I remeber when ToI first published that bs figure. It includes funds allocted for LCAN and LCA mk2 The gripen hower is only inclusive of ammount spent orignally and not the gripen NG

^^^ first time i am hearing true benefits from offsets. Hope more is coming from other deals as well.

Canards also slow down the aircraft at high speeds. Not something that is viable for plane designed primarily as an interceptor.

One of our media's greatest lies crushed. LCA TEJAS PROJECT FUNDING DETAILS REVEALED #Nitesh's post has been edited by me. to try and improve readablity

See i don't get why the LCA mkII can't be the same as the LCA-N and use LEVCONS

Well if you did not convince your self IAF was being arm twisted into everything , you would not have had such a headache. Which as a result lowed your opinion of the Tejas unnecessarily. Well unless you still want to preach inducting the tejas is waste , its a waste of pilots and all such...

told u i will continue this when more info arose well you were determined to brand ADA as a company(even though its just a lab) trying to sell Products to the poor IAF who did not have any choice and was being arm twisted into it by the MoD. There you go 20 fighters for development and field...

You will get no issue from me, all this circular logic by both PoV's and the time spent to write each post has drained my endurance. let us call a break till new info arises. but i still maintain induction of Tejas is a must.

Well its still more cost effective than the MKI , 42 of those cost us 100 mill plus for each unit Same apply for the tejas. But really , we are still talking 100% increase in the case of the MKI , imported platforms never cost effective compared to domestic options. For starters , we...

I did forget about Gripen quick re-arm and refuel time. Well i have to say , credit where credits dew , it would not have been as useful on any other aircraft than the gripen .

EoS always apply , the original estimates of 25 mil per aircraft by Kalam and company were for orders over a 100. Adjust for inflation it would cost a little over 30. It's not surprising the cost per aircraft is high given that the orders are only 40 aircraft. if we only ordered 20 they would...

Small scale orders , result in the high price and LCA costs under 40 mil not 40 mill. Kalam once said Tejas can be made for 25mil , adjust for inflation. It will only cost us a little over 30 mil. Larger scale order economy of Scale will apply that figure has not even been adjusted for...

Sarcastic: And that is useful because ? Pilots get briefed before they get in their aircraft. Any other info can be transferred onto the plane by the time they are in the air In an emergency combat situation , pilots don't usually stay on the tarmac analyzing the battlefield , they focus on...

That was only the case for target. It was just a simulated scenario , Real AoA on Gripen is far higher. All the Euro Canards are designed with High AoA's. That seemed more the case of pilot error then design flaw. Aircrafts flew too close to one another There is a lot of ambiguity on the...

A qualitative edge is requirement for i do not disagree. But we also have a quantitative requirement. MKI , MRCA and FGFA are not cost-effective enough to be fielded in numbers we are satisfied with. This is why we have a LCA requirement in the first place. To produce the large number of...

And we will never be able to match them in any quantitative way , unless we can come up with cost-effective platforms. MKI , MMRCA , FGFA , they all have high capability , but they all cost too much. They are expensive to buy , expensive to run and require twice the manpower to operate them in...

@ppgj what about AoA comparison What about Speed comparison What about avionics what about sensor fusion What about EW suits What about loiter time What about Radar

This is nothing but far art Tejas MKII will use levicons/LERX as on the Tejas-Navy as opposed to canards. It achieves the same purpose of increasing AOA without adding addition surfaces to increase the RCS.

IAF will be using , and not so much dependent I know why we have Obsolescence. I only wanted to humble your POV , that IAF is just too good for the Tejas. And what about tomorrow. One can't only focus on issue of today and avoid the storm of tomorrow. They is a balance in meeting the needs...