Search results

Don't bother. You don't know much about aircraft to discuss with. You can go ahead and sing your anti-national rhetoric.

This proves you have no idea what the discussion is about!!! IAF evaluated all aircraft and came up with the conclusion that the Mig-35 is not even worth shortlisting. And Mig-35 is a generation ahead compared to the Mig-29K. So, what does that prove?

It doesn't matter if the army is stopped dead by the Chinese. The point is we are no longer a defensive military. Our objective is to strike deep in the heart of the enemy. It is clear you have lost track of the discussion. You are contradicting your own points. That $22 Billion...

Is that why the Russians have added drop tanks to the Su-35 and Su-34 and increased their ranges by another 1000 Km, when their internal fuel ranges were already higher than the MKI? This is the upgraded IAF Mig-29 with a CFT on top. This a Su-34 with PTB-3000, 3000L tank. This is over the 12...

The Koreans rejected the F-15 for the F-35. So what's your point? The UAE deal is lost only if one of them confirms the news. As for the source on the Singapore tests, it is lost in the deep chasm called the Internet. It was news back in 2009.

:facepalm: A single Rafale flew against 3 Singaporean Block 50/52s and beat them.

The range I have given states "best range." The reason we can't compare just internal fuel for Rafale and Mig-29K is because when they are on strike missions, they will fly with tanks. This is a real world comparison. RCS isn't calculated like that. B-2 bomber is 10 times bigger than a...

It has less to do with the computer and more to do with the hardware and software. The ability to change the power of each module gives you the option of switching between high and low gain antennas to get the best result. So, you can choreograph the antenna to perform multiple tasks at one...

I'll keep it simple. RCS Su-30 = ~12m2 Mig-29K = ~1m2 Rafale = ~0.1m2 Best ranges with tanks Su-30 = 2500-3000Km (on internal) Mig-29K = 3000 Km with three drop tanks Rafale = 3700+ Km with three drop tanks (CFTs are available) Actual range in the region of 4500 Km with CFT...

AESA's advantages are also in detection, identification, classification, tracking, prioritization, multitasking etc over PESA. It is also more advanced in terms of EW, it is capable of high power ECM functions. It is also be great at data dissemination.

I think like the IAF. I have nothing on them. And this thing about bragging rights, is that related to LCA?

In terms of electronics, it is 5th gen. In other parameters, it is 4th gen. As of today, in terms of electronics, there isn't a better aircraft in operation.

RVV-AE has not seen any new update. There is a new export missile called RVV-SD. And we are yet to order it, if we plan to. There is another missile under development called K-77M. MICA has seen new updates. If we are talking about future development, then Meteor is available on Rafale...

Due to the export priority given for Rafale, a lot of its current and future capabilities have been publicly revealed. Many aspects are still secret, but from what has been released, it is one hell of an aircraft. The US has been trying its best to scuttle French business. They even pressured...

Are you getting into this again? The OLS-35 is obsolete. RVV-AE is obsolete. EL/L 8222 is obsolete. The IAF Mig-29s carry an entirely new AESA based EW suite. They don't carry the EL/L 8222. MLU for Mig-29K is far away. The basic avionics suite for Mig-35 is barely ready. Regardless the...

Rafale is no magic bullet. There is no such thing as a magic bullet. Similarly the Chinese air defense is no magic bullet either. Nobody is underestimating the Chinese air defense, least of all me. I actually believe they have surpassed us in every parameter. We are not going to fly over...

Rafale offsets the need for more ground equipment. Nobody is going to fight a war today but it can be possible in a decade from now. There is no real way of knowing what may trigger a war. We could end up fighting for Africa's resources if the need arises. We can't use tanks against China...

There was no way we could have afforded joining a program like Rafale. We were dirt poor. We could barely afford LCA. We never planned to fight China over Tibet. They took large parts of Arunachal Pradesh during the 1962 war.

It's both a yes and no. We can produce the engines on our own too. The bigger issue would be manufacturing the landing gear which we do not have a license for. That along with titanium forges. We can actually make a clone of the MKI, but it will be prohibitively expensive.

With more sorties and cheaper operation costs. Also by creating a second supply line and a second production line. Added extra benefits in other roles including the induction of new weapons. The enemy will have to create plans to counter two different aircraft in their airspace instead of one.