Search results

Me for one, would prefer the Mk II to go a different way, my suggestions a) Twin engine instead of single enigne, Single engine planes are cheap to produce and maintain, Also they are easier, but all depends on the single engine of the plane, if there is a failure,.then there is high probablity...

When the top brass of the services are filled with retards, what you expect will happen? See arjun and tejas The day India cleans retards from its services, we shall be seeing an apple and calling it an apple.

for Tejas MK (t2) II I would still prefer it having twin engines (two smaller engines with combined thrust much higher than F414 engine) . If I am to manage the aims of T2 I would prefer it to be modular where the engine can be changed in shortest possible time so as to allow higher sortie...

http://www.wallpaperup.com/uploads/wallpapers/2014/09/05/437010/ca209276ed435ced1883f7729ac43af5.jpg See this image, I might consider putting an internal Multi functional POD just below the nose where the plane Cannon comes out

Stealthier MK2 is ok, but should not be at the cost of maneuverability. Also I might suggest targeting pod internal and just below the nose

Tejas are way better than Mirage 2000 even when Mirage have latest upgrades. Mirage 2000 RDY vs AESA for Tejas.. Its a no brainer.. Wonder why when some french members say that Mirage 2000 is superior to F-16, why does UAE want to keep its F-16 Block 60 and want to sell their Mirage 2000-9 which...

We have potential to make all these planes, Who the hell are the buyers? Or govt expects the industrialists to buy two seat unarmed fighters so that they can travel between metros faster???

Never underestimate your enemy, Let us wait and see how it turns out to be. Even USA media calls F-35 similar names but still its developing, is it not? The media is not given full access to the plane.

The Chinese have J-31 which seems to have been influenced by F-35