Trimming landing gear of 6.5 ton fighter by 500kg! Possible only if MK-2 chooses to take off with detachable rollers and land a like glider, just like Me 163.
Landing Gear including the entire undercarriage was overweight by 1.5 tons. That's the reason EADS was roped in as a development partner in 2009. Even today Landing gear is overweight by 500kgs.
Redesigned nose as of today means increasing length with plug. Changed intake means increasing radius in horizontal axis and few more auxiliary inlets. Changes for F-414 will be internal. Wing will largely remain unchanged except LEVCON.
Look at it realistically. Saab with all its expertise is still a little away from fielding a fully functional NG platform even after starting in 2008. The LCA Mk2 is not even on the drawing board yet. Do you really expect the LCA Mk2 to actually follow the schedule. Look at Satish's post, it came as a surprise to me too. F414s delivery start in 2014. Unless LCA Mk2's continue using F404s initially I don't realistically see LCA Mk2 following schedule.
In dog fight main objective always remains getting behind foe's 6 o'clcok and turning with turn is considered as worst maneuver as it bleeds energy very fast especillay of pure delta. But this is not the first and last maneuver in the book. High Yo Yo is one alternative and very good especially for deltas because they at advantage there.
You don't expect the enemy to shoot you, do you? If the LCA cannot get into the enemy's 6 o'clock then the enemy fighter will. You only talked of 2 manuevers out of a thousand. Sure there will be some maneuvers that LCA may excel at. But Deltas are supposed to be great dog fighters. Both M2000 as well as Gripen are great dog fighters.
Plain speculation and negative one. There were some in 90s who used to say LCA will not even fly. There are some who says, FGFA will fail as a stealth fighters because Russians can only build fighters with large RCS not with LO features. Do not not risk factor applies with them? Can you say for sure Russian 5G design will be better than US or even Chinese because some says Chinese stealth tech is stolen US technology? What if China in reality has stolen US 5g tech? Would not FGFA or even PAK-FA put IAF at great disadvantage at both fronts?
You are pitting proven designers(Sukhoi, Lockheed) against unproven designers(ADA and Chengdu). Also that comment about China stealing F-22 tech is not real. The Americans keep their tech in highly secure data banks. I doubt even the President has seen them.
More reasons to expect for better than otherwise. DRDO is now delivering. Situation has changed for good will change even more for better.
Except Brahmos DRDO has delivered nothing extraordinarily unique. Brahmos is mainly Russian tech too. AAD and PAD are already in existence and the radar used is Israeli. Nothing awesome about Arjun, Akash, ALH etc. Superior versions of all are in existence. Fact is I am not pinning anything on DRDO until they successfully deliver a platform that even ACM will not criticize.
IAF is not a single fighter type air force, it has available spots for imported one. Mere success/failure of LCA and AMCA will not seal faith of IAF. But their success would change IAF's faith, Navy's faith and Indian's faith forever. Worth taking chance.
Yes. But for some reason ACM is visibly unhappy with LCA. Heck, Navy Admiral actually came out to the media and said they don't want LCA but will induct it out of patriotism.
No. Buying defence products from out side and developing then buying them locally doesn't compare to MBA from IIM and MBA from start up college respectively. Unlike your comparison, here interests are permanently mutual and reciprocal and will bear fruits forever. If IAF invests in local it will face some problem initially but in time it will get perfect product for its need. But with imports IAF will always be compromising, sometime on requirements sometime on budget.
All that will not help win wars. If China invades by the time you fix problems, then we will be inducting and operationalizing J-20s in Lohegaon AFB.
If anything in IAF is reliable then it is Mirage? Jaguar did had its share of criticism. But this is not the thread to discuss that in detail. Whole point was, new Jaguars and new engines (in upgraded one's) will have much life left when they will be decommissioned. So why put so much money specially when unlike Tejas spin-off/pay-back, money invested in Jaguars will be totally unrecoverable.
Money invested in Jaguars or LCA is not going anywhere. Military is an unrecoverable expenditure. Jaguar upgrades will happen in India. Also, finances shouldn't be squandered away over a useless platform just to save up on a useful one. A second squadron is entirely useless.
USN did not engaged because they were not presenting any considerable threat. Whenever they did, they were intercepted by jets flying from carriers.
2 Flankers flew over a carrier and a Chinese sub reached firing distance. Both are threats.
Mig-21s shot down F-16s during a war game but during Red USAF officer said they were operation at huge restrictions. Will know about that carrier incident soon.
It was smart use of Mig-21s against legacy F-15s during Cope India 2004. They broke formation and merged when the F-15s were busy against M2000 and Su-30k. They fired BVRs and ran away. We will know nothing about the other exercises since they are no longer being revealed to the media.
Then what? Radar is a major ask from IAF in LCA.
I understand radar will take time. So, it is not important. Radars and other avionics can be upgraded with time, but not the airframe. And it is the airframe that pisses me off.
Only engine and Radar was IAF's call. Rest of improvements about which we came to know during AI 09 was ADA's proposal.
We don't know that. IAF is involved in Mk2 design. So, its not just engine and radar.
IAF only said don't want LCA with present thrust/engine. A mere re-engining doesn't shoots MK-1 to MK-2 there is a comprehensive package.
Yes. And deliveries aren't any time soon for Mk2. IAF is not interested in MK1.
Tejas will fire BVR just like F-16s. In any air to air combat Tejas will engage F-16s at number advantage or else will escape. Same applies to J-10. However i don't consider it a threat as long as it uses chinese BVR missiles.
That isn't enough. What if the F-16s have come for air interdiction missions inside our borders or even Chinese J-10s. Running away is not an option then. The army will not keep quiet if they get bombed because the IAF could not match the adversary.
Imported hardwares are neither cheap nor easily acquirable specially when need is most, recall Kargil days.........One black dot and SAAB will be banned just like Bofors. What then other than IAF begging DRDO to keep them airworthy.
That's the reason we are asking for full ToT for airframe and spares manufacturing in India itself. DRDO is made to serve the armed forces. There is no question of IAF begging, IAF only demands. DRDO must provide or shut down. There is no alternative.
So can do heavier fighters much better than Gripen in addition to heavy duty role which Gripen can't do. So why don't dump Gripen and buy them?
It would be funny if costs of operation of Gripen turns out to be cheaper than the LCA. Heck they said LCA will cost upwards of $40million now. Also I am not against the LCA program itself. I am against stuffing LCA down services throats without satisfying their more modern requirements.
What I am saying is since IAF has already asked for 20 LCA Mk1 then go ahead with it. But sticking 20 more down their throats and then having a Mk2 as IOC in 2015-16 period is as stupid as we possible can be.
So, until 2016, IAF will have 40 Mk1 with FOC and they will again renew testing the Mk2 from its IOC. Just Wow.
No i did not. I only pointed to its usefulness in present time. BTW A-10 and Jaguar are different and i had used Jaguar for something not A-10.
The Jags are pretty much our A-10s.
No, i am only saying don't invest in re-engined Jaguar and new one specially when a better replacement will be fully ready in 2 years. Mature or not, any day down the line it will be replaced by new jet and more likely date is 2018 .
Building CAS aircraft isn't easy. LCA isn't a better replacement since it is a Delta. Deltas don't do well in CAP even if you rig them up with equipment.
Nitesh has posted one article regarding F-16 which gives me enough reasons to distrust.
What if LCA turns out to be worse?
MBA logic doesn't applies here. A students pays a college and gets an MBA. Relation, 2 years max. IAF pays ADA and gets something. DRDO improves next one using that money provides better this time to IAF. Relation, forever.
Oh! It does apply here. And your statement only helps my case. Heck, a student wouldn't join a startup even for only 2 years. But you want IAF to join a startup for 40 years and build up a, LOL, relationship. Why don't we just do that with Pakistan and China and get it over with? Relationships are sweet, but they don't win wars as well.
You could say IAF is the master and DRDO is the servant in this relationship. The relationship of both parties has to be proven first before a relationship can be established. IAF is proven, DRDO is sadly, not.
Remember USAF dumped Boeing and chose LM F-22. USAF had a more mature relationship with Boeing but they dumped them as fast as the wind because LM came out with a better platform that actually suited their requirements. The truth is the YF-23 is much more superior to the F-22 in all respects except agility. The YF-23 had more powerful engines, better stealth, better payload and range, better avionics. But it did not fit USAF requirements simply because Boeing forgot about dog fights. If you cannot deliver as stipulated, then don't deliver at all.
