Do you have actual test results of the use of a chute on the aircraft we are talking about? No? So, no need to be so sure about it.
Is the HPT-32 imported? So, what's up with this import mania claim? Go buy Micromax and Akas tablet. If you don't have an imported phone or a tablet, then fine. If you do that makes you a hypocrite.
Buy only Indian. If you have even one foreign object in your home, like a LG TV, Samsung washing machine etc then you still are a hypocrite because all these have Indian equivalents.
No need to talk bad about the Armed forces importing if Indian equipment comes by reducing their quality standards.
Yeah! Right only CAG knows everything. How about IAF wanted to import even basic trainer but were shot down due to HAL's veto? Ever thought about that?
The question is why cant IAF combine with HAL to produce a decent turbo prop or jet trainer ,while IAF goes hammer and tons at ADA for LCA 's 50 year old delay?
Only if the aircraft had conformed to requirements in the first place. No need to assume and say it did.
India is the only country where the DPSU can veto Armed forces decisions.
If you read the JAGUAR darin update story, You can understand how IAF bungled without even noticing it does not have decent navigational aid for terrain hugging and only discovered it after they bought and then how the local talent helped with DARIN upgrade.IAF bought jags without even knowing they dont have working terrain hugging capability that is so important for DPS,you can read it at leissure in TKS tales.
No need to get all philosophical. 400 pilots dying is more important than 1 pilot dying, regardless of consequences and reasons. When you sign up for the armed forces it is not for a picnic.
If only IAF with suitable leadership and along with HAL have marshaled the effort of indigenising the spares of 1970s MIG-21 s after the collapse of USSR not many pilots would have died. Instead cheap spares from bulgaria was imported and hastened the gory o MIg crashes.
USAF did not ground F-22s because a pilot died. They grounded the F-22s because the problems became public.
Oh! Please. The need always arises 10 years in advance before actual work is carried out. This has been the same for every armed forces for decades. The Navy pitched for a MRCA a few years ago. They will realistically get their own aircraft at the end of the decade. SFC is the same too and they may never even get it.
Vegetables right? Go buy what you want in a second?
When it take so many years to simply evaluate four fighters ,think how many years will it take to build a 4th gen fighter from scratch.
What the IAF did, nobody else has done ever. Period.
Right. And you think if we only pitted EF and Rafale do you think 5th gen avionics would have come cheap? It was Boeing which brought in the AESA, not the others.
This will be the cheapest way to buy Rafale and this has been done many times. Did oyu know about the controversy surrounding the one of our earliest tenders involving Mirage-3s, Jaguars and Viggen. Sanjay Gandhi's interference after Jag was selected because Viggen was the supposedly superior platform. But IAF insisted they always wanted the Jag and after that Sanjay backed off. Well, same case.
Super MKIs and PAKFA... what now?
Most probably Navy, not PLAAF.
IAF wanted that. But we don't know why GoI interfered. But it happened for the good.
Not even close. Mirage-2000s were expected to replace Mig-27s. Who the heck told you MRCA will replace Mig-21s? That is LCA's job.
Kaveri was well funded even before 1989. The 1991 thing was LCA's issue.
That's why dates were pushed to 1999 induction from 1996. Instead is became 2006 with first flight in 1999, then 2009, then 2011. What about now? Money is there, infrastructure is there. Even then there is that extra 6 years of delay.
You are talking about things that happened 20 years ago. Remember that. Only technology stopped LCA's progress after funding was approved. There was no FBW until 1999 even after Dassault offered an Analog one. DRDO pushed LCA's specs up, not IAF.
Wrong. Digital FCS was ADA's decision. Every Tom, Dick and Harry who knows LCA's history knows this aspect. IAF merely laughed and rightly so.
Austin's mail to me;
Also, this. A very important point that everybody
"conveniently" forgets.
Much better than your 50% figure. So, I was correcting your mistake. All the extras not necessary.
Good. Now you are thinking along the lines of a critic. However you forget that most of this was already mandated. Just that DRDO took it a notch further and complicated it. We will develop radar, we will develop FCS, we will develop 4th gen avionics, we will develop this, that etc. Afterall how will they justify their budget and work if everything was imported.
fft: Ok...
No, actually I don't. It is just that IAF is criticized for the wrong things not where they need to be criticized.
Btw, Mig-21s crashes attributed to human error were primarily due to training inadequacies. This was due to the lack of an advanced trainer. Whatever HPT-32s faults, it had nothing to do with Mig-21 crashes. The absence of Hawk or equivalent was, something IAF sorely needed since the 80s but was denied for any number of reasons.
Again. Idiotic assumptions without knowing facts. IAF bought a lot of Maruts if you have forgotten. Isn't that enough? Nobody offered a better engine and hence the project died. India couldn't build one engine on it's own.
Ok. Your opinion, something I don't share. Neither do many economists.
Even IAF cannot predict.
The battlespace isn't large enough for such a large number. We an probably fit 80-100MKIs in the NE and the same in the North. Nothing more. Attrition based warfare, we will see.
More pilots dead. Also that talk of LCA being low RCS is plain nonsense. It is a regular aircraft with a RCS like that of a truck. Been repeating the same thing all over the forum.
AWACS don't give target lock information. They only vector aircraft to targets. Only missile "blind" shots may work and those shots don't kill. They only have a tactical significance.
]Awacs gave target locks to RAFALE's AASM in libiya ,with these lock the RAFALE pilots fired simultaneously all six AASM and other misssiles in front of them and backside of them without switching their radars. So they must be all lying as per your high standards.
4 J-11s will be equal to a formation of 12 LCA Mk2s and 2 tankers. That's the math.
You can explain this math ematical fact to the members in your following posts,I hope.
LCA's RCS is 3 times smaller than Mirage-2000. Rafale's RCS is 10 times smaller. F-22 is 10000 times smaller. Difference?
That's your small RCS, but to a radar, LCA is a flying truck. LCA's small size is useful in only one place, dog fights and that's only if the other aircraft does not have a 360degree IRST.
You can bless this forum by giving the source for your claim that LCAA has a third of Mirages RCS. And also explain the FRENCH MAGIC by which the RAFALE is said to have a RCS of 0.1 sq met while it is so bigger than LCA.Hpw was this managed in RAFALE/ and how that can't be managed In LCA mk-1 or MK-2.
Yeah, I noticed. But I believe that could be emergency thrust. But I guess it is fine, and it still makes the aircraft underpowered though. This is only counting T/W ratio and not a whole host of other reasons like inlet design, drag, unnecessary weight etc.
Ok. That's cute. Do you see me believing it? No.
That's in effect a new aircraft. Let's talk about Tejas Mk3 after Mk2 is flying shall we?
Well! Best of luck to them. But they will die.
Same back to you matey. At least let's get some LCA history straight instead of making assumptions.
Btw, AWACS don't do radar locks.
Awacs gave target locks to RAFALE's AASM in libiya ,with these lock the RAFALE pilots fired simultaneously all six AASM and other misssiles in front of them and backside of them without switching their radars. So they must be all lying as per your high standards.
But in the following part of your post you are claiming that New SU radars can detect a LCA 400 miles away. Then cant AWACSS do the same detection,and relay this info to LCA. You have claimed in your previous posts that one F-22 will fire the missile and another F-22 will guide it. Then why it cannot be possible for LCA? Can one LCA fire the misslie and an AWACA or SUKHOI or EW craft with larger radars guide the missile?
Read this small passage and see if you understand. Page 69.
Flying Magazine - Google Books
If you have doubts from the above I will explain what happened.
Also, as a FYI, the MKI will be locking on to the LCA at 180km while the LCA will be locking on to the MKI at, say, 120 or 130Km. And that is only considering the MKI maneuvers himself within the LCA's radar cone, like a moron, which won't happen.
Just so you know, to reduce radar detection range by 50% you will need to reduce RCS by 15 times. Also, The MKIs new upgrade will allow LCA detection at max possible range of ~400Km(like AWACS) even if the LCA is flying low. Just so we get the math right. A single J-11/J-20 would have engaged 4 LCAs even before the LCA knows the J-11 is present. Of course, AWACS help remove that advantage a little, but with J-20 even that AWACS advantage is gone.
How does a single J-10 or J-11 with an RCS 4 or 5 times bigger than LCA see first and lock first?
As usual you are reeling off your own pet theories here.
Current Irbis-E specs call for a LCA detection at 400Km and a lock at probably 70% of the range.
sakthi
These are all just your figures without any comprehension regarding the term RCS. According to many experts for any airborne radar the detection range of 0.1 sq.meter target like LCA is 70 Nautical miles only. However much ASEA may improve the detection level this basic aerodynamic fact cannot be changed. While asea is good enough to detect a stealthy cruise missile within 50 km,it can never detect any target beyond it's RCs range. It may improve detection at some angularities, but no front on. A low flying LCA will have the least possible RCS among modern 4th gens in the world. Missiles covered under wings canot emit any radar reflections to a high flying awacs.
Another FYI, in a recent simulation conducted by USAF when selling the F-35 to a customer, they determined that even the F-35 stands no chance against the Su-35 if support aircraft like tankers and AWACS are taken out. So, you decide where LCA (a Mirage-2000 equivalent) stands as of today.
What happened to your repeated war cry through out this thread that 5th gen will eat all 4th gen alive.Now you are openly admitting that 5th gen need the support of AWACS and ew crafts to survive against SU-35.The J-20 will have atleast 3 times the RCs of F-35 as per the shaping and stealth technology level ,in that case our rafales and sukhois can finish them off,and LCA wont be far behind either in mk-II
It is nice to know the basics before jumping to conclusions, no?
