Name the contenders again? I believe there was another with 2 engines and even more load/range (if those are what's important to you); I think it even had wings that folded. Christ, I just can't seem to remember.........
I agree that we don't need the F-35B.
Super Hornet has inferior performance. No competition with the Rafale. This was one of our Navy Admiral's viewpoint.
which aircraft wud you choose between two if one is quick footed like a rabbit and other is a pregnant buffalo. Boeing in its own presentation had accepted that F-18SH needed new engines which were ready but needed funds for being certified and till than F-18 will suffer from range and maneuverability problems. Rafale does not need to fold its wings and so it can operate at 9G while F-18 due to its folding wings is reduced to just 7.5G load factor. Wud you still call it a better fighter? Also please read the max range of F-18SH v/s that of Rafale-M with just internal fuel or with max fuel, you will know what I am saying.
Russia won't be selling the PAK-FA to anyone India doesn't approve of. Just like the Bhramos India and Russia have come up with a list of "approved" states both nations are comfortable with selling these high-end military gear. There is next to ZERO chance of the IAF or IN ever going AGAINST the PAK-FA/
Like I have said ^^ Russia isn't going to be selling the PAK-FA to anyone India doesn't approve of. And 200-250+ 5th gen fighters isn't a "vast" number? These are numbers the F-22 will never see.
Pakistan? Please they spend, what, 5% of what India does on defence? The gap is only going to widen between India and Pakistan in the coming years. The Paksitanis can dream and beg big brother China for scraps off the table (5th gen fighters) but that doesn't mean China will be all that interested. Unless China is willing to give the birds free of charge, pay for all training, pay for all weapons package, pay for all maintence and pay for all spares then the deal is a non-starter.
So, your telling me India gave Russia approval to sell Flankers (among other items) to China. LOL
If, China believes it need to contain India or it feels the need to protect Pakistan from the latter. China could in fact support much of the expense for Pakistan to acquire such types. Also, who is to say China couldn't base 5th Generation Aircraft in Pakistan! Remember, China is involved with a number of countries about basing at this very moment.
There is no doubt about the fact that the US is the largest arms 'producer' in the world...but it is not a not the largest 'exporter' is it?? Going by plain facts it is fairly visible that the present US arms market is more or less limited to the NATO countries and the so called 'client states' like Saudi Arabia, Pakistan Taiwan and Japan, and most of the sales are made with a certain strategic plan in mind..see India never stands a chance in the US policies ever...in fact technically speaking the US still trusts Pakistan more than India...we hold a position where the US security departments classifies us as a 'potential threat' till date no matter how low it is, it is there..therefore, I see no chance of the US selling it top-end defense products to India, without a EUMA, or anything of the sort.
So, your telling me India gave Russia approval to sell Flankers (among other items) to China. LOL
I would add that Russia is currently in discussion with China over selling the Su-35. Which, have a number of components that will be included in the PAK-FA.
So, your telling me India gave Russia approval to sell Flankers (among other items) to China. LOL
Ok, so your plan is to rely on fortune and French goodwill to keep the Rafale M in production until India needs it.
Oh, I'm sorry, I thought load/range were what mattered to you; guess that only applies in comparison to the F-35C. Come to think about it, most of the comparisons I've seen to the F-35 here are rather selective. Always with the "doesn't have the kinematics of X" or "doesn't have the range of Y" or "isn't as *stealthy* as Z." The *stealth* part is especially amusing; I've always wondered where so many people learned how to eyeball RCS models from photographs.
Once you guys sort out the problem of F-35 regarding its tailhook, you can call it a ship based fighter as of now, the problem of tailhook being very closely positioned to main gear has this aircraft unfit for ships. I hope you are aware of this problem.
You seem to be a little out of date as that issue has already been addressed; turned out they just needed to sharpen the hook and add a dampener. Carrier trials are still scheduled for later this year or early next.
Yup. Pretty much the same story everywhere, including FGFA, F-35 etc.
He is talking about the SH not the F-35.
Recommend looking at the whole conversation.
are you aware that F-35 has a problem in engaging the wire if it lands between two wires? when an ac touches down between two wires, its main gear goes over the wire and if the distance is small between the main gear and the hook, wire does not get enough time to rise up to be caught by the hook even if the hook is travelling flush with the deck. In a perfect deck landing, the ac flies to a point of height on deck where the hook engages first and than the ac hits the deck. However 99% landings are done in a manner that ac hits the deck first and than the hook engages.
And I just explained how simple the problem was to fix.
