MMRCA news and discussions.

[fulcrum]

Did MMRCA mention single engine fighters? I was not aware of that.

 

[Soham]

No it didn't. I was wasn't talking about the no. of engines. I'm talking about the roles of each contender.
The Mig, Super Hornet, and the Eurofighter aren't multirole fighters. They are used for air superiority by most countries.

Most contenders are heavy fighters, with re-adjustment of payload to make them multi-role.

 

[John]

well firstly SH for USN has 7.5 g limit and the RAAF version has a 9g limit. The Aim-120 D's range is well over 110NM or 200km against a non-maneuvering target, its range is over 50% more than the Aim-120C-7 which has a max range of 120km. Aim-120 C-5 has a range of 105km or roughly over 60NM. read the article below as well will give u an idea of its real range.

Raytheon AIM-120 AMRAAM

Even if its tracking range for 1m2 is around 165 km, its still well over anything else. Read the following article page 206-207, the Apg-73 had a max. range of 160NM, thus the APG-79 has double the max detection range hence the actual max. range is well over 300NM and 5 times the reliability of the APG-73. Now an aircraft that has max detection range well over 500km should have tracking range for 1m2 target of well over 165km.

The Naval Institute guide to world ... - Google Books

The heck are you talking about US storing BVRs at home, go look around how many customers have already received the Aim-120 C-7 and how many orders have been placed and full-filled. ok even if what you say is even remotely true, the Rafale, EF wont have a primary A2A missile till Meteor arrives which is btw mindless drivel since both Ef and Rafale deploy the Aim-120 C-7 as their primary A2A missiles as of now. so again bro please bring something meaningful to the discussion.

Ex-pilots who never flew the SH have no clue, the guys who test flew for the Aussies recommended its purchase. Its fly away cost and life time expense will depend on IAF evaluations and we as of yet have no clue which aircraft has the lowest operational costs. Surely Gripen, Falcon will lead the way. The remaining is hard to say. The Sh has low cost per hour flight, here is some proof, page 14 of the file and page 10 of the document and i shal paste the figures; by the way the document is from July 2009

$8,333 per flight hour provided by a new F/A-18E/F (at a 6,000 flight hour life, the cost per flight hour of a new F/A-18E/F would fall even further to $5,814 if those planes are similarly extended to 8,600 flight hours as have legacy F/A-18s).

(A bit further in the same document). The Navy projects that the F/A-18E/F will remain in the fleet until at least 2040, and should be able to use most or all of the full service life of any newly purchased aircraft.

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/weapons/RL30624.pdf

so at purchase the SH has 6000 hours and has a cost of $8333 per flight hour and this cost falls to roughly $5814 is the life is extended by anther 2600 hours. This shows that USN will use till 2040, gr8 so SH will have upgrades over life time and its the aircraft that's upgraded even faster than the Raptor. wow so many had so much crap to say about the SH but, my Rolls Royce Phantom has a much higher annual car insurance payment than the SH's cost per flight hour wow.

Now SH is also the first aircraft that is being tested with bio-fuel blends, ok we pay much for it but at least through out its life-time we can save millions because of bio-fuel blends. The French have no BVRs beyond max range of 70km, now to get to Aim-120 D level would take another decade.

Please MBDA which is French, British, Italian and German together they aren't able to get the 100km Meteor out by 2017, you expect me to believe they can develop some better or longer range than that so soon?? wake up. more than 1/3 of our R-77s/R-27s in our inventory don't work, when the 100km range normal one doesn't work well, you expect me to be scared of a longer range r-77 which might not work a third of the time..hmm...even if it works well we have the MKI that can deploy 10 of those missiles in A2A, hence a mig-35 isn't so much of use. Mig is the worst choice, all the other contenders can deploy a wide range of PGMS and long range missiles, mig doesn't come close in such roles. Besides whats the use having a very long range R-77 M when the mig's AESA has max detection range of 130km for a 3m2 target..haha...this is a joke against the SH which can already engage its missiles at that range.

http://img398.imageshack.us/img398/1602/dscn0121cy9.jpg

Now The US could have downgraded our Phalcon or even rejected our request for it, yet they didn't, we have it and will receive more. They could have downgraded the P-8, now have they?? or do u think we would have ordered the P-8 if it was downgraded. We are not a threat to the US,we dont have to conduct nuke tests because we can simulate them on super computers, well we are about to test Agni-5 a borderline ICBM, the US knows that we are about to conduct a test next year, but hey no sanctions, N-deal, new nuke plants coming up, the heck are u talking about sanctions.

The western world is trying to cut down its nuke arsenal and we want to test more, the ****, we can take on our enemies both Pak and China with our Agni 1/2/3. why do we need to test more warheads?

Or do u think US is waking up everyday just to find a reason to put sanctions on us, moron, a country like the US cant deny the attractiveness of the largest democratic market in the world, they know we are peaceful and we don't provoke anything until we are seriously threatened.

Yeah battling bearded mullahs...did you forget how the Russians ran with their tail between their legs when those very mullahs screwed them over and over again. Did u forget those mullahs who easily took the lives over 170 people in mumbai, they don't fear death and such an enemy is never to be underestimated. Those mullahs are the biggest threat to world peace and the way they seem to grow, they are the biggest threat to India. Or do u think we just keep ranting for no reason about how Pakistani nukes are not safe because of those same mullahs.

Even the Pakistanis are not stupid to go for conflict with India. People mentioned the pressure US put on us after 26/11 sure we didn't go for surgical strikes but you think the Pakis would have kept quiet, had we gone for conflict after 26/11, today the sub-continent would been drenched in the aftermaths of nuclear devastation. We don't have any defenses against Pakistani cruise or ballistic missiles as of yet, sure we are working on capabilities but we know that Pakistan doesn't care about deploying nukes first, the smartest thing we did was not go to war coz the Pakistanis would have launched against us for sure in retaliation and if we would have started the conflict we would have lost credibility and international support on the case against Pak.

Pak, Iran, NK, Venezuela etc. have sanctions yes, but why heck is everyone comparing India to them why the flying F*** is everyone comparing us to other scum, does everyone here under-estimate the power of India. None of them can match our scale, our economy or our behavior as a democracy. And what $11 billion spare cash??? wow, the US is over 12 trillion in debt keep that in mind. Its not spare cash for anyone, not anymore.

ok stop mis-stating the truth, EUVA states we choose the location and time of inspections and not the US. Its obvious you have a lot to research so please find more and come with fitting replies and not gibberish. They haven't downgraded the Phalcon, P-8, C-130J, Paveways, so i have no reason to believe they will downgrade SH or SV.

In a BVR mode the SH with Aim-120 D will kill the Su-30mki and the SH is a better dog fighter than Gripen, Falcon neither of which cant pull a decent high aoa maneuver without almost going into a spin. SH does even more without TVC.

Super Hornet 1

The link above has a part called "observations" described by the Aussie pilot who test flew it. I am pasting it, now that's a real active duty pilot talking about it and not some retired old fart. So read carefully before replying, its plain english. btw the radar he speaks of is the APG-73 and not the APG-79 being offered to us.

2.7 Observations

The Super Hornet is a fighter with exceptional handling qualities, even by modern fighter standards, which even a novice can handle comfortably and with confidence at the edge of the low speed manoeuvre envelope.

The point which Boeing and the US Navy have made most convincingly, is that the aircraft's flight control software is so robust that even a beginner on the type can fly it without embarrassing himself too badly. Sceptics should note that test pilot comments about fighters with this generation of flight controls being as easy to fly as a Cessna 172 are indeed correct. There is no room for argument here, as I had the opportunity to observe first hand!

In the hands of an experienced combat pilot, such flight control software means that the pilot can be wholly focussed on the furball in progress, and need not devote any thought to pushing the aircraft past the edge into a uncontrolled departure and resulting risk of a ground impact or successful enemy missile shot. The importance of a substantially departure resistant aircraft, especially if encumbered with stores, cannot be understated - carefree handling translates directly into combat effectiveness.

In a low speed post-merge manoeuvring fight, with a high off-boresight 4th generation missile and Helmet Mounted Display, the Super Hornet will be a very difficult opponent for any current Russian fighter, even the Su-27/30. The analogue and early generation digital flight controls with hard-wired or hard-coded AoA limiters used in the Russian aircraft are a generation behind the Super Hornet and a much more experienced pilot will be required for the Russian types to match the ease with which the Super Hornet handles high alpha flight regimes.

The reports emanating from carrier landing trials performed in the US cannot be disputed, the aircraft is a sheer delight in the circuit and will take much of the anxiety out of night and bad weather traps, especially for nugget fighter-attack pilots.

The cockpit ergonomics build upon two decades of Hornet experience, and make for a very comfortable and easy to use cockpit environment. Again, a novice pilot will find the MFD modes easy to navigate and easy to follow. The colour moving map display makes navigational orientation ridiculously easy, against the mental chores of VOR/DME/TACAN, radar mapping and INS/map-on-the-knee navigation. The prospect of MIDS/RWR/radar/IFF tracks being overlayed on the moving map will take much effort out of maintaining wider area situational awareness.

The radar is very easy to use in MMTI, GMTI and SAR spot mapping modes, and provides an excellent tool for highly accurate all weather maritime strike, littoral strike and battlefield interdiction operations. In particular, the ability to interleave MTI and surface mapping modes is exceptionally useful for resolving and identifying moving surface targets of opportunity.

In conclusion, the reports of the Hornet's exceptional high alpha handling characteristics are provably correct.

:Laie_39:

so with new GE 414 EPE engine SH will have 20% extra thrust per engine, the engine also has lower fuel burn than the GE 414-400 and hence range is increased. TOT will come, the nature of competition will make sure the US gives full-tot, it will be a last minute bombshell that will put the SH in favour among the top 3.

And excuse me the SH is not a multirole???? haha.. hello A2A, A2G, maritime missions, fighter sweep, escorts, interdiction, interceptions, quick reaction, ground support, deep strike, cruise missile defense, PGMs, recon, awacs and tanker roles. SH is the mother of all multiroles. none of the others can dream to do what the SH does since day one.

 

[kuku]

It seems every plane is a multi role plane, however a plane like the Super Hornet with its strike role coming before its fighter role seems to be a good choice for filling in 7 to 8 squadrons that the InAF is looking for, now that the Su-30 has proved itself as a good fighter to InAF.

In a low speed post-merge manoeuvring fight, with a high off-boresight 4th generation missile and Helmet Mounted Display, the Super Hornet will be a very difficult opponent for any current Russian fighter, even the Su-27/30.

The analogue and early generation digital flight controls with hard-wired or hard-coded AoA limiters used in the Russian aircraft are a generation behind the Super Hornet and a much more experienced pilot will be required for the Russian types to match the ease with which the Super Hornet handles high alpha flight regimes.

There is just one problem with that, the Su-30s will be armed with similar high off bore sight missiles and HMDs and the comment about more experienced pilots is just strange, there is no way anyone can know that till the birds start falling from the sky (or is there?)

 

[fulcrum]

well firstly SH for USN has 7.5 g limit and the RAAF version has a 9g limit. The Aim-120 D's range is well over 110NM or 200km against a non-maneuvering target, its range is over 50% more than the Aim-120C-7 which has a max range of 120km. Aim-120 C-5 has a range of 105km or roughly over 60NM. read the article below as well will give u an idea of its real range.

No.. both of them have the same G limit.

The link you gave says it has a 50% extra range than the 120c. C-5 or C-7.. Don't know which C it is.
And besides how did you get the C-7 range? I'd like to have a link for that.

Also even if we go by your 120km max range. 50% will actually be only 180 kms. 60% increase will be 192 km. ONLY A 67% INCREASE WILL BE 200 Kms.

The heck are you talking about US storing BVRs at home, go look around how many customers have already received the Aim-120 C-7 and how many orders have been placed and full-filled. ok even if what you say is even remotely true, the Rafale, EF wont have a primary A2A missile till Meteor arrives which is btw mindless drivel since both Ef and Rafale deploy the Aim-120 C-7 as their primary A2A missiles as of now. so again bro please bring something meaningful to the discussion.

India is neither an Ally nor a chumcha state. And besides U.S has some business in Pakistan which is our prime enemy. Do you seriously believe U.S would let us keep the Amraams and have a war with pakistan knowing we could jeopardize their operations in afghanistan.

Ex-pilots who never flew the SH have no clue, the guys who test flew for the Aussies recommended its purchase. Its fly away cost and life time expense will depend on IAF evaluations and we as of yet have no clue which aircraft has the lowest operational costs. Surely Gripen, Falcon will lead the way. The remaining is hard to say. The Sh has low cost per hour flight, here is some proof, page 14 of the file and page 10 of the document and i shal paste the figures; by the way the document is from July 2009

$8,333 per flight hour provided by a new F/A-18E/F (at a 6,000 flight hour life, the cost per flight hour of a new F/A-18E/F would fall even further to $5,814 if those planes are similarly extended to 8,600 flight hours as have legacy F/A-18s).

(A bit further in the same document). The Navy projects that the F/A-18E/F will remain in the fleet until at least 2040, and should be able to use most or all of the full service life of any newly purchased aircraft.

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/weapons/RL30624.pdf

so at purchase the SH has 6000 hours and has a cost of $8333 per flight hour and this cost falls to roughly $5814 is the life is extended by anther 2600 hours. This shows that USN will use till 2040, gr8 so SH will have upgrades over life time and its the aircraft that's upgraded even faster than the Raptor. wow so many had so much crap to say about the SH but, my Rolls Royce Phantom has a much higher annual car insurance payment than the SH's cost per flight hour wow.

Now SH is also the first aircraft that is being tested with bio-fuel blends, ok we pay much for it but at least through out its life-time we can save millions because of bio-fuel blends.

So? Gripen has a $3000 per flight hour and Mig-35 has 2.5 less cost than Mig-29s.. and don't forget it costs almost half that of the F-18. Given the rip-off F-18 is it should have such operating costs.

The French have no BVRs beyond max range of 70km, now to get to Aim-120 D level would take another decade.
Please MBDA which is French, British, Italian and German together they aren't able to get the 100km Meteor out by 2017, you expect me to believe they can develop some better or longer range than that so soon?? wake up. more than 1/3 of our R-77s/R-27s in our inventory don't work, when the 100km range normal one doesn't work well, you expect me to be scared of a longer range r-77 which might not work a third of the time..hmm...even if it works well we have the MKI that can deploy 10 of those missiles in A2A, hence a mig-35 isn't so much of use. Mig is the worst choice, all the other contenders can deploy a wide range of PGMS and long range missiles, mig doesn't come close in such roles. Besides whats the use having a very long range R-77 M when the mig's AESA has max detection range of 130km for a 3m2 target..haha...this is a joke against the SH which can already engage its missiles at that range.

Meteror is a ramjet!! It's the next gen missile. Aim-120d is not a ramjet. It's operational range is 100+ km. It's max range is classified. If the europeans master ranjet technology then longer range ram jet missiles is just a breeze.
The development of Meteor is in its final stages. Though of a shorter range, it is hellva lot better than our 120D in some arms storage in the U.S.

Now The US could have downgraded our Phalcon or even rejected our request for it, yet they didn't, we have it and will receive more. They could have downgraded the P-8, now have they?? or do u think we would have ordered the P-8 if it was downgraded. We are not a threat to the US,we dont have to conduct nuke tests because we can simulate them on super computers, well we are about to test Agni-5 a borderline ICBM, the US knows that we are about to conduct a test next year, but hey no sanctions, N-deal, new nuke plants coming up, the heck are u talking about sanctions.

The western world is trying to cut down its nuke arsenal and we want to test more, the ****, we can take on our enemies both Pak and China with our Agni 1/2/3. why do we need to test more warheads?

Phalcon is a Isreali reverse engineered system. When the deal was done by Israelis and they assured us that U.S will not get in the way. Given the lobbies Israel has in washington, I'm not a bit surprised. And besides, AWACS is a big radar, not an offensive platform like a deep-strike fighter.
Read up on P-8 sale. P-8 is a purely commercial sale thanks to boeing licenses in advance. The U.S DoD/State department cannot have a say in such sales.
F-18 is different. There is no Israel to back us up. And it is a offensive strike fighter featuring U.S tech.

Super computers??? lol If simulation is all that matters then we can simulate everything without testing. Simulation can never ever ever replace real-time testing. Those nations have tested hundreds to thousand nukes and obtained all operational and design data to feed into their computers to obtain the simulation results, and even then those sim results won't be taken for granted. We exploded a small fire cracker nuke, which is still not known whether it was successful or not.. but magically can simulate large nukes? Are you joking?
Cutting down to what extent? Even with the recent start negotiations, they still have thousands and thousands of nukes EVEN FEATURING MEGATON ONES!!!

An ICBM is an ICBM. The next Agni is definitely not an ICBM.

Or do u think US is waking up everyday just to find a reason to put sanctions on us, moron, a country like the US cant deny the attractiveness of the largest democratic market in the world, they know we are peaceful and we don't provoke anything until we are seriously threatened.

Oi.. avoid name calling.

The U.S is a short sighted stupid country which can't even call spade a spade. As long as they are involved in Pakistan, they won't let us touch pakistan. So expect sanctions being repeated several times the moment we threaten pakistan.

Yeah battling bearded mullahs...did you forget how the Russians ran with their tail between their legs when those very mullahs screwed them over and over again. Did u forget those mullahs who easily took the lives over 170 people in mumbai, they don't fear death and such an enemy is never to be underestimated. Those mullahs are the biggest threat to world peace and the way they seem to grow, they are the biggest threat to India. Or do u think we just keep ranting for no reason about how Pakistani nukes are not safe because of those same mullahs.

So? the last time I checked Mullahs can't fly and can't launch amraams. Launching bombs on Ak-47 equipped morons is hardly an achievement.

Even the Pakistanis are not stupid to go for conflict with India. People mentioned the pressure US put on us after 26/11 sure we didn't go for surgical strikes but you think the Pakis would have kept quiet, had we gone for conflict after 26/11, today the sub-continent would been drenched in the aftermaths of nuclear devastation. We don't have any defenses against Pakistani cruise or ballistic missiles as of yet, sure we are working on capabilities but we know that Pakistan doesn't care about deploying nukes first, the smartest thing we did was not go to war coz the Pakistanis would have launched against us for sure in retaliation and if we would have started the conflict we would have lost credibility and international support on the case against Pak.

Pak, Iran, NK, Venezuela etc. have sanctions yes, but why heck is everyone comparing India to them why the flying F*** is everyone comparing us to other scum, does everyone here under-estimate the power of India. None of them can match our scale, our economy or our behavior as a democracy. And what $11 billion spare cash??? wow, the US is over 12 trillion in debt keep that in mind. Its not spare cash for anyone, not anymore.

lol.. launching nukes for a few strikes? I can't believe the extent you're going to justify a foreign nation's pressure on our country. They had no right to do so. What we do, is our decision. Are you even an Indian.. can't believe you're supporting the U.S so blatantly. What's the color of your passport?

The U.S has some bussiness in pakistan, they would never let India attack pakistan.

ok stop mis-stating the truth, EUVA states we choose the location and time of inspections and not the US. Its obvious you have a lot to research so please find more and come with fitting replies and not gibberish. They haven't downgraded the Phalcon, P-8, C-130J, Paveways, so i have no reason to believe they will downgrade SH or SV.

You're the one who is mis-stating here. It's Bilateral dammit! We don't get to choose alone.. U.S has a say too.
In any case I never heard of such blatant crap from the Russians! Inspection.. like hell!! F*ck U.S and its inspections.

The link above has a part called "observations" described by the Aussie pilot who test flew it. I am pasting it, now that's a real active duty pilot talking about it and not some retired old fart. So read carefully before replying, its plain english. btw the radar he speaks of is the APG-73 and not the APG-79 being offered to us.

2.7 Observations

The Super Hornet is a fighter with exceptional handling qualities, even by modern fighter standards, which even a novice can handle comfortably and with confidence at the edge of the low speed manoeuvre envelope.

The point which Boeing and the US Navy have made most convincingly, is that the aircraft's flight control software is so robust that even a beginner on the type can fly it without embarrassing himself too badly. Sceptics should note that test pilot comments about fighters with this generation of flight controls being as easy to fly as a Cessna 172 are indeed correct. There is no room for argument here, as I had the opportunity to observe first hand!

In the hands of an experienced combat pilot, such flight control software means that the pilot can be wholly focussed on the furball in progress, and need not devote any thought to pushing the aircraft past the edge into a uncontrolled departure and resulting risk of a ground impact or successful enemy missile shot. The importance of a substantially departure resistant aircraft, especially if encumbered with stores, cannot be understated - carefree handling translates directly into combat effectiveness.

In a low speed post-merge manoeuvring fight, with a high off-boresight 4th generation missile and Helmet Mounted Display, the Super Hornet will be a very difficult opponent for any current Russian fighter, even the Su-27/30. The analogue and early generation digital flight controls with hard-wired or hard-coded AoA limiters used in the Russian aircraft are a generation behind the Super Hornet and a much more experienced pilot will be required for the Russian types to match the ease with which the Super Hornet handles high alpha flight regimes.

The reports emanating from carrier landing trials performed in the US cannot be disputed, the aircraft is a sheer delight in the circuit and will take much of the anxiety out of night and bad weather traps, especially for nugget fighter-attack pilots.

The cockpit ergonomics build upon two decades of Hornet experience, and make for a very comfortable and easy to use cockpit environment. Again, a novice pilot will find the MFD modes easy to navigate and easy to follow. The colour moving map display makes navigational orientation ridiculously easy, against the mental chores of VOR/DME/TACAN, radar mapping and INS/map-on-the-knee navigation. The prospect of MIDS/RWR/radar/IFF tracks being overlayed on the moving map will take much effort out of maintaining wider area situational awareness.

The radar is very easy to use in MMTI, GMTI and SAR spot mapping modes, and provides an excellent tool for highly accurate all weather maritime strike, littoral strike and battlefield interdiction operations. In particular, the ability to interleave MTI and surface mapping modes is exceptionally useful for resolving and identifying moving surface targets of opportunity.

In conclusion, the reports of the Hornet's exceptional high alpha handling characteristics are provably correct.



so with new GE 414 EPE engine SH will have 20% extra thrust per engine, the engine also has lower fuel burn than the GE 414-400 and hence range is increased. TOT will come, the nature of competition will make sure the US gives full-tot, it will be a last minute bombshell that will put the SH in favour among the top 3.

And excuse me the SH is not a multirole???? haha.. hello A2A, A2G, maritime missions, fighter sweep, escorts, interdiction, interceptions, quick reaction, ground support, deep strike, cruise missile defense, PGMs, recon, awacs and tanker roles. SH is the mother of all multiroles. none of the others can dream to do what the SH does since day one.

hahahahaha.. you posted the main man himself. The guy is THE prime target for those ex-pilots in those forums.
That guy is not a pilot, he a lobbiest for Boeing who arm twisted the Aussie govt to get the SH. Without him there would have been no SH in australia.
That guy is also asking for F-22 raptors to protect australia from invading Indians, yes we Indians,.. did you know that?

What the heck.. Here you go, this was the forum I was talking about: PPRuNe Forums - Professional Pilots Rumour Network which stands for Professional Pilots Rumour Network.

The main man: Carlo Copp says!!! - PPRuNe Forums

 

[Dark Sorrow]

It seems every plane is a multi role plane, however a plane like the Super Hornet with its strike role coming before its fighter role seems to be a good choice for filling in 7 to 8 squadrons that the InAF is looking for, now that the Su-30 has proved itself as a good fighter to InAF.

SH is a true multi-role plane. For SEAD and DEAD operation SH is best candidate. Its EW suite and JHMCS are the best aviable in international market.
Missions performed
(1) Anti-Air Warfare
(2) Fighter Escort
(3) SEAD
(4) Forward Air Controller
(5) Day Night Precission Strike
(6) Areal Refueling
GE414 are extremely fuel efficient and is regarded as one of the best in its class. And as USN is using it, SH will remain in service for atleast 15-20 years, with periodic upgrades aviable.
APG-79 is far superior to Bars in MKI.
SH will be able to efficiently use CBU-105 and Paveway in IAFs inventory. The only problem will be AIM-120 and AIM-9 as the would be completely new in IAFs inventory and currently no jet in IAF uses them.

 

[Payeng]

A Fighter jet is as good as it have the liberty to attack enemy territory, can F-18 deliver it in the true sense?

 

[F-14]

one thing will be the AIM 9X it is off boresight

 

[fulcrum]

There is just one problem with that, the Su-30s will be armed with similar high off bore sight missiles and HMDs and the comment about more experienced pilots is just strange, there is no way anyone can know that till the birds start falling from the sky (or is there?)

That guy is is a paid lobby for Boeing.

A Fighter jet is as good as it have the liberty to attack enemy territory, can F-18 deliver it in the true sense?

Liberty? If you're talking about political liberty it depends on the U.S.. so it won't have the liberty to attack if the enemy is pakistan.
If you're only talking about fighting through junks which are present in PAF arsenal, then it can.

 

[Payeng]

to be the devil's advocate PAF arsenal should not be taken as junks, that would be under estimation.

Again permission to use ones own strategic assets doesn't worth anything.

 

[Dark Sorrow]

India is neither an Ally nor a chumcha state. And besides U.S has some business in Pakistan which is our prime enemy.

Every defence analyst in delhi has agreed upon that china is a bigger threat to India compaired to pakistan, making china the prime enemy. Its time you also agree on this fact. For this same reason US and India are coming closer i.e. to contain china.

You do seriously believe U.S would let us keep the Amraams and have a war with pakistan knowing we could jeopardise their operations in afghanistan.

It doesnot matter which plane we buy, till US has its intrest in Afganistan and its supply route passes through Pakistan, US won't allow us to go on a war with Pakistan.

So? Gripen has a $3000 per flight hour and Mig-35 has 2.5 less cost than Mig-29s.. and don't forget it costs almost half that of the F-18. Given the rip-off F-18 is it should have such operating costs.

Operation cost is not a major factor. IAF is far capable to maintain and operate any jet in the deal. If operation cost was the factor the EF-2K and Rafale should be out of question.

Meteror is a ramjet!! It's the next gen missile. Aim-120d is not a ramjet. It's operational range is 100+ km. It's max range is classified. If the europeans master ranjet technology then longer range ram jet missiles is just a breeze.
The development of Meteor is in its final stages. Though of a shorter range, it is hellva lot better than our 120D in some arms storage in the U.S.

The problem with meteor is that it

is too expensive as a BVR. If you
see 120D it is designed to

conserve as much energy as possible. It suffers very less drag. Meteor on the other hand is built on a different concept that missile doesnot need to carry oxidizer for the fuel with itself. Ramjet engine tend to suffer a lot more drag and turbulence.

Super computers??? lol If simulation is all that matters then we can simulate everything without testing. Simulation can never ever ever replace real-time testing. Those nations have tested hundreds to thousand nukes and obtained all operational and design data to feed into their computers to obtain the simulation results, and even then those sim results won't be taken for granted. We exploded a small fire cracker nuke, which is still not known whether it was successful or not.. but magically can simulate large nukes? Are you joking?
Cutting down to what extent? Even with the recent start negotiations, they still have thousands and thousands of nukes EVEN FEATURING MEGATON ONES!!!

With appropriate knowledge it

can be done.

The U.S is a short sighted stupid country which can't even call spade a spade. As long as they are involved in Pakistan, they won't let us touch pakistan. So expect sanctions being repeated several times the moment we threaten pakistan.

Point totally agreed but I would say US is the smartest country. It just gets what it wants by hook or crook.

The U.S has some bussiness in pakistan, they would never let India attack pakistan.

I completely agree with you on

this.

It's still inspection. I never heard of such blatant crap from the russians! Inspection.. like hell!! f*ck you U.S.

I also don't like this clause but every country has its own protocols.

That guy is also asking for F-22 raptors to protect australia from invading Indians, yes we Indians,.. did you know that?

I heard something that for first time.

 

[Dark Sorrow]

A Fighter jet is as good as it have the liberty to attack enemy territory, can F-18 deliver it in the true sense?

Gone are the days when wars fought were local and bombing enemies city would just result in loss of yours enemy's economy. Today in the era of globalization every country tends to invest in every other country in some or other way. When two countries go on war third party also suffers loss and no one likes loss. Thus any conflict tends to attract global attention, mounting international pressure on both countries to stop fighting. Forget SH our air force won't have liberty to use Tejas as per their will. People in our country be it politicians, bussiness men, burocrat and comman man are just intrested in good business.

 

[Payeng]

Gone are the days when wars fought were local and bombing enemies city would just result in loss of yours enemy's economy. Today in the era of globalization every country tends to invest in every other country in some or other way. When two countries go on war third party also suffers loss and no one likes loss. Thus any conflict tends to attract global attention, mounting international pressure on both countries to stop fighting. Forget SH our air force won't have liberty to use Tejas as per their will. People in our country be it politicians, bussiness men, burocrat and comman man are just intrested in good business.

You are right Dark Sorrow but we should keep out options open for the worst.

 

[Dark Sorrow]

This thread has grown to big. I suggest mods to close this thread and open a new thread for MMRCA discussion.

 

[kuku]

SH is a true multi-role plane. For SEAD and DEAD operation SH is best candidate. Its EW suite and JHMCS are the best aviable in international market.
Missions performed

(1) Anti-Air Warfare
(2) Fighter Escort
(3) SEAD
(4) Forward Air Controller
(5) Day Night Precission Strike
(6) Areal Refueling

GE414 are extremely fuel efficient and is regarded as one of the best in its class. And as USN is using it, SH will remain in service for atleast 15-20 years, with periodic upgrades aviable.
APG-79 is far superior to Bars in MKI.

SH will be able to efficiently use CBU-105 and Paveway in IAFs inventory. The only problem will be AIM-120 and AIM-9 as the would be completely new in IAFs inventory and currently no jet in IAF uses them.

SEAD and DEAD as effective as USN requires equally evolved electronic intelligence gathering capability and something like the EA-18 growler, which no nation will get its hands on.

Almost every contender in this tender will provide for a EW suite and a HMD, if you claim one of them to be superior then i would prefer a comparison between all of them, not that i am questioning your opinion, its just that i would perfer to understand it.

The missions you list can be completed by all of the contenders to various degrees.

For the USN the F-18E/F increases strike mission survivability and supplements the F-14 Tomcat in fleet air defense.

It truly is a very effective strike fighter, something that i think is exactly what the InAF needs, it is however not designed like a Eurofighter with the primary purpose of air to air combat in mind.

In a conflict in which US military is involved air superiority will not be tasked to this plane from the USN.

In this tender the APG-79 will not be judged with regards to teh N011 Bars.

Outside of the Russian contender most planes will bring in new weapon types.

 

[fulcrum]

to be the devil's advocate PAF arsenal should not be taken as junks, that would be under estimation.

Not underestimating payeng.. just a passing remark.

Every defence analyst in delhi has agreed upon that china is a bigger threat to India compaired to pakistan, making china the prime enemy. Its time you also agree on this fact. For this same reason US and India are coming closer i.e. to contain china.

Don't believe that. China is a threat, but saying they are a bigger threat than pakistan is over stretching it. The chances of a war with pakistan is definitely higher than China.

It doesnot matter which plane we buy, till US has its intrest in Afganistan and its supply route passes through Pakistan, US won't allow us to go on a war with Pakistan.

Precisely.. that was what I was saying to the earlier poster too.

Operation cost is not a major factor. IAF is far capable to maintain and operate any jet in the deal. If operation cost was the factor the EF-2K and Rafale should be out of question.

Yup.. couldn't agree more. IAF is not a cash starved AF.
Was just responding to the john guy who was making a big deal about that cost.

The problem with meteor is that it

is too expensive as a BVR. If you
see 120D it is designed to

conserve as much energy as possible. It suffers very less drag. Meteor on the other hand is built on a different concept that missile doesnot need to carry oxidizer for the fuel with itself. Ramjet engine tend to suffer a lot more drag and turbulence.

But still it is a next gen missile. In future almost all BVR missiles will be based on Ramjet technology. Even U.S and Russian are working on them. It can get farther than any conventinal missle with the same amount of propellant can.

The price of Meteor is high because it is still an incomplete and a brand new missile with no previous infrastructure to manufacture it. If ordered in bulk and when a production line opens, the price will come down.

With appropriate knowledge it can be done.

No it can't. No simulation can substitute for actual testing. The real world has a lot of factors and the way they interact with each other can never be simulated accurately by using simulation. Especially India which has very little nuke data to being with.
If simulation is all that takes, then there won't be any testing of anything. It would be straight to production, be it cars or missiles. Given the fact that we are taking about nuclear weapons, where a humongous energy release takes place in a fraction of a second after neutron bombardment on atoms in sub-atomic levels, you can't simulate that 100% accurately in a computer.

Point totally agreed but I would say US is the smartest country. It just gets what it wants by hook or crook.

Yeah.. smart on the tactical level, dumb on a strategic/long term level.

I also don't like this clause but every country has its own protocols.

The Russians don't have it, and neither do the french. Their protocol is demeaning.

I heard something that for first time.

australia invaded - Key Publishing Ltd Aviation Forums

 

[Dark Sorrow]

australia invaded - Key Publishing Ltd Aviation Forums

That dicussion was really stupid, waste of my time and bandwidth.

 

[ppgj]

all agree our mki's are superior or equal to any of the mrca contenders why don't get more of the same.


considering india's size,growth potential,knowledge pool-it is surprising that we still depend on others for our defence/security needs.time has come to put an end to the procurement of arms/aircrafts etc with mrcabeing the last.we should spend on r&d in all spheres of defence equipment and become self reliant.

 

[K Factor]

all agree our mki's are superior or equal to any of the mrca contenders why don't get more of the same.

Yes, they are good but essentially,they are 35 year old airframes (though heavily modified). Moving forward in the next 10 years, 50 % of IAF inventory will be phased out. We need the MRCA to maintain our strength levels. We cannot produce as many MKIs as required to maintain squadron levels.

Also, MKI is currently used in an Air-Superiority role, with a secondary strike element. We need more potent strike force.

Also, there is one saying, "never put all your eggs in the same basket" .

As to your second post, we can reverse engineer and mass produce fighters and other defence equipment if we wanted. BUT, they would be cheap fakes.

We don't compromise on quality.

 

[John]

well the US has been simulating all kinds of nuke tests since 1992 when they seized testing so don't know what you bitching about, besides if we test we're screwed the N-deal goes out the window, now last i checked its more important to have a decent electricity supply in the country rather than having a bomb that delivers a bigger explosion, screw the nuke test, there is no need for it, we still have enough nukes with good enough yields to wipe out both China and PAk may times over. so screw your obsession for testing. Testing will only slow the peace process by a few decades both with China and PAk and not to mention the integrity we loose across the world.

secondly the article was written with a lot of detail regarding the SH flying qualities, now a fake pilot can't write stuff like that. so again find me more proof as this guy was fake and dont give some forum based proof that's pure jack shite to me. besides you want an impartial view on its handling, well here it is... even IAF pilots love it..

Strengths

It was Boeing, remember, that changed the entire complexion of the MMRCA, by "elbowing" (a phrase used by the IAF, but not with acrimony) itself into what was to be a competition for a medium-weight, medium-range fighterplane. It was also Boeing which virtually pulled the rug from under the other contenders by being the first to express its intention to supply an active electronically-scalled array (AESA) radar with its contender -- the highly respected Raytheon APG-79 radar. It was only after the IAF began doggedly pursuing information on the Raytheon radar and export licensing information that the other five contenders jumped onto the bandwagon and began either offering AESA radars, or publicising them in a more emphatic manner. The IAF recognises that unwaveringly, but still gives Boeing credit for changing the game. Among the six competing radars, the IAF has also been most exposed to the capabilities of the APG-79 that comes with the Super Hornet, in simulators and live flights. One IAF pilot who took the front seat in a Super Hornet at Aero India 2007 said he found the airplane's digital flight control system (FCS) to be possibly the most mature and intelligent in the world on a fourth generation aircraft. Many in the IAF are of the opinion that alleviation of pilot workload is something that has been achieved in a dramatic way in the Super Hornet -- its cockpit, one pilot says, is the very definition of convenience, automation and ergonomics. The AN/ASQ-228 advanced targeting forward looking infrared (ATFLIR) targeting pod is considered on par, if not better, than Lockheed-Martin's equivalent on the F-16IN. A lot of folks thought the fact that the Super Hornet is a naval fighter would be a downer, but no -- it has actually translated into its acceptance as a far more rugged, quick reaction fighter, which the Super Hornet undoubtedly is. In demonstration flight debriefs, the IAF has been careful to note that the airplane's short take-off capability with near full combat load is undeniable, as are its handling characteristics at low altitude with the same load. The Super Hornet comes backed by a firm that the government of India has a lot of experience dealing with. The fact that ahead of the F-35C, the US Navy's air arm is being standardised across roles on the Super Hornet platform is a source of great reassurance, for its reputation as the Navy's next "swiss-army knife". Being fairly battle proven despite its freshness off the block is a good thing too.

LiveFist - The Best of Indian Defence: MRCA

Meteor wont be ready till 2017 by then US would have deployed a longer range scramjet BVR missile. The fact is even if we buy EF or Rafale we'll need to get the Aim-120 C-7 but with SV or SH we'll get Aim-120D till Meteor arrives. Besides with Aim-120D you still have first shot, even if the enemy is armed with Meteor that dont mean jack because the Aim-120D will kill him long before he gets a chance to fire the infamous meteor besides the SH can carry upto 12 Aim-120Ds. now at 2007 rates Meteor costed more than a million pounds and in 2017 its bound to cost even much more. By 2017 we will have our own home made Ram-jet Astra so **** the meteor or maybe even a scramjet Astra because by 2010 we would have mastered the scramjet tech starting with Brahmos-2. so yeah whether EF, Rafale or another aircraft we cant go to war with PAk without international support or permission of US.

more than half the ****ing country is in shambles and you want to spend more than a million pounds per missile?? you outta your mind?? why is it that now we suddenly have a 7-8% growth rate everybody thinks we have the luxury to throw money around, besides with people like ****ing Mayavati who spent over a 1000 crores for her own statues are in power do you really think Govt. funds actually reach the lowest levels of the economy?? India is still in shambles and that's the reality on the ground. As long as its a democracy there will always someone who will oppose paying so much for a ****ing missile or an aircraft platform. Drought has taken its tolls, food and water shortage is massive problem, half our cities are full of slums and you want us to buy million pound missiles, screw you.

US has donations in Pak and not ****ing business, US has business in India, which ****ing planet do you live? when was the last the Paks paid for anything? Our business value is gr8er for the US. yes thousands, they have many nukes, at peak times US had over 30000 warheads now its down to about 6000, now that's a massive drop and more cuts are on the way. As long as we have upto 800-1000 warheads is much much more than enough. Besides haven't you noticed that India has always been very humanitarian in wars, do u think we would simply launch against cities of our enemies, i know we wont, we have tactical nukes which will make sure we destroy only key installations and military targets with small easily deployable tactical nukes. I really dont think any PM would authorize a strike against any enemy city whether in China or Pak in an all out war. Besides for key installations within cities we will use weapons like the Brahmos 1/2, Nirbhay, Shaurya etc with conventional warheads and not ****ing nukes, we are a respectful nation and not blood thirsty butchers. Besides the karma of such atrocities would destroy our country years later.

well the mig-29 costs per flight are horrendous and 2.5 time drop still keeps the cost well over SH's cost per hour. SH outperforms the mig-35 in combat. The SH carries more missiles, detects, tracks and locks at a much longer ranges. Mig-35 can only dream of the kinda of multirole PGMS the SH can deploy. The SH performs more roles than the mig on any given second. The Gripen is not likely to win because our LCA mk-2 will outperform it or the LCA mk-2 program would also be in jeopardy.

SH is not the master of a certain trade, its the jack of all trades. If SH wins we'll go for the Aim-120D and Asraam/Python-5 as its primary missiles. Do you really think a single easy to fly SH armed with over 12 A2A BVR missiles will turn tail and run or will be scared of anyone?? The pilot flying it knows he can deploy more missiles than any aircraft in the world in a single sortie, he knows he has got the longest range radar deployed on any 4.5 gen fighter and can deploy some very cool, accurate, multirole and reasonable priced weapons at standoff ranges, he knows he can pull all kinds of military roles all this gives a pilot lots of confidence which he wont find in any other aircraft, no matter how hard he tries. What the EF, mig pass off as multirole is a joke. SH, SV, Rafale and Gripen NG are the most multirole. Now Gripen Ng is not a good choice, remain SV, SH or Rafale are fine with me but the price of the Rafale stings a lot.

Yes Phalcon is Israeli yet it contains a lot of US parts and no one can get the Phalcon without US permission. Israeli lobbies have nothing to do with it. US denied Israel from giving tech for Gripen NG and i am sure US will block the sale of Issy avionics even for the mig-35 if we choose the mig. The fact is Israel is a dog and US is the master, the only reason why Israel exists is continued US support. sure Phalcon is not a fighter but most of the tech on Phalcon and P-8 is far beyond the tech on any 4.5 fighter. Not to mention the P-8 can also launch weapons.

Again with the bitching about the EUVA, we have the choice of location and timing of inspections. Yes Russia never had inspections with anyone which is why the Chinese have reverse engineered every single Russian aircraft and missile and copied so much tech that they are not far from advanced tech like MATV, AESA, supercruising engines, very long range radars etc. There are two side to every action, inspections are both good and bad. Besides inspections last a couple of days, what the **** will inspect?? most of the time they will look at bullshit charts, walk about aircraft and talk about the functionality, have lunch, take a nap and go home to make love to their wives. Besides countries who are under US sanctions, all other friendly nations have had little or no hick ups in logistics, spares, lifetime service and upgradability. With so many nations buying US and opting to buying more from US, US is a proven reliable supplier to countries it considers friendly and we are bound to have more strategic relations with the US.

With half our projects in Russian suffering severe delays, many Russian missiles malfunctioning, problems even with MKI/mig-27/mig-29 spares on many occasions shows though its a string free supplier, its still a piss poor supplier who has no control over the other end of the supply chain. Thanx to Russia, China has a low cost, fully re-engineered, just as deadly massive armed force. At least US has not shyed away from banning defense sales or even donations to Pak. China or any given day is bigger threat than Pak. Pak aint jack and by 2015 Pak offensive abilities will have no effect on India. China is arming Pak as well so China is the real long term threat and our future needs are being catered more towards China because as of now we almost have everything to screw Pak violently.

The RFP would never have been sent to the US companies if MOD/IAF didn't consider the strategic implications of choosing a US platform or do you think they just blindly sent the RFP to all companies without thinking? Do you think we are so stupid as to not consider all this before we sent a RFP? Its because of US inclusion the qualitative requirements for the MRCA had to upgraded. Now do you also think that once we acquire a US platform that we wont do much to protect our interests or have a very high level of autonomy in usage?

Everything has been taken into consideration and the ideal candidate will win. The fact is yes after 26/11 we could have gone for surgical strikes but you think Pak would have kept quiet?? they would have seen our aggression as an all out war and they would have easily authorized nuke retaliation. Besides our strikes would have been launched using Brahmos and missiles like that, do u think when the Pak radar picks up a low flying cruise missile incoming from India, they have no idea if its nuke or conventional hence any such weapons they will certainly launch nukes against us. Thats the problem with nuke powers, today if we see an incoming Paki ballistic missile, the moment we pick it up on radar, we will ready our nukes for launch and fire
because we have no idea whether the payload is nuke or conventional or do you think we would wait till the enemy missile drops to find out whether its nuke or conventional before we fire back with nukes. I thank god for US pressure which prevented us from making a mistake. We would have lost all credibility which we gained through our historical war-time behavior.

You cant screw with the US because its a nation built from the world, its a mix of the whole world. Europeans, Africans, Asians, south Americans,the whole world is in the US, cant screw with that. Which is why you will find the smartest people over there as well as the the world's biggest morons. get used our closeness to them, stop bitching and hanging on to what they did to us ages ago. Its a whole new ball game and we will play more and more with the US.