so it is., there is not much news about RR collaboration though ., who is going to partner with them , hope it is the private sector but most likely a public sector entity given it is likely to come with some IPR ., maybe we will know more after BJs visit to Indiaramana wrote:83+40= 123 Tejas. Add Mk2.
Add the RR engine in the works.Essentially very tough to import combat jets after 2024.
Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019
Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019
Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019
Testing takes years and I don't think there is even a design that one could talk about today. If they really are serious, they should go for ORCA with K9+. Unless we operate at least a fighter with our engine, we cannot get any solid development going.
Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019
Years of testing does not matter, even if 10., it will be in time for a future variant of the AMCA.basant wrote:Testing takes years and I don't think there is even a design that one could talk about today. If they really are serious, they should go for ORCA with K9+. Unless we operate at least a fighter with our engine, we cannot get any solid development going.
Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019
Agreed. What I was referring to was about delay in placing order for F404s and that RR engine shouldn't be a reason for that.
Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019
Are there any public sources that are feeding the pylon mounted IRST speculation?
Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019
The RR engine is for AMCA onlee. The 1As will have F404s. (MWF will have F414.) So we better get an order placed for F404s.basant wrote:Agreed. What I was referring to was about delay in placing order for F404s and that RR engine shouldn't be a reason for that.
But can an engine order even be placed without the formal signing of the order for the 83?