In case it is delayed, and frankly I can't imagine why (considering the amount of experience gained in producing the tiny LCA), they can easily order more LCA.Kartik wrote:I really really hope that the IAF leadership sees the writing on the wall. With a stated goal of 6 years for first flight, an IAF ORCA variant of the TEDBF could achieve a nearly similar first flight target. One can bet that there won't be even the first of the 114 MRCAs coming in by then.Cain Marko wrote: Frankly, do we need anyMRCA when this beauty is on the way?
I was screaming and arguing about this fighter for the past many years. NLCA should've been a twin engined design from the beginning.
Esp. After the IAF complained of lower thrust for the LCA in the mid-late 2000s. The entire LCA2, NLCA and MRCA should have been combined into one fighter. ORCA. by now we'd be inducting it in numbers. An easy rafale equivalent mass produced at Desi prices.
Why spend $20 billion on an import when an ORCA is well within the reach of the local industry? Private sector industries could be roped in from the beginning to work on specific work packages to lighten the increased load on ADA and HAL engineering resources.
the IAF could compromise and agree that an additional 36-48 Rafales would be what they could get - 72 to 84 Rafales is 3/4th of their original MRCA requirement anyway.
And the remaining 114 could be ORCA.
I would even go so far as to say that they should straight away replace the mwf numbers with additional mk1a. That bird will be more than enough at the lower end of the inventory. Although I'm not sure how far they are more into mwf design as of now. This will allow Hal to increase production capacity and really ramp up numbers driving down costs.
Let orca and amca be the main Ada projects for the next 15-20 years. That can be followed by a stealth LCA based ucav.
This lost opportunity truly pains me.