The Indo Russian PAK-FA Project
Re: The Indo Russian PAK-FA Project
The latest news says that trials will start by this month itself..!
Re: The Indo Russian PAK-FA Project
It has a Radar Cross Section (RCS) of just 0.5 square metre as compared to the Su-30MKI’s RCS of about 20 square metres.”
Re: The Indo Russian PAK-FA Project
Hmm nice article with a romantic "touch" , the only thing being on how different the India variant if to the Russian, different news reports have suggested different things... Hmm sounds a good mix of 50 single seated and 200 double seated.. Since I believe the PakFa should only be air superiority and enemy suppression mode to make the first cut into defences, if that works sounds good.sankum wrote:Ajai Shukla article
India, Russia close to PACT on next generation fighter
The major worry being the assimiliation part and the effects on MCA though reports have indicated that MCA is of a different class and would be independent of the PAkFA. Also invitaton of bids by the Navy to Lockheed for F35 also is a potential game changer.
Now PakFa: India goes in surely
F-35: being bid has decent chances to win
MCA: signs of Kaveri-Snecma JV, news reports of designs etc sound well
Only thing is all are next gen fighters with different tonnages, classes, costs and strings attached. I would love to see all work in the India context but do all work well in a combo and does India need all 3 working in tandem in the India armed forces and ofc the cost aspects.
Needs to discussed into quite a bit.
Re: The Indo Russian PAK-FA Project
I hope and pray the officer was mistaken. A RCS of 0.5m would put the T-50s stealth at par with the Rafale and Eurofighter. The F-22 and F-35 are in a completely different league.It has a Radar Cross Section (RCS) of just 0.5 square metre as compared to the Su-30MKI’s RCS of about 20 square metres.”
Whatever other capabilities the PAKFA project brings to the table, stealth remains the most crucial factor defining a fifth generation aircraft.
Re: The Indo Russian PAK-FA Project
To me, the most interesting line in the entire article was:
Is Russia still in such dire straits economically to be enticed to allow Indian partnership solely for the Cash India will bring to the project ? Strange indeed .
(Part II: FGFA negotiating hardball: Russia says India brings little to the table)
Re: The Indo Russian PAK-FA Project
At 100MM/aircraft for a production run of 500 aircrafts means $50Billion, add $10Billion for R&D which brings total to $60billion. That's alot of money for anyone.
Cost per aircraft would shoot up if size of production lot decreases. More than R&D money India brings a lot of money as a joint customer.
Cost per aircraft would shoot up if size of production lot decreases. More than R&D money India brings a lot of money as a joint customer.
Re: The Indo Russian PAK-FA Project
[
both Euro-canards claim such low RCS values only when they're flying clean, which happens during airshows only mostly. in an actual combat scenario, there is no way the Euro-canards will have 0.5 m2 RCS, since they let their drop tanks and weapons hang on external pylons. the PAK-FA with internally carried weapons and large enough internal fuel reserves, in most combat missions will fly clean. only during ferry missions will it need to carry drop tanks, and even that cannot be said for sure (considering the Su-30MKI almost never carries any).vnomad wrote:I hope and pray the officer was mistaken. A RCS of 0.5m would put the T-50s stealth at par with the Rafale and Eurofighter. The F-22 and F-35 are in a completely different league.It has a Radar Cross Section (RCS) of just 0.5 square metre as compared to the Su-30MKI’s RCS of about 20 square metres.”
Whatever other capabilities the PAKFA project brings to the table, stealth remains the most crucial factor defining a fifth generation aircraft.
Re: The Indo Russian PAK-FA Project
Wrt the PAK-FA twin seat version that India seems to be overwhelmingly interested in.
Is it correct to assume that with AWACS support, a lot of the work performed by the WSO in twin seater fighter is redundant, and is taken over by the AWACS controllers themselves? Then the fighter can perform just as well with adequate fusion of information for the pilot.
It is only six months now that India is operating its own AWACS in a big way. Perhaps the requirement of twin seater fighter might change?
Both the USAF and the Russian AF which operate AWACS opted for single seater FGFAs
Is it correct to assume that with AWACS support, a lot of the work performed by the WSO in twin seater fighter is redundant, and is taken over by the AWACS controllers themselves? Then the fighter can perform just as well with adequate fusion of information for the pilot.
It is only six months now that India is operating its own AWACS in a big way. Perhaps the requirement of twin seater fighter might change?
Both the USAF and the Russian AF which operate AWACS opted for single seater FGFAs
Re: The Indo Russian PAK-FA Project
Value add (from the AS article):
Late last year, a defence ministry delegation to Sukhoi’s flagship aircraft facility in Siberia became the first Indians to set eyes upon the next-generation fighter that is slated to form the backbone of the future Indian Air Force (IAF). In that first meeting, carefully choreographed by Sukhoi, the new fighter, standing on the tarmac waved a welcome to the Indians, moving all its control fins simultaneously.
Re: The Indo Russian PAK-FA Project
Its most definitely misinformation. There is no way Ajay Shukla knows the real RCS of the PAK-FA. The .5m^2 is most likely what he was told to quote. Besides the RAM coatings on PAK-FA and the shape of PAK-FA the build quality will also play a role in its RCS. Russian fighters weren't exactly known for their quality.I hope and pray the officer was mistaken. A RCS of 0.5m would put the T-50s stealth at par with the Rafale and Eurofighter. The F-22 and F-35 are in a completely different league.
Whatever other capabilities the PAKFA project brings to the table, stealth remains the most crucial factor defining a fifth generation aircraft.
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 13112
- Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
- Location: Ban se dar nahin lagta , chootiyon se lagta hai .
Re: The Indo Russian PAK-FA Project
RCS figures would be a closely guarded secret (no OEM will put on these on any data sheet at least not before the AC's replacements are in the pipeline ) , having said that 0.5 msq is a safe guesstimate for an AC without any external stores and built for LPI .
B_patel I would say perhaps 'finish' yes but quality wise some of their AC have been right up there alongside the best what US/WEST could offer and fwiw former too is changing as the over emphasis on 'numbers' is no longer feasible and required as far as RU is concerned.
B_patel I would say perhaps 'finish' yes but quality wise some of their AC have been right up there alongside the best what US/WEST could offer and fwiw former too is changing as the over emphasis on 'numbers' is no longer feasible and required as far as RU is concerned.
Re: The Indo Russian PAK-FA Project
Wiki says that RCS depends on distance between the source and the target...but every one quoting RCS seem to ignore the fact...!
Am I mistaken...!
Am I mistaken...!
Re: The Indo Russian PAK-FA Project
that confirms it ,if we are going for 200 twin seat version of Pak-FA and already have or will have 250+ MKI special WSO will be brought in ,i have seen a picture of MKI crew with Half wing in his chest , is it for WSO ??
Re: The Indo Russian PAK-FA Project
If the PAK-FA has a RCS of 0.5sq m it is really bad news.
The detection distance is proportional to the fourth root of RCS.
That means to reduce the detection distance by half you have to reduce the RCS by 16.
PAK-FA will be no match for either the F-22 or the F-35 if the RCS is 0.5sq m.
My guess is that even LCA with its composites and delta wing has an RCS of around 1 sq m without weapons.
PAK-FA should target an RCS of around 0.01sq m and be equipped with an X-band AESA augmented with L-band AESA along with IRST and other advanced avionics to even stand chance against F-22
The detection distance is proportional to the fourth root of RCS.
That means to reduce the detection distance by half you have to reduce the RCS by 16.
PAK-FA will be no match for either the F-22 or the F-35 if the RCS is 0.5sq m.
My guess is that even LCA with its composites and delta wing has an RCS of around 1 sq m without weapons.
PAK-FA should target an RCS of around 0.01sq m and be equipped with an X-band AESA augmented with L-band AESA along with IRST and other advanced avionics to even stand chance against F-22
-
- BRFite
- Posts: 185
- Joined: 16 Aug 2009 21:22
Re: The Indo Russian PAK-FA Project
I would like to believe that the RCS figure was put in the article on my request.
Hear ij sum tope seekreet Inphormation abut RCS, just phor eyor aankhen :
http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htairf ... 51125.aspx
The super hornet, the UAE's F-16's are all flying the 5the gen AESA radars. The data fusion capability is really expected of anything made in today's world be it tanks, ships or aircrafts. But low RCS is what 5th gen is all about:Ajai Sir,
I have a question that I have been dying to know for a very long time.
Can you answer it, out of F-22, F-35, F-117 and FGFA, which aircraft has the smallest radar cross-section?(I know that 117 is not in U.S. service right now)
I want to know it because the stealth is the most distinguishing feature of a fifth gen. a/c. Given that radar tech. is improving every day an a/c with the smalled RCS should have an advantage over others.
Thank You,
Vijay
Hear ij sum tope seekreet Inphormation abut RCS, just phor eyor aankhen :
http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htairf ... 51125.aspx
Re: The Indo Russian PAK-FA Project
About the RCS, everyone should stay calm until more details come out.
Regarding the importance of RCS, it's worth noting that Carlo Kopp (of Air Power Australia) says than an Su-35 (or MKI) can handle a JSF. http://ausairpower.net/APA-Flanker.html
Also worth reading is Bill Sweetman's article, "Stealthy Sukhois." http://preview.tinyurl.com/yzpc36p
Regarding the importance of RCS, it's worth noting that Carlo Kopp (of Air Power Australia) says than an Su-35 (or MKI) can handle a JSF. http://ausairpower.net/APA-Flanker.html
Also worth reading is Bill Sweetman's article, "Stealthy Sukhois." http://preview.tinyurl.com/yzpc36p
Re: The Indo Russian PAK-FA Project
Kartik wrote:
both Euro-canards claim such low RCS values only when they're flying clean, which happens during airshows only mostly. in an actual combat scenario, there is no way the Euro-canards will have 0.5 m2 RCS, since they let their drop tanks and weapons hang on external pylons. the PAK-FA with internally carried weapons and large enough internal fuel reserves, in most combat missions will fly clean. only during ferry missions will it need to carry drop tanks, and even that cannot be said for sure (considering the Su-30MKI almost never carries any).
All the same the F-22's RCS has been rumoured to be in the range of 0.001m^2.
Ah well, as long as its better than the Jxx...
Re: The Indo Russian PAK-FA Project
You are actually. The RCS is purely a property of the object and does not depend on the distance or power of the emitter.sumshyam wrote:Wiki says that RCS depends on distance between the source and the target...but every one quoting RCS seem to ignore the fact...!
Am I mistaken...!
Check the wiki article again, you probably misread it.
Re: The Indo Russian PAK-FA Project
Such third party analyses are rarely accurate. British DERA simulations put the F-22 at a roughly a 2:1 advantage vis-a-vis the Eurofighter on an evaluation of combat effectiveness. All perceptions changed when it scored a 144-0 kill ratio at Ex. Northern Edge in Alaska and similar figures in later exercises. I wouldn't underrate the F-35.Avarachan wrote:About the RCS, everyone should stay calm until more details come out.
Regarding the importance of RCS, it's worth noting that Carlo Kopp (of Air Power Australia) says than an Su-35 (or MKI) can handle a JSF. http://ausairpower.net/APA-Flanker.html
Also worth reading is Bill Sweetman's article, "Stealthy Sukhois." http://preview.tinyurl.com/yzpc36p
username changed to vsingh.
you can take a human sounding name of your own choice if you want,
provided its not taken.
Rahul.
Last edited by Rahul M on 05 Jan 2010 10:29, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: username changed.
Reason: username changed.
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 13112
- Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
- Location: Ban se dar nahin lagta , chootiyon se lagta hai .
Re: The Indo Russian PAK-FA Project
SumShyam nice question infact I too have doubts over the whole concept of RCS but from a layman's pov I can give the following analogy RCS is a physical attribute of an object (in this case an AC) just like 'height' of a human ; now a man 6 feet tall may not be visible to naked eye from say 5 miles and his silhouette would appear to gradually increase as he approaches the observer but this does not mean his physical 'height' has increased when he was at 5 miles to say when he reaches at 100 meters from the observer.sumshyam wrote:Wiki says that RCS depends on distance between the source and the target...but every one quoting RCS seem to ignore the fact...!
Am I mistaken...!
Imho RCS too is a similar attribute however unlike a human's height you cant measure it with a measuring tape for RCS itself is not an attribute which human sense organs can perceive .
When you say that a Radar transmitting at D db can detect a 1msq target at 100km it simply means that the power density of the incident radiation at the receiver is equal/greater than the minimum threshold value .
So when one employs a more powerful Radar (higher Pt) one increases the chances of detecting the above target at longer range not because RCS has increased but because received power density at the receiver is higher.
--Need to run back to my hole before I make mockery of myself.
Last edited by negi on 05 Jan 2010 11:08, edited 1 time in total.
Re: The Indo Russian PAK-FA Project
Yeah sure. I rather go with Vivek or Vivek S. Either available? (BTW I'd have PM ed you instead quoting you, but that's locked for now).username changed to vsingh.
you can take a human sounding name of your own choice if you want,
provided its not taken.
Rahul.
Re: The Indo Russian PAK-FA Project
A quote from f16.net posted by toan
So, I sincerely hope a better scale for PAK-FA/FGFA...!The minimal frontal RCS of the traditional fighters:
F-15, Su-27: 10~15m2
Tornado: 8 m2
MIG-29: 5 m2
F-18, MIG-21: 3 m2
F-16, M2000: 1~2 m2
Accroding to the declarations of the manufacturers of the NG fighter in the world, the minimal frontal RCS of NG fighters are:
F/A-22:
The declaration of "Marble Size" (about 0.0002~0.0005 m2) in 1999~2000. The newest estimation now is the RCS of "Fly size"
F-35:
The declaration of "Golf ball size" (about 0.0015 m2) by LM in 2000.
EF-2000:
My personal estimation is 0.05~0.1 m2, which is based on the declarations of BAES:
1. "The Typhoon's RCS is bettered only by the F-22 in the frontal hemisphere and betters the F-22 at some angles." (2001).
2. "The RCS of EF-2000 is about 1/3 of the RCS of Rafale" (1998).
MIG-44:
"0.1 m2 class, which is about 1/10 of the RCS of MIG-29SMT", the declaration of Mikoyan in 1999~2000.
F/A-18E/F:
"0.1 m2 class", the declaration of USN in 1999~2000.
Rafale:
"1/10 of the frontal RCS of MIRAGE-2000" (about 0.1~0.2 m2), declared by Dassault in 1999.
Su-47:
"0.3 m2 class", declared by Sukhoi in 2002.
JAS-39:
"1/5 of the frontal RCS of F/A-18 C/D, 1/3 of the frontal RCS of F-16 C/D block40/42, and 1/2 of the frontal RCS of the MIRAGE-2000" (about 0.5 m2).
Theoretically, if a radar can detect F-15C (RCS=10 m2) at the range of 1.000 (about 250 km for the radar of Su-35/37), then its detective range to other fighters shoul be:
Tornado (RCS = 8 m2): 0.946 (about 235 km for the radar of Su-35/37)
MIG-29 (RCS = 5 m2): 0.840 (about 210 km for the radar of Su-35/37)
F/A-18C (RCS = 3 m2): 0.740 (about 185 km for the radar of Su-35/37)
F-16C (RCS = 1.2 m2): 0.589 (about 148 km for the radar of Su-35/37)
JAS39 (RCS = 0.5 m2): 0.473 (about 118 km for the radar of Su-35/37)
Su-47 (RCS = 0.3 m2): 0.416 (about 104 km for the radar of Su-35/37)
Rafale (RCS = 0.1~0.2 m2): 0.316~0.376 (about 80~95 km for the radar of Su-35/37)
F-18E (RCS = 0.1 m2): 0.316 (about 80 km for the radar of Su-35/37)
MIG-42 (RCS = 0.1 m2): 0.316 (about 80 km for the radar of Su-35/37)
EF2K (RCS = 0.05~0.1 m2): 0.266~0.316 (about 65~80 km for the radar of Su-35/37)
F-35A (RCS = 0.0015 m2): 0.111 (about 28 km for the radar of Su-35/37)
F/A-22 (RCS < or = 0.0002~0.0005 m2): < or = 0.067~0.084 (about 16~21 km for the radar of Su-35/37)
Re: The Indo Russian PAK-FA Project
Another news says that
5th generation aircraft is equipped with Russia's "artificial intelligence", the aviation equipment modern advanced weapons systems including air missiles are not, not-to-ground, air-to-carrier and two 30mm cannon .
-
- BRFite
- Posts: 269
- Joined: 05 May 2007 01:20
- Location: ghaziabad
- Contact:
Re: The Indo Russian PAK-FA Project
250 pak-fa------13 squadronsThe contract, which Bangalore-based Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL) will sign with Russia’s United Aircraft Corporation (UAC), will commit to building 250 fighters for the IAF .India has agreed to buy a mix of about 50 single-seat and 200 twin-seat aircraft.
189-200 mmrca- 10 squadrons
228 su-30mki--- 12 squadrons
140tejas mk1+ mk2----- 7 squadrons
total--------------42 squadrons, so three squadrons are left to achieve the sanctioned strength of 45 squadrons,, very confusing should we spenD billions and develop MCA just to fill 3 more squadrons, funny, ADA /hal /drdo should rather focus on stealthy UCAV using GTRE/SNECMA KAVERI,,which would not only function as a bomber but also an interceptor
Re: The Indo Russian PAK-FA Project
Number of Su-30MKI will be around 278 (280-2 :: considering no replenishment), if I remember correctly.saptarishi wrote: 250 pak-fa------13 squadrons
189-200 mmrca- 10 squadrons
228 su-30mki--- 12 squadrons
140tejas mk1+ mk2----- 7 squadrons
Anyhow...I am kinda bored of such calculations as these have been done by a number of people again and again....!
Re: The Indo Russian PAK-FA Project
What would be the RCS if a lot of the Paki radars are knocked out?
Re: The Indo Russian PAK-FA Project
I think the stealthy UCAV + bomber + interceptor + recon/ELINT/SIGINT (different versions) is the way to go. Irrespective of the MCA and other aircraft programs.
HAL / DRDO need to take this up ASAP.
HAL / DRDO need to take this up ASAP.
Re: The Indo Russian PAK-FA Project
hmm...!NRao wrote:What would be the RCS if a lot of the Paki radars are knocked out?
I think we should be much concerned bout the beauty of Mansarovar...!
Re: The Indo Russian PAK-FA Project
Don't forget the upgraded MiG 29s and Mirages.saptarishi wrote:250 pak-fa------13 squadrons
189-200 mmrca- 10 squadrons
228 su-30mki--- 12 squadrons
140tejas mk1+ mk2----- 7 squadrons
total--------------42 squadrons, so three squadrons are left to achieve the sanctioned strength of 45 squadrons,, very confusing should we spenD billions and develop MCA just to fill 3 more squadrons, funny, ADA /hal /drdo should rather focus on stealthy UCAV using GTRE/SNECMA KAVERI,,which would not only function as a bomber but also an interceptor
Re: The Indo Russian PAK-FA Project
I think we (IAF) would have retired the fulcrums and mirages by the time we have our 250 PAK-FA. Also, It should be 278 Su-30 MKI rather than 228 ------> so 14 squadrons.Dmurphy wrote:Don't forget the upgraded MiG 29s and Mirages.saptarishi wrote:250 pak-fa------13 squadrons
189-200 mmrca- 10 squadrons
228 su-30mki--- 12 squadrons
140tejas mk1+ mk2----- 7 squadrons
total--------------42 squadrons, so three squadrons are left to achieve the sanctioned strength of 45 squadrons,, very confusing should we spenD billions and develop MCA just to fill 3 more squadrons, funny, ADA /hal /drdo should rather focus on stealthy UCAV using GTRE/SNECMA KAVERI,,which would not only function as a bomber but also an interceptor
I think 250 would be 12 squadrons with 21 aircraft per squadron, especially since we are buying 50 single seaters too. (Usual single seater squadrons are 18 + 3 trainer). We probably shall not buy 200 MMRCAs, but only 126 as is planned now (That makes it 6 squadrons). So we have
FGFA / PAK-FA: (250) :12 squadrons
Tejas: (140): 7 squadrons
Su30 MKI: (278): 14 squadrons
MRCA: (126): 6 squadrons
Total of 39 squadrons... Next, account for attrition: Probably 20 birds.
So, we need 7 MCA squadrons to fill the gap.
We can export the rest of the MCAs. I am sure they shall be cheaper than contemporary fighters.
One question is, given this situation, is the age of dedicated attack aircraft over? What shall be our Jaguar / Mig-27 replacements? or shall they all be multi-role birds that shall replace the Jags and Mig-27s?
Re: The Indo Russian PAK-FA Project
Why go for two seaters? This still boggles me ... afaik the F-35 and F-22 doesnt even have a trainer version.
In this day and age of reduced pilot load cant we manage with single seat fighters?
In this day and age of reduced pilot load cant we manage with single seat fighters?
Re: The Indo Russian PAK-FA Project
India to develop 25% of fifth generation fighter.
Having designed over 100 aircraft (including India’s Su-30MKI), built over 10,000 fighters, and with 50 world aviation records to its credit, Sukhoi understandably regards Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL) — its partner-to-be in designing the FGFA — as very much the greenhorn.
But the newcomer wants its due. Bangalore-based HAL has negotiated firmly to get a 25 per cent share of design and development work in the FGFA programme. HAL’s work share will include critical software, including the mission computer (the Su-30MKI mission computer is entirely Indian); navigation systems; most of the cockpit displays; the counter measure dispensing (CMD) systems; and modifying Sukhoi’s single-seat prototype into the twin-seat fighter that the Indian Air Force (IAF) wants.
Last edited by Rahul M on 06 Jan 2010 00:46, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: copyright. please don't post entire articles.
Reason: copyright. please don't post entire articles.
Re: The Indo Russian PAK-FA Project
you are outta luck. looks like all permutations and combinations of vivek are taken. any other choice ? or stick to this one ?vsingh wrote:Yeah sure. I rather go with Vivek or Vivek S. Either available? (BTW I'd have PM ed you instead quoting you, but that's locked for now).username changed to vsingh.
you can take a human sounding name of your own choice if you want,
provided its not taken.
Rahul.
Re: The Indo Russian PAK-FA Project
The advantage of a single seater is higher fuel load and consequently greater range. Valuable while flying patrol over the vast Russian hinterland, but not worth the premium in the Indian context. The real value of the co-pilot would probably be in establishing situational awareness particularly in a mini-AWACS role.Aditya G wrote:Why go for two seaters? This still boggles me ... afaik the F-35 and F-22 doesnt even have a trainer version.
In this day and age of reduced pilot load cant we manage with single seat fighters?
Last edited by Viv S on 06 Jan 2010 00:57, edited 1 time in total.
Re: The Indo Russian PAK-FA Project
Well, could you give it just one more shot and try Visin? Or if that doesn't work Viv/ViV/VivS/ViV S/Viv S(you get the idea). I have a rather generic last name and I'd prefer to avoid it. I appreciate it very much. Thank You.Rahul M wrote: you are outta luck. looks like all permutations and combinations of vivek are taken. any other choice ? or stick to this one ?
P.S. I realise I should've read the rules more thoroughly. Typed in 'vnomad' out of habit(its my usual pseudonym).
done,
Rahul.
Re: The Indo Russian PAK-FA Project
Does anyone know if the Russians have single crystal turbine blade technology?
Does any of the Russian jet engines use these blades?
Do they plan on having it in the fifth generation fighter?
Does any of the Russian jet engines use these blades?
Do they plan on having it in the fifth generation fighter?
Re: The Indo Russian PAK-FA Project
^^
Yes, they have been using single crystal blades in engines for decades now.
Yes, they have been using single crystal blades in engines for decades now.
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 5352
- Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26
Re: The Indo Russian PAK-FA Project
MRCA will be 126 numbers. Rest will be MCA - 10+ sqds. Btw, that RCS size figure needs to be takes with a grain of salt - perhaps the gent meant all aspect stealth not just frontal value. For frontal value, the 0.5 msq figure is toted around for the MiG-29K/35/SMT.saptarishi wrote:
250 pak-fa------13 squadrons
189-200 mmrca- 10 squadrons
228 su-30mki--- 12 squadrons
140tejas mk1+ mk2----- 7 squadrons
total--------------42 squadrons, so three squadrons are left to achieve the sanctioned strength of 45 squadrons,, very confusing should we spenD billions and develop MCA just to fill 3 more squadrons, funny, ADA /hal /drdo should rather focus on stealthy UCAV using GTRE/SNECMA KAVERI,,which would not only function as a bomber but also an interceptor
CM.
Re: The Indo Russian PAK-FA Project
If India is going to get a 5th Gen fighter for ~ $ 100 million, how much do you think is India going to spend for the MRCA? Surely not ~$80 million per plane for a 4.5gen.
The lower priced ones which meet IAF's RFP have a lead.
The lower priced ones which meet IAF's RFP have a lead.