Philip wrote:There are over 120 Jags to be upgraded. Planned. Dedicating a couple of sqds for the GA role,by relieving the two sqds of their maritime strike role, is very doable. This is because once BMos is integrated onto MKIs and later when BMos-M arrives, MKIs,MIG-29UGs,M2Ks and Rafales too could possible carry the missile,giving a quantum leap in striking power ,range,etc.than lowly Jags equipped with sub-sonic ASMs.
Lets get the facts straight first. There's only one squadron of Jaguar IMs in the IAF consisting of only 12 aircraft. They are not 'dedicated maritime' aircraft, they are multi-role aircraft that will carry out routine strike missions in wartime in addition to anti-shipping missions. The Brahmos-M will in all likelihood enter service around 2030, around the same time as when the Mirages, MiG-29s & Jaguars start retiring.
None of which has any relation to restarting the Jaguar production, so I assume it was written as a deflection.
THis is again because all 120+ are to be upgraded which will require huge spares/component requirements to sustain the aircraft for at least 2 decades,what is the great difficulty in restarting production of new ones when even brand new engines are being fitted?
Re-engining, upgrades or consumables production is very very different from aircraft production.
Why,there are some from time to time in the US who advocate restarting F-22 production! The US Congress tasked the USAF to study the cost,feasibility,etc. of the same.
And what pray tell did the study say? Keep in mind, when the F-22 program would wound up, it was still the most they put in contingency plans to restart production if necessary. The documentation was preserved and tooling carefully stored. None of which applies to the Jaguar.
And back in the USSR..sorry Russia,There is talk of reopening the Blackjack line. China wants to reopen the AN-124 line with the UKR. A completely brand new facility in Russia is now manufacturing IL-76-90s,transports,tankers and EW variants,completely new upgraded aircraft,which was once built only in Tashkent. In fact a certain country called India has just ordered two more for its AWACS Phalcon bird. So please think outside the box.Where there's will there's a way.
Thinking outside the box is different from living in La La Land. The Russians have sizeable orders for transport aircraft that do NOT undergo obsolescence in the same manner as fighter aircraft.
The issue is not building Jags instead of LCAs. LCA production is abysmal and even with the second line,one has to wait and see if the magical 16/yr will be built by HAL.The key point which you missed is that the Jags are the cheapest aircraft that we can build.The LCAs ,far more sophisticated,will cost us between $25-30M.
LCA production is 'abysmal' so lets invest in vaporware instead? The Jaguar is cheapest based on what? Why isn't the MiG-27 the cheapest aircraft we can build? Or MiG-21? Or maybe the Gnat? All are equally meaningless proposals since the cost of rebuilding the infrastructure and long supply chains that feed into it, is up in the air.