'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Locked
Will
BRFite
Posts: 637
Joined: 28 Apr 2011 11:27

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Post by Will »

NRao wrote:
Prasad wrote: This entire paragraph needs to be engraved in big bold letters in a few offices!
There is a brain trust called IIS right next door.

There are two institutions that have done very, very well, with little funds, called ISRO and the DAE.

And, various IIMs churn out brains that many multinational seek, this is not a topic they need advise on (with due respects).

The problem lies elsewhere.

I suspect Parrikar had come close to solving it, when he was pushed out. Read that even the PMO opposed Parrikar's plan and Parrikar stood by it.
For the record, Parrikar wasn't pushed out. Parrikar could not wait to go back to Goa as chief minister. He never wanted to be defence minister in the first place. He spent most of his time in goa trying to remote control the govt in the state than being a proper defence minister. Imagine what could have been achieved if he had dedicated himself to being defence minister. Now we are stuck with another part time DM. Not to dish Jaitley but being finance minister is a job and a half in itself. High time the GOI bought in a qualified dedicated DM. Please don't mention AK here. Those were the dark days of Indian defence :evil:
Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5393
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Post by Cain Marko »

Manish_Sharma wrote:Cross posting from R&D thread:
Maybe it's not babus for once, but HAL which is contended with biryani, Sukhoi + hawk screwdriver Giri while pretending to be manufacturer.

They just aren't interested, maybe too incompetent to manufacture a product from ground up.

Private sector competitors are needed for this pot bellied - biryani fed pampered HAL.
Now you know why they are pushing for the single engine deal trying to get private industry involved!
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Post by Austin »

Will wrote:
NRao wrote:
There is a brain trust called IIS right next door.

There are two institutions that have done very, very well, with little funds, called ISRO and the DAE.

And, various IIMs churn out brains that many multinational seek, this is not a topic they need advise on (with due respects).

The problem lies elsewhere.

I suspect Parrikar had come close to solving it, when he was pushed out. Read that even the PMO opposed Parrikar's plan and Parrikar stood by it.
For the record, Parrikar wasn't pushed out. Parrikar could not wait to go back to Goa as chief minister. He never wanted to be defence minister in the first place. He spent most of his time in goa trying to remote control the govt in the state than being a proper defence minister. Imagine what could have been achieved if he had dedicated himself to being defence minister. Now we are stuck with another part time DM. Not to dish Jaitley but being finance minister is a job and a half in itself. High time the GOI bought in a qualified dedicated DM. Please don't mention AK here. Those were the dark days of Indian defence :evil:
That's not true , he was the best defence minister in recent history and perhaps the only two I remember GF and Parrikar.

He was told to go to Goa by BJP as they felt keeping Goa with bjp was more imp politically and Parrikar was the best guy to do the job based on his experience in Goa politics.

Till he was mod he did a great job specially his support to indigenous project was second to none
Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5128
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Post by Manish_Sharma »

Cain Marko wrote:
Manish_Sharma wrote:Cross posting from R&D thread:
Maybe it's not babus for once, but HAL which is contended with biryani, Sukhoi + hawk screwdriver Giri while pretending to be manufacturer.

They just aren't interested, maybe too incompetent to manufacture a product from ground up.

Private sector competitors are needed for this pot bellied - biryani fed pampered HAL.
Now you know why they are pushing for the single engine deal trying to get private industry involved!
:oops:

Tejas will and can never succeed when it's manufacturing agency is so lazy naakaara , that the only thing they aspire for screwdrivergiri of AFA Any Foreign Aircraft.

No hope for Bharatiya Aviation Industry to develop if it's based on HAL
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18654
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Post by Rakesh »

Austin wrote:
Will wrote:
For the record, Parrikar wasn't pushed out. Parrikar could not wait to go back to Goa as chief minister. He never wanted to be defence minister in the first place. He spent most of his time in goa trying to remote control the govt in the state than being a proper defence minister. Imagine what could have been achieved if he had dedicated himself to being defence minister. Now we are stuck with another part time DM. Not to dish Jaitley but being finance minister is a job and a half in itself. High time the GOI bought in a qualified dedicated DM. Please don't mention AK here. Those were the dark days of Indian defence :evil:
That's not true , he was the best defence minister in recent history and perhaps the only two I remember GF and Parrikar.

He was told to go to Goa by BJP as they felt keeping Goa with bjp was more imp politically and Parrikar was the best guy to do the job based on his experience in Goa politics.

Till he was mod he did a great job specially his support to indigenous project was second to none
Austin: Being pushed out means basically getting fired. It is a nice way of putting it, rather than using the term "fired" or "terminated". You are correct, but so is Will. Parrikar was never pushed out, but he was the best man to lead the BJP in Goa.

That in no way undermines his performance as DM, which was eons ahead of his predecessor (not Jaitley, but AK Antony). It is just another insinuation among the long list of obfuscations :) And thus everything else stated after that is complete nonsense. There is not a shred of evidence, NOT ONE, that he was pushed out of the Defence Ministry. Parrikar always had one foot in Goa. He loves that state. He was born there, did his schooling there. He is a 100% Goan, in and out. But he did his job as Raksha Mantri with elan. No can dispute that. He was a straight shooter. No bullsh!t with him.
Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21233
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Post by Prem »

http://warisboring.com/why-an-indian-f- ... -big-deal/
The upgrades for the new Block 70 model F-16s are considerable. Most importantly, the F-16 would receive a new AN/APG-83 Active Electronically Scanned Array—or AESA—radar.The AESA radar will feeds its data into an enhanced avionics package, which includes a new pilot display, faster computer processors and super-high-speed data links, granting the ability to fuse sensor data from friendly platforms.Another feature of the Block 70 that was recently incorporated on U.S. Air Force F-16 is an Automatic Ground Collision Avoidance System, which will correct an Viper’s course upwards whenever a crash seems imminent. This could save the pilot’s life in the event of a blackout during a high-G maneuver, or if the pilot loses track of his or her position during a dogfight—a leading cause of fatal jet fighter accidents.he new Indian F-16s would also come off the factory floor with helmet-mounted sights that can cue targets for high off-boresight missiles such as the AIM-9X. Basically, this means that Viper pilots no longer needs to have their plane pointed at the enemy to shoot at it. The pilot need only train his or her helmet-mounted sight at an enemy, and the AIM-9X can zoom off at a potentially sharp angle to intercept it.It’s less clear what the Block 70’s armament will comprise beyond-visual-range warfare, which is expected to predominate in future aerial clashes now that missiles can target aircraft from dozens of miles away.Will India order the AIM-120 missiles used by the U.S. Air Force and its allies, or will the Block 70 F-16 be compatible with the domestic Astra long-range missiles? The Lockheed Martin website for the Block 70 emphasizes “weapons integration” of “country-unique” weapons, which implies an Indian F-16 might be adapted to locally preferred systems.
srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5393
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Post by srai »

^^^
Nothing that homegrown LCA won't have.

LCA Mk.1 already has Dash Helmet that offers cueing of high off-boresight missiles such as R-73 and Python-5. It already comes with IAF-specified weapons fully integrated :wink:

LCA Mk1A will have AESA radar.
Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2931
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Post by Vivek K »

^^^^+100!
arvin
BRFite
Posts: 673
Joined: 17 Aug 2016 21:26

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Post by arvin »

Manish_Sharma wrote:
Tejas will and can never succeed when it's manufacturing agency is so lazy naakaara , that the only thing they aspire for screwdrivergiri of AFA Any Foreign Aircraft.

No hope for Bharatiya Aviation Industry to develop if it's based on HAL
So true. My support for F-16 is purely beacuse it will be manufactured by private sector.
Like Air-India, HAL should also be disposed off. Or atleast split it into 5 divisions:
1.) Fighters & Trainers 2.) Helicopters 3.) Aero-engines 4.) HAL airport 5.) HAL Kalyana Mandapa.
Marten
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2176
Joined: 01 Jan 2010 21:41
Location: Engaging Communists, Uber-Socialists, Maoists, and other pro-poverty groups in fruitful dialog.

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Post by Marten »

arvin wrote:
Manish_Sharma wrote:
Tejas will and can never succeed when it's manufacturing agency is so lazy naakaara , that the only thing they aspire for screwdrivergiri of AFA Any Foreign Aircraft.

No hope for Bharatiya Aviation Industry to develop if it's based on HAL
So true. My support for F-16 is purely beacuse it will be manufactured by private sector.
Like Air-India, HAL should also be disposed off. Or atleast split it into 5 divisions:
1.) Fighters & Trainers 2.) Helicopters 3.) Aero-engines 4.) HAL airport 5.) HAL Kalyana Mandapa.
:rotfl:
Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5393
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Post by Cain Marko »

srai wrote:^^^
Nothing that homegrown LCA won't have.

LCA Mk.1 already has Dash Helmet that offers cueing of high off-boresight missiles such as R-73 and Python-5. It already comes with IAF-specified weapons fully integrated :wink:

LCA Mk1A will have AESA radar.
Exactly the thought that crossed my mind.
Eric Leiderman
BRFite
Posts: 364
Joined: 26 Nov 2010 08:56

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Post by Eric Leiderman »

We might not agree with the F16 and Gripen. However It seems to be a done deal.

Hopefully the Gov with help fm ADA and DRDO should concentrate on modules that the LCA currently imports (I do not mean engine or radar)
and get the vendors to set up in india for these items, With a clause that they will support the LCA and its many avatars also the AMCA

I am quite sure that is already being acted on by our Mandrins , just hope it is.

Then the above starts getting palatable.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19281
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Post by NRao »

I seem to have, unintentionally (should have expected it), lit a fire about Parrikar and being pushed out. Apologies about that. All I wanted to convey is that there is - IMHO - some video evidence ( again IMHO) that Parrikar had a plan and that both the PMO and Jaitley were pushing back on it. That he did not want to be the DM and preferred to be in Goa is a fact, but - again, IMHO - unrelated to this thread. Point being - IMHO, of course and no one needs to agree with it - Parrikar had a game plan, that seems to have be acceptable to many in the field, but not in the political establishment.

Realted to thsi thread:

F-16 is related to the GE F414 "enhanced" engine for the AMCA. I just do not see it not coming - it will be in the IAF. And, it will have nothing to do with the LCA.

Although this is a SE thread, let me go out on a limb and state the F-18 will be related to the Carrier Working Group's contribution to the Vishal - which I expect to be a smaller version of the USN Ford (which is not an incremental over the previous boats - it is a quantum leap for what that is worth) . I expect the INS Vishal to have many of the techs, besides the EMALS, broadly an all electric boat. all that for another thread.

And, finally, I would be very, very pleasantly surprised to find any official document/statement related to the either the F-16/F-18 being realted to the AMCA/Vishal.
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Post by Philip »

It's going to be a logistical nightmare with another SE light fighter and LCA,plus the IN possessing two fighters (at least the 29K is a relative of the 29UG) and wanting another type.Ideally,the Rafale-M would be best from a tech pt. of view,not a cost-effective one though.Vishal is going to arrive nowhere before 2030 and really the 57 fighters are not the most urgent priority for the IN.The ASW helos fo which 120-150 are required are most urgent as well as subs. Extraneous forces (US) appear to have taken over some decision-making in South Block,which I fear is diverting more objective and realistic solutions.

AS NR has said above,MP had a grip on the reality of the situ,wanted more MKIs instead of Rafales but was forces to acquiesce .The LCA is nowhere a major priority it appears and how pvt. industry will make a better job of sophisticated aircraft manufacturing than HAL remains to be seen.

Incidentally,the Hindu reported that Nirbhay's failure was due to recycled material being used for the wings! It's why the missile failed.One may remember that I commented when the missile was first tested that its quality was very shoddy,There seems to be a yawning gap between DRDO made missiles and the BMos Corp. Compare the two missiles external quality wise. The BMos Corp. has a unique working doctrine and philosophy/"mantra" ,read Dr.P's book.This appears vastly different from that of some other DPSUs under the DRDO. Results show.

Flipping through the excellent books on the IN's history,there is an excellent description why the IN has succeeded in indigenisation and why the other two services haven't. In the IN,design begins at home and sr. capable officers are embedded in the project dev/prod. stage with the respective OEM/DPSU.The IN therefore has total control over the project,less time wasted, in design decisions,etc. I seriously wonder how the SE plan is going to help the IAF in indigenisation.It will be "back to the future",dejas vu,screwdriver tech yet again!
Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5128
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Post by Manish_Sharma »

NRao wrote:
a.) F-16 is related to the GE F414 "enhanced" engine for the AMCA. I just do not see it not coming - it will be in the IAF.

b.) And, it will have nothing to do with the LCA.
European ej200 is also on the offer; so ge414 has competition, no reason for americans to act superior and put ridiculous conditions. In America they have saying "customer is always right" but here they force the customer​ to those humiliating yearly inspections.

b.) In the days of Arjun vs tincan debates this used to be 'the line' :
tincan orders have nothing to do with Arjun.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19281
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Post by NRao »

No idea why it is so difficult.

The following article does mention, but is actually behind teh curve.

GE supplies two test engines for Tejas Mk-2, eyes collaboration for AMCA
"The first two engines are for flight test. They are ready to go as and when the plane is ready. We are committed to deliver six more engines," said Mark Pearson, who leads the military engine programme for GE in an interview.

Pearson is betting on the over 700 engineers who work on design and take charge of manufacturing parts of GE's commercial aero engines, at its India centre in Bengaluru, to push for local co-development of the engine for AMCA, which ADA is developing.
This "co-development" is part of the DTTI process and *was requested by India*. During Parrikar's last visit, last Dec(?), the US SD modified their rules to export certain techs related to engines to India (the vid is on YT, where Carter announced it in the presence of Parrikar, in DC).

There is also a vid by Mark Peaerson, at AI17, in Feb, 2017, that shows a ppt slide on this matter. Indicating that the work *has already started* (which is why the above article is "behind the curve").

So, what is so great about thsi engine? It satisfies the US's claim to conduct a JV with India, just like that of Brahmos with Russia. When the US/India could not find a good project, India, when Obama visited India, proposed two projects. The outcomes were the Carrier Working Group and the Engine Working Group (they I think have a diff designation, but serves the purpose here). This effort, for an enhanced F414-INS6 (specific engine made for the LCA MK2 - and NOT any GE F414) is a collaborative effort between India and the US. The IP for this engine will be shared between India and the US (very similar to the Brahmos). This engine is an Indian engine, with Indians working out of the GE office in Bangalore. GE Bangalore has 700 engineers - currently working on the commercial side, some of whom have been tasked with enhancing the GE F414-INS6.


Now, the "payment" for this engine was worked out by both India and the US (all this out there in open source, just need to connect the dots). I have not chased who proposed a SE air craft, but someone did and then the following followed: SE (F-16), MII, LM stated that they needed a minimum order of XXX for F-16 MII, Modi said something to the effect up-to-200 (LM CEO visited India last summer or so). What held all this up was the SP process and associating a partner to LM in India.

This Indo-GE (IGE) engine is specifically designed for the AMCA - at 110 kN, it has plenty of power to spare and the AC to grow.

Two things I found very interesting:
* GE Bangalore has 700 engineers working on commercial GE engines. Leading edge techs. I wonder how many engineers does GTRE have. Trying to get a feel for eng-2-eng ration ......... just for the heck of it
* The co-development effort was assigned to a non gov party in India. ADA will have a say, but not GTRE.
Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5128
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Post by Manish_Sharma »

^wow, I didnt know that so much background work has been happening...
Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14398
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Post by Aditya_V »

NRao wrote:No idea why it is so difficult.

The following article does mention, but is actually behind teh curve.

GE supplies two test engines for Tejas Mk-2, eyes collaboration for AMCA
Quote from that article in Feb 17
The Tejas fighter is been powered by the GE-404 engine since its development and the IAF plans to induct over 120 planes with the same engine.So far, India has ordered around 100 engines for the fighter from GE and plans to buy more engines in the coming years. The single engine fighter being developed by the Aeronautical Development ...
Didnt know 100 404IN have been ordered.
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Post by Philip »

100 engines in what timeframe? It may give a clue to what expected LCA prod. figs would be! AMCA even by the ACM's interview is expected post 2030.
So what then happens to the great GTRE? It's very puzzling why the MOD doesn't want a central engine dev. entity for dsign and development of all engines for fixed and rotary wing aircraft.Instead,we're buying bits and pieces from the spare parts bin of global OEMs for both aircraft and helos,developing despite the massive order book,zero desi engines.What a sad state of affairs.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18654
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Post by Rakesh »

Failed Lockheed Martin F 16 carries no improvement potential for India, say IAF veterans
http://www.financialexpress.com/india-n ... ns/747705/
One of the reasons for the failure of F-16 at the time was that there was no room for any improvements or growth in the aircraft, explained a former fighter pilot who was one of the test pilots involved in trials. Today, the F-16 being offered to India for the IAF has absolutely no growth potential.
The author of the news piece has got her fighter generations mixed up. See last paragraph.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18654
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Post by Rakesh »

Brar, I know you are going to read this. So please provide your analysis on the article above.
Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Post by Viv S »

Rakesh wrote:The author of the news piece has got her fighter generations mixed up. See last paragraph.
Not the author. That's AM Matheswaran who's just wrong.. as usual.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18654
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Post by Rakesh »

I saw that. But I was going to give the Air Marshal the benefit of the doubt....because he of all people, should know the difference between 3rd and 4th generation.
nirav
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2020
Joined: 31 Aug 2004 00:22
Location: Mumbai

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Post by nirav »

If the F16 BLK 70 is "third" gen, what gen is our 'indigenous' effort ?
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18654
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Post by Rakesh »

nirav: did you even bother reading the posts above? :D
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Post by brar_w »

Rakesh the article has some errors but it is tough disputing the conclusion. While the Block 70 is going to be much easier to upgrade than say the UAEs block 60, the point is valid that its the end of the road unless someone picks up what is likely to be a huge bill for funding user-specific upgrades in key areas.

Specifically for the USAF which will be the largest F-16 operator till the type is finally retired, there isn't expected to be any significant capability bump beyond some of the things they are upgrading at the moment (which is essentially the F-16 block 70 capability). With one exception being weapons, pods (DIRCM, DECM etc) and other strap on sensors.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18654
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Post by Rakesh »

Thank you brar for that analysis.
nirav
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2020
Joined: 31 Aug 2004 00:22
Location: Mumbai

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Post by nirav »

Rakesh wrote:nirav: did you even bother reading the posts above? :D
I did Rakesh Saar. Went through the article too.

The single engined fighter competition evokes way too many reactions in all directions !

It's exasperating !
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19281
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Post by NRao »

what errors?

Image

Caption:
This was the same aircraft that participated in the Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft competition ........
I will take 200 of "the same aircraft".
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18654
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Post by Rakesh »

brar_w wrote:Rakesh the article has some errors but it is tough disputing the conclusion. While the Block 70 is going to be much easier to upgrade than say the UAEs block 60, the point is valid that its the end of the road unless someone picks up what is likely to be a huge bill for funding user-specific upgrades in key areas.

Specifically for the USAF which will be the largest F-16 operator till the type is finally retired, there isn't expected to be any significant capability bump beyond some of the things they are upgrading at the moment (which is essentially the F-16 block 70 capability). With one exception being weapons, pods (DIRCM, DECM etc) and other strap on sensors.
Brar, why is the Block 70 going to be easier to upgrade than the Block 60?
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Post by brar_w »

Block 60 has UAE proprietary systems that no one else really adopted. Block 70 is the standard that will be used as the base for upgrading US and international F-16's, either wholesale adoption of its avionics or many components so they bring economies of scale more open architecture requirements of the USAF. So US, South Korea, Taiwan and other potential upgrade customers, possibly even the UAE adopts many block 70 systems to make upgrades easier.
srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5393
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Post by srai »

Rakesh wrote:I saw that. But I was going to give the Air Marshal the benefit of the doubt....because he of all people, should know the difference between 3rd and 4th generation.
He is right from the pov of the original F-16 airframe design--of 1970s vintage "3rd-Gen". Yes, it's possible to continual upgrade it with "4th-Gen" technologies but would have limitations. For instance, MiG-21, a "2nd-Gen" platform, too could be upgraded with "4th Gen" technologies; would that make it a true "4th-Gen" design? That's what he is eluding to.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Post by brar_w »

Relaxed stability, FBW, and high T2W ratio, but I guess one could always make up their own definition and set of criteria since there is no universally accepted definition. Most will describe the F-16 as a fourth generation aircraft, and future variants and Eurocanards, Flankers, F-16E and Super Hornets as 4+ generation.

Image
Kashi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3671
Joined: 06 May 2011 13:53

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Post by Kashi »

If we are intent on getting a foreign single-jet fighter why not go for Mitsubishi F-2 from Japan, or at least consider.
Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5128
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Post by Manish_Sharma »

^They aren't interested to sell offensive platforms to Bharat. As we saw they were trying so hard to sell Soryu subs to aussies, but not to us.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Post by brar_w »

Kashi wrote:If we are intent on getting a foreign single-jet fighter why not go for Mitsubishi F-2 from Japan
Should give the Rafale a good run for its money on cost.
srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5393
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Post by srai »

brar_w wrote:Relaxed stability, FBW, and high T2W ratio, but I guess one could always make up their own definition and set of criteria since there is no universally accepted definition. Most will describe the F-16 as a fourth generation aircraft, and future variants and Eurocanards, Flankers, F-16E and Super Hornets as 4+ generation.

Image
This whole generational designation is more of a marketing ploy IMO. Valid for a short period of time. It's not static in nature. Now to differentiate they are coming up with 4+, 4++, 4+++ :mrgreen:
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Post by Singha »

Image
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Post by Singha »

since 2010 the stock has tripled.
Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5128
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter

Post by Manish_Sharma »

NRao wrote:
I will take 200 of "the same aircraft".
Errrmm... "take" means "lease"OR "purchase"?

I remember you were suggesting Rafale not be mfrd here but just leased till 2036 as they will be obsolete by then.

But f16 won't be obsolete even till 2065 I guess.

_____________________________________________
On the other hand Tejas Mk2 beats Grippen E soundly on every level accept sensor fusion:

http://indiandefence.com/threads/lca-mk ... ext.57465/
Last edited by Manish_Sharma on 05 Jul 2017 07:54, edited 1 time in total.
Locked