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 defenceNRao wrote:There is a brain trust called IIS right next door.Prasad wrote: This entire paragraph needs to be engraved in big bold letters in a few offices!
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.
'Make in India' Single engined fighter
Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 5393
- Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26
Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter
Now you know why they are pushing for the single engine deal trying to get private industry involved!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.
Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter
That's not true , he was the best defence minister in recent history and perhaps the only two I remember GF and Parrikar.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 defenceNRao 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.
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
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 5128
- Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17
Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter
Cain Marko wrote:Now you know why they are pushing for the single engine deal trying to get private industry involved!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.
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
Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter
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.Austin wrote:That's not true , he was the best defence minister in recent history and perhaps the only two I remember GF and Parrikar.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
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
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.
Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter
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.
Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter
^^^
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
LCA Mk1A will have AESA radar.
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
LCA Mk1A will have AESA radar.
Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter
So true. My support for F-16 is purely beacuse it will be manufactured by private sector.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
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.
-
- 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
arvin wrote:So true. My support for F-16 is purely beacuse it will be manufactured by private sector.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
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.
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 5393
- Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26
Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter
Exactly the thought that crossed my mind.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
LCA Mk1A will have AESA radar.
-
- BRFite
- Posts: 364
- Joined: 26 Nov 2010 08:56
Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter
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.
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.
Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter
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.
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.
Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter
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!
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!
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 5128
- Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17
Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter
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.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.
b.) In the days of Arjun vs tincan debates this used to be 'the line' :
tincan orders have nothing to do with Arjun.
Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter
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
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.
The following article does mention, but is actually behind teh curve.
GE supplies two test engines for Tejas Mk-2, eyes collaboration for AMCA
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)."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.
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.
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 5128
- Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17
Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter
^wow, I didnt know that so much background work has been happening...
Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter
Quote from that article in Feb 17NRao 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
Didnt know 100 404IN have been ordered.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 ...
Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter
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.
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.
Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter
Failed Lockheed Martin F 16 carries no improvement potential for India, say IAF veterans
http://www.financialexpress.com/india-n ... ns/747705/
http://www.financialexpress.com/india-n ... ns/747705/
The author of the news piece has got her fighter generations mixed up. See last paragraph.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.
Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter
Brar, I know you are going to read this. So please provide your analysis on the article above.
Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter
Not the author. That's AM Matheswaran who's just wrong.. as usual.Rakesh wrote:The author of the news piece has got her fighter generations mixed up. See last paragraph.
Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter
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.
Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter
If the F16 BLK 70 is "third" gen, what gen is our 'indigenous' effort ?
Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter
nirav: did you even bother reading the posts above?
Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter
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.
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.
Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter
Thank you brar for that analysis.
Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter
I did Rakesh Saar. Went through the article too.Rakesh wrote:nirav: did you even bother reading the posts above?
The single engined fighter competition evokes way too many reactions in all directions !
It's exasperating !
Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter
what errors?
Caption:
Caption:
I will take 200 of "the same aircraft".This was the same aircraft that participated in the Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft competition ........
Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter
Brar, why is the Block 70 going to be easier to upgrade than the Block 60?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.
Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter
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.
Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter
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.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.
Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter
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.
Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter
If we are intent on getting a foreign single-jet fighter why not go for Mitsubishi F-2 from Japan, or at least consider.
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 5128
- Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17
Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter
^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.
Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter
Should give the Rafale a good run for its money on cost.Kashi wrote:If we are intent on getting a foreign single-jet fighter why not go for Mitsubishi F-2 from Japan
Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter
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+++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.
Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter
since 2010 the stock has tripled.
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 5128
- Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17
Re: 'Make in India' Single engined fighter
Errrmm... "take" means "lease"OR "purchase"?NRao wrote:
I will take 200 of "the same aircraft".
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.