soaringphnx
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2010
- Messages
- 418
- Reaction score
- 0
Several people says that, but I would request to look at both cases a bit closer!
The most important reason why we chose the MKI was the advantage of licence production and ToT to produce all parts in India, which gives us more confidence about spare supply. PLAAFs Su 27 and Su 30MKK were build in Russia, so no matter that they bought similar fighters too, we had a clear advantage.
The F16IN also will be licence produced in India, but it's not clear which parts and if the important parts like radar, or avionics will only be assembled in India. So although we have an advantage over PAF with licence production, the spare supply, especially in war times, or during sanctions will not be as easy compared to the MKI.
Yes, the Su 30 MKK has the same design, the same engine and the same weapons as our MKI and except of the engine, that will be the same case with F16 in PAF and F16IN. But, PAF has 30 years of experience with F16s, PLAAF instead procured the first Su 27 SKs in the early 90s, while IAF get the first Su 30MKs in the mid 90s. That gives PLAAF hardly a superiority in terms of confidence, or tactics with that fighter. PAF instead, knows any advantages, as well as weak points and have a clear experience advantage with that fighter, which clearly reduced the advantage of more capable techs in the F16IN. It still might have slight advantages, but very less compared to the advantages other contenders would offer.
I agree completely. It is not something that can be overlooked and is definitely an important factor. But I feel that the F-16 won't be disqualified just because of this one factor. There are a lot of other reasons to go for other aircraft like the Rafale or F-18SH. Just my 2 cents.