tvsram1992
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2010
- Messages
- 3,808
- Reaction score
- -1
N-LCA is good for carrier defence.
Carrier defense is the ultimate aim of USN.
Carrier defense is the ultimate aim of USN.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Rafale: Dassault in very active negotiations with the UAE
Les Echos , September 8
Dassault sent a negotiating team on the spot last weekend to wrap the final details of a technical and commercial proposal. The Emiratis evoke the Dubai Airshow in mid-November. The Brazilian experience, however, urges caution...
...The technical configuration? It should finally be close to the French model, with a radar whose range will be improved, but an engine thrust of 7.5 tonnes and not more than 9 tonnes. The war in Libya did much: it demonstrated the full capabilities of the aircraft. The maintenance component is being finalized and the French Air Force has made a proposal to his counterpart for training and an offer is on the table about the weapons (2ASM and MBDA Meteor missiles)...
So, which planes are going to retire from the IAF service.
with FGFA around , there is absolutly no need to waste money on MMRCA ..
just buy the Super-MKI's to replace the Mig 21s and 27s , even LCA would be enough to replace these..
with FGFA around , there is absolutly no need to waste money on MMRCA ..
just buy the Super-MKI's to replace the Mig 21s and 27s , even LCA would be enough to replace these..
Its not just about replacement of old aircrafts. Its about getting latest high technology, along with possible maximum collaboration with European countries.
The 123 LCA MK1/2 are required to replace 120 Mig21 Bisons
While mmrca will replace 5 Sqds of Mig27 and 2 Sqds of Jaguars
Also u cant just replace a Ground attack fighter with a Air superiority fighter
Both Su30MKI and FGFA are airsuperiority fighters
The 123 LCA MK1/2 are required to replace 120 Mig21 Bisons
While mmrca will replace 5 Sqds of Mig27 and 2 Sqds of Jaguars
Also u cant just replace a Ground attack fighter with a Air superiority fighter
Both Su30MKI and FGFA are airsuperiority fighters
Its not just about replacement of old aircrafts. Its about getting latest high technology, along with possible maximum collaboration with European countries.
Exactly, but luckyy is a fan of Russian fighters, that's why he prefers them and don't understand that this is about way more than just new fighters. But even if technology and industrial advantages wouldn't be important, Kargil showed IAF how important it is not to depend on Russian fighters and weapon only and have capable alternatives. That's why IAF prefered Mirage 2000-5 before, Rafale and EF today over Russian counterparts.
Hi Archie, that's not correct like that, because any multi role combat fighter can replace older ground attack fighters. That's why the MKI is already replacing Mig 27 squads in IAF, why Rafale replaces Jags, Mirage and Super Étendard in the ground attack role, or why even the EF will replace Tornados in future.
The difference is, that older fighters were designed specially for one role and to maximise the advantages in this role, like specialised for low level penetration, better armour, or different avionics. So any multi role fighter might be able to strike, but might not be as effective in the same role as a dedicated strike fighter. The Libyan conflict and the different performance of the RAF Tornado and their EFs showed this pretty well. While the EF is a multi role fighter, it lacked the variety of weapons that the Tornado used to fulfill different types of strike roles. Also with the single seat config, RAF pilots reported that the Tornado WSOs often provided the laser guidance, to take away some of the workload of the EF pilots (twin seat EFs are trainers only).
Another example is the F35 that is a multi role fighter as well and will replace F15s in the A2A roles, as well as A10s in the CAS role. But although the weapons and techs makes it useful in both roles, it is not as good as the F15, or the A10. It is not fast and maneuverable enough to be an air superiority fighter, but is too fast and lacks the slow speed maneuverability of the A10 to fulfill the same roles as effectively.
Only a few fighters are designed to be nearly equally good in A2A and A2G, fighters like the F16, or Rafale. That's why they are the more balenced MMRCAs, while an EF/Mig 35 might have some advantages in the A2A role, or an F18SH maybe some advantages in the A2G role.
Exactly, but luckyy is a fan of Russian fighters, that's why he prefers them and don't understand that this is about way more than just new fighters. But even if technology and industrial advantages wouldn't be important, Kargil showed IAF how important it is not to depend on Russian fighters and weapon only and have capable alternatives. That's why IAF prefered Mirage 2000-5 before, Rafale and EF today over Russian counterparts.
Hi Archie, that's not correct like that, because any multi role combat fighter can replace older ground attack fighters. That's why the MKI is already replacing Mig 27 squads in IAF, why Rafale replaces Jags, Mirage and Super Étendard in the ground attack role, or why even the EF will replace Tornados in future.
The difference is, that older fighters were designed specially for one role and to maximise the advantages in this role, like specialised for low level penetration, better armour, or different avionics. So any multi role fighter might be able to strike, but might not be as effective in the same role as a dedicated strike fighter. The Libyan conflict and the different performance of the RAF Tornado and their EFs showed this pretty well. While the EF is a multi role fighter, it lacked the variety of weapons that the Tornado used to fulfill different types of strike roles. Also with the single seat config, RAF pilots reported that the Tornado WSOs often provided the laser guidance, to take away some of the workload of the EF pilots (twin seat EFs are trainers only).
Another example is the F35 that is a multi role fighter as well and will replace F15s in the A2A roles, as well as A10s in the CAS role. But although the weapons and techs makes it useful in both roles, it is not as good as the F15, or the A10. It is not fast and maneuverable enough to be an air superiority fighter, but is too fast and lacks the slow speed maneuverability of the A10 to fulfill the same roles as effectively.
Only a few fighters are designed to be nearly equally good in A2A and A2G, fighters like the F16, or Rafale. That's why they are the more balenced MMRCAs, while an EF/Mig 35 might have some advantages in the A2A role, or an F18SH maybe some advantages in the A2G role.
SU-30MKI is the IAF's Prime Ground attack fighter ..