then why 500Km combat radius and why IAF says too shot range and wont accept it in service? Published material on LCA is proven wrong many time it could be the case again? anyhow i cannot provide any link to support my claim.
there is a universal phenomena in any indian wepon system they tend to downplay the orignal range of such thing then be it missiles or tejas... i still dont know why
In think your missed the Line where i said Demonstrated.
i didn't miss that it is forced upon IAF. Theory discussed is that IAF love foreign mall and is resisting Hundreds of LCA and instead demanding 40 Rafale for IAF or both (LCA+Rafale). It’s too low of view to criticize IAF even when they are giving rational for their resistance. After all they are the one to face the music when failure of LCA will occur in combat.
And you Know Better as Being An Outsider (Pakistani).Nevertheless IAF cheif Already Made Statement that LCA Meets its Requirements
i think its political statement. besides there is "Would" in it. there is link on the same page says they want 100 Rafale.
Above F-16 combat radius is with no drop tank or com. Fuel tank and loaded with weapons. F16 has lot of hard points for both. While ferry range is 4200 km with drop tanks. It does not match with LCA any how. Irrelevant.
Now this is the point it does not match because LCA is light MRCA and F-16 is medium wt MMRCA. So LCA would more suit for the point defense, interceptor and CAS not as the deep strike attack mission. Thats point was made you to realized how the Import Looby plays its part to defame the LCA in among the general people.
Take all those claim with the Pinch of Salt.can somebody here tell me that how come jf 17 has such a long range when its engine & fuel consumption are nearly same & have same amt. of capacity of external load as of the tejas or lca .
can somebody here tell me that how come jf 17 has such a long range when its engine & fuel consumption are nearly same & have same amt. of capacity of external load as of the tejas or lca .
can somebody here tell me that how come jf 17 has such a long range when its engine & fuel consumption are nearly same & have same amt. of capacity of external load as of the tejas or lca .
another thing apart from chinese and hyper patriotic pakistani exagarading the comabt range of there super duper DSI tech laden fighter is sabotage philosophy /false propogandda to scuttle LCA entry into air force by greedy beurocrats , policticicans and there presstitutes they delliberetalli made one after another such media campain and hid the strong points of LCA and now since they are firmly said no and there arms agents bieng hunted they have now started to speak truthscan somebody here tell me that how come jf 17 has such a long range when its engine & fuel consumption are nearly same & have same amt. of capacity of external load as of the tejas or lca .
Comparing same class of fighter jet only LCA is odd one range wise jft and gripen validate each other. I think LCA is short in leanth then other two which is probably why. But then again why staggering weight.
Concept of this age is miltiroll aircrafts. Point defence with mig-21 type jet is thing of past. As for close CAS this plane does not have rough air feild capability which mean it has to take off from well maintained airbase which are not and should not be closeby (for china and pak). LCA rang mean that a competant MLR system can takeout the base it is flying from. For example paf CAS squd is based in peshawar. War is not about making weapons that fails however history is full of such weaponry.
