sancho
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2009
- Messages
- 13,011
- Reaction score
- 27
- Country
- Location
And yet, the IAF doesn't want to order more than 40 Mk1, despite it being better than most light fighters out there, better than half the IAF's fleet today
It is comparable to in certain aspects and in some even superior, but still is nearly a decade too late. Ordering high numbers of MK1 today (a 4th gen fighter), in a time where AESA and modern avionics are the getting the standard (4.5 gen) obviously doesn't make much sense. That's why the Mk2 is the prefered version of IAF an IN, because the delays in development must now be countered by upgrades again.
and a terrific achievement by a country with no previous experience in the field.
Only if you completely ignore the fact that the development is delayed for a decade, that the engine development failed completely, that the radar still seems to be an issue, that we have hired foreign consultants after we messed up things.
We have achieved certain things, no doubt, but don't fall into blind blamings and hyping on the other side. We have to look at it rationally, have to point out the failures and mistake to learn from them, otherwise we will do it again and again. Simply overseeing the problems and just blaming one side is not a solution!
It's not like it would be at the expense of national security - the product they get would be better in most respects than the second best fighter they have right now.
Wrong, LCA MK1 might be technically in the same gen as M2K, Mig 29 and might offer some other advantages, but the overall performance is still clearly inferior, be it by lacking capabilities like limited number of hardpoints, payload, no IRST, or limited variety of weapons...
infact, in the strike role it will offer the same capability as the M2Ks and Jags had in 1999, but we have 2013 now and a multi role light combat fighter today must offer some more.
The engine is something we should not have attempted, or at least should have been a separate endeavor from the LCA project from the beginning.
We must have gone with such a development, to get some own know how in this area, but de-linked from the start and with a foreign engine for LCA prototypes and MK1s, then we would see several LCA squads in IAF today and MMRCA wouldn't even be needed.
We also should have used foreign partners to give such an engine development a higher chance of success, but all this didn't happened, or were simply messed up for the wrong reason and LCA as a fighter suffered from it.