The biggest shocker of the MMRCA......
- Thread starter black flame
- Start date
!!craft!!
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2010
- Messages
- 543
- Reaction score
- 0
cos PAF will get the same planes in the future. and they are using that plane for more than 30 years, that means that they know how that plane handles,its advantages and weakness, which means there is a possibility that they can kick our f -16 ***...
i always liked f-16...a true multi role fighter. I dont think PAF having f-16\'s will deter IAF from going for it. We\'ll be having a much advanced version & more numbers. Our second line fighter will be much more capable than enemy\'s frontline fighter 
. IAF would be then using python 5, R-77, AIM and NIRBHAY!!
Remember Israel also advised us to go for f-16..maybe there will be ease of inter-operability between IsAF and InAF!!!
. IAF would be then using python 5, R-77, AIM and NIRBHAY!!Remember Israel also advised us to go for f-16..maybe there will be ease of inter-operability between IsAF and InAF!!!
Markus
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- May 27, 2010
- Messages
- 4,425
- Reaction score
- -1
i always liked f-16...a true multi role fighter. I dont think PAF having f-16\'s will deter IAF from going for it. We\'ll be having a much advanced version & more numbers. Our second line fighter will be much more capable than enemy\'s frontline fighter
Remember Israel also advised us to go for f-16..maybe there will be ease of inter-operability between IsAF and InAF!!!
When did Israel do that?
Links...
Marxist
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2009
- Messages
- 2,894
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Markus
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- May 27, 2010
- Messages
- 4,425
- Reaction score
- -1
The Israeli advice is to go for F-16 only vis-a-vis Gripen.
Anyways, I donno what IAF and MoD are thinking if they want to purchase single engined fighters.
IAF doctrine itself calls for twin engined bigger planes for higher radius coverage.
!!craft!!
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2010
- Messages
- 543
- Reaction score
- 0
i always liked f-16...a true multi role fighter. I dont think PAF having f-16\'s will deter IAF from going for it. We\'ll be having a much advanced version & more numbers. Our second line fighter will be much more capable than enemy\'s frontline fighter
Remember Israel also advised us to go for f-16..maybe there will be ease of inter-operability between IsAF and InAF!!!
the problem is not with f 16 .no doubt that it is a excellent war plane with a good record...the problem is usa,its tot and source codes.and it being a pain in the *** after the sales of weapon.
Yes ToT would be a problem but im not a big fan of this ToT. If we are getting what we want then why dont we go for it? Regarding sales,if need demands cant we go for third party sources?
dbc
PDF THINK TANK: ANALYST
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2009
- Messages
- 6,551
- Reaction score
- 14
- Country
- Location
Yes ToT would be a problem but im not a big fan of this ToT. If we are getting what we want then why dont we go for it? Regarding sales,if need demands cant we go for third party sources?
Is ToT a problem for LM or Boeing? Has this been verified or just assumed?
TOT is a problem for uncle Sam. It\'s just assumed.
dbc
PDF THINK TANK: ANALYST
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2009
- Messages
- 6,551
- Reaction score
- 14
- Country
- Location
FMS isn't applicable for the MMRCA bid, LM plans to move the F-16 production line to India - impossible to do that without ToT.
linkinpark
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2008
- Messages
- 865
- Reaction score
- 0
Usually, all the American fighters comes with strings which end-users don't like.
A random selection of examples:
Malaysia and the F/A-18: Mahathir Mohammad on F/A-18s & the US:
Brazils experiences with US ITAR et al.
Brazilian brigadier bashes US defense export policies on YouTube - The DEW Line
UK (and others) tough issues with JSF technology transfer:
UK Leads Growing Backlash Against JSF
ITAR Fallout: Britain to Pull Out of F-35 JSF Program?
Last edited by a moderator:
Similar threads
- Article
