It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Indian Air Force : News, Pics and Discussion thread

page: 16
3
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 15 2006 @ 05:54 AM
link   
I suggest anone interested in the MRCA deal to read this

www.the-week.com...

Its somewhat a long article but gives a good indian perspective




posted on Apr, 15 2006 @ 05:55 AM
link   
Well, as for airframe design surely the Nimrod seems better suited than a modified 737. However great manuverability is not a prority for an MRA.

The critical things for an MPA are the sensors. And that where the P-8 is a generation ahead. The Nimrod MRA.4's sensor and command system are supplied by Boeing and are the essentially same as ones on the older P-3C Orion which the P-8 intends to replace.

The magnetic systems and much of the sensors of the MRA.4 is dirctly borrowed from the older Nimrod MRA.2 and represents the same level of technology as seen on the P-3C.

The P-8 however features a new generation of the latest sensors and avionics that give it a critical advantage over the Nimrod or the upgraded Russian Types or the P-3C. Hope my arguments were convincing.



posted on Apr, 15 2006 @ 06:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by chinawhite
I suggest anone interested in the MRCA deal to read this

www.the-week.com...

Its somewhat a long article but gives a good indian perspective


That article is a vintage one and is almost a year old when the MRCA was still on the anvil. The views and detils expressed in that article dont hold good anymore considering that the F/A-18 E/F, the Rafale and the Eurofighter got added to the MRCA list with the deletion of the Mirage-2000-5. An exlcusive custom F-16 block 70 is on offer instead of the standard blocks. The Mig-29 got replaced by the much more capable Mig-35 which inturn seems to have given was for the stealthy I-2000 ! India's equations with America have changed in a very big way over the period between the article being written and now. The equations considered in the article are perhaps not the same ones that are used to make judgements today.

[edit on 15/4/06 by Stealth Spy]



posted on Apr, 15 2006 @ 06:14 AM
link   
Keyword : perspective


EDIT: ummm?....

The article was not posted to give a tip of what the other countries are offering india but a insight on how the indian defence planners are reacting to the offers and polictical implications for each deal

Theres more to defence deals then just comparing block numbers. Most of the aircraft we fill the original MRCA requiment twice over and roughly comparale. What i like to do is look at the deal and see what direction india is heading. The plane being bought will reflect on indias foreign policy which will affected countries in the asian region.

You said yourself that the US does not win on capablity.

For the russians its a life or death situation. For the EF its some extra cash and same for the rafale. For the US it means its will have won the diplomatic game and have influence in the region after it can control indian arm purchases and its policy. Hard diplomacy, Back scene hair pulling arm twisting. Most things its does with other users

Indias policy it seems is not for a dominate india but for a multi-polar asia. They both make deals with china and the US playing each other off. US for a counter-balance to china and china trying to stop that counter balance and another force to oppose US power world-wide

What is india seeking now? secure oil supplies gas supplies?. To surround pakistan?. Indian plans are not to clear as of now with no real goal except to keep growing. Its hard to think of a senario without a definate goal. Are they going to buy american, stick to russian or buy some european?. thats why things like arms purchases are so important. China sets goals each year, goals which are reachable. Whats india thinking?.

Funny thing is these deals india is making are through producion rights or aquiring technology which it does not have and later applying it to other equipment. This is what you were so disgusted over when china does it. But when another country like say, India, whats your opinoin?

But if your willing to have a more in-depth conversation on this then i will be waiting



[edit on 15-4-2006 by chinawhite]



posted on Apr, 15 2006 @ 07:47 AM
link   
stealth spy, I figured you were looking at it like that.

Do you really believe that Boeing is developing all new systems for the P-8 and not making use the the very systems that they are also supplying for the Nimrod MRA 4?

You think that they will just throw away perfectly good and up to date systems and start again from scratch?

Where do you get this stuff from?
I notice that the Boeing website states that the APS 137, currently in use on the P-3 Orion is to be upgraded for use in the P-8. This is only one system but doesn't it sort of contradict what you said?

I also downloaded the P-8 PDF from the Boeing website and no mention is made anywhere of 'all new next generation systems'. Are you really sure that the Nimrod is a generation behind it?



Well, as for airframe design surely the Nimrod seems better suited than a modified 737. However great manuverability is not a prority for an MRA.


I must have missed it, where did anybody claim that manouverability was an issue?

However, I would have thought that the Nimrods 'more than' 6,000 mile range with 15 hours on station would be extremely relevant to India by comparison with the P-8's 1,200 miles with 4 hours on station.

Thats quite a difference and would, I reckon, allow India to operate the same missions with fewer aircraft representing a decent cost saving.



posted on Apr, 15 2006 @ 11:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by chinawhite
Keyword : perspective


What is india seeking now? secure oil supplies gas supplies?. To surround pakistan?. Indian plans are not to clear as of now with no real goal except to keep growing. Its hard to think of a senario without a definate goal. Are they going to buy american, stick to russian or buy some european?. thats why things like arms purchases are so important. China sets goals each year, goals which are reachable. Whats india thinking?.

[edit on 15-4-2006 by chinawhite]



India more or less 'surrounds' Pakistan anyways!

You have landmass encirlement right from the Southeast of Pakistan to the North. The government in Afghanistan is/was always(Northern Alliance-types)
aligned more towards India and the USSR. In the South you a vastly superior
navy capable of executing a more or less total naval blockade.

India's going to mix n' match. Its been a unwritten policy for years and it obviously has its benefits in the long run. Especially for local industries. You get to see how stuff compares first hand.Infrastructural/maintenance difficulties are always overcome by indigneousing everything thus making oneself more self sufficient. Few countries have the options India has. Either they're bullied into decisions by the US, or they're on the other side and hence have little or no access to US & co stuff.

China does everything in 5 year plans rather than one year. Right now China's given itself five years to learn English. That's one of the spheres in which they're lacking(as compared to India) and they've obviously seen the kind of business a strong english-speaking community can pull in w/o having to spend anything on infrastructural facilities.

What is India thinking? India's thinking big..
It works in FYPs too. Beyond that I feel its wise not to contribute much to this.



posted on Apr, 15 2006 @ 01:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by chinawhite
What is india seeking now? secure oil supplies gas supplies?. To surround pakistan?. Indian plans are not to clear as of now with no real goal except to keep growing. Its hard to think of a senario without a definate goal. Are they going to buy american, stick to russian or buy some european?. thats why things like arms purchases are so important. China sets goals each year, goals which are reachable. Whats india thinking?.

But if your willing to have a more in-depth conversation on this then i will be waiting


Sorry but i am not willing to take this off topic geopolitical India v/s China talk any further. Extending talk about chinese having goals and questioning if India ever have any goals will only lead to needless never ending unnecessary off-topic posting.

Getting back to the MRCA : It is fairly clear that all the competing airplanes are all potent fighting machines and would serve India's needs. The choice of airplane would hardly make any earth shattering difference to capability of the Air Force. Keeping this in mind it seems that the decision makers are going to go for a package which would be good for the country as a whole that include the realms of technology gathering and political equations that would be helpful to satisfy some other interests.


Funny thing is these deals india is making are through producion rights or aquiring technology which it does not have and later applying it to other equipment. This is what you were so disgusted over when china does it


Now now, i have never expressed any "disgust" at fair and legal technology transfer deals and production licenses which have been duly paid for, irrespective of the country involved. However what "disgusts" me is illegal plagerism and mass scale shameless cloning of airplanes (and unapproved export of the same), and this sentiment of mine too is valid irrespective of the nation involved.



posted on Apr, 15 2006 @ 02:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by waynos
Do you really believe that Boeing is developing all new systems for the P-8 and not making use the the very systems that they are also supplying for the Nimrod MRA 4?

You think that they will just throw away perfectly good and up to date systems and start again from scratch?

I notice that the Boeing website states that the APS 137, currently in use on the P-3 Orion is to be upgraded for use in the P-8.


Well they may not start from scratch, but the uprated systems must surely be better than base ones.

Additionally, globalsecurity adds that the electronic support measures systems, the electro-optical / infrared sensor, magnetic anomaly detector are all "new".

The Boeing provided Tactical Command System (TCS) and systems that integrate sensors on the MRA.4 are also to be enhcanced to a higher level in the P-8.

Raytheon is also adding its revolutionary GPS Anti-Jam and Towed Decoy Self-Protection suites into the meal in addition to its uprated APS 137.

There are also some "new generation" pods for an electronic intelligence (ELINT) role. There is also some HSI process that is said to simplify things greatly and reduce costs in a big way.


Are you really sure that the Nimrod is a generation behind it

Well, perhaps "a generational gap" was a far fetched comment that i made but the US rejected at BAe proposal to build a Nimrod that was more/equally potent as the MRA.4 and the same was rejected and selected the new gen P-8 project from Boeing. This speaks for itself for any comparisions between the two.


However, I would have thought that the Nimrods 'more than' 6,000 mile range with 15 hours on station would be extremely relevant to India by comparison with the P-8's 1,200 miles with 4 hours on station. Thats quite a difference and would, I reckon, allow India to operate the same missions with fewer aircraft representing a decent cost saving.


Yes the Nimrod does have that advantage, but considering that India's range needs are less than what is offered by the P-3 or the P-8, it would not make a critical difference.

However considering that the first P-8 is only scheduled for 2009 (?) and the new Nimrod is much ahead of the P-8 project, it would appear more favourable IMHO to satisfy the IN's needs for MPA's considering that most of the MPA fleet is at the brink of retirement.

[edit on 15/4/06 by Stealth Spy]



posted on Apr, 15 2006 @ 05:17 PM
link   


Well they may not start from scratch, but the uprated systems must surely be better than base ones.


Absolutely, but who ever said that the MRA4 systems were 'base'?




The Boeing provided Tactical Command System (TCS) and systems that integrate sensors on the MRA.4 are also to be enhcanced to a higher level in the P-8.


Says who though? I could find no reference to any of this on Boeings own PDF, I would have thought it was on there? I'm not calling you a liar btw, I would merely like to see the info.



Well, perhaps "a generational gap" was a far fetched comment that i made


Fair enough, thats all I was getting at. I don't know enough about the details to declare one superior to the other, but in systems suites they are right up there with each other, make no mistake about that.



the US rejected at BAe proposal to build a Nimrod that was more/equally potent as the MRA.4 and the same was rejected and selected the new gen P-8 project from Boeing. This speaks for itself for any comparisions between the two.


Actually that is completely wrong and if you are supposing the P-8 is far superior because of it then let me enlighten you, BAE withdrew the Nimrod MRA4 from the MMA of their own accord, it was never rejected. The reason for this was that the rights to market the Nimrod to the USA were held by McDonnell Douglas (any overseas bidder for any US contract MUST be partnered with a domestic supplier, ie Lockheed and Alenia for the C-27J, MDC had been BAE's US partners before on the Harrier and the Hawk and the Nimrod continued the association. The acquisition of MDC by Boeing meant that they took these licenses but they were then faced with potentially promoting the Nimrod in competition to their own, home grown P-8, clearly this was never going to happen and without a US partner BAE had no option but to withdraw.




Yes the Nimrod does have that advantage, but considering that India's range needs are less than what is offered by the P-3 or the P-8, it would not make a critical difference.


I completely disagree, the issue isn't simply about the distance to be travelled, the Nimrods advantage here is about how long it can remain on station unrefuelled, or another way, how a single Nimrod can do the job of four P-8's or a single P-8 and three trips with a tanker to fill it up again.

Given that some of the fleet will always be grounded for repairs and maintenance the Nimrod will achieve a much higher degree of availability. In simple wear and tear issues, imagine for simplicty's sake a 24 hours a day patrol coverage by a single aircraft being airborne at all times over a period of 7 days, with that simple scenario 42 P-8 missions would need to be flown (all those takes offs and landings, plus the flight crews required etc).

With the Nimrod MRA 4 you could provide a single aircraft airborne for 24hours a day with only 11 missions, resulting in a much reduced wear and tear on the aircraft because of the lower number of take off/landing cycles.

This is just a simple 'for instance' of course.

I'd love to see the Nimrod in service with a second air force, but I don't really see it happening, despite what I said in this post.



posted on Apr, 16 2006 @ 04:04 AM
link   
Didn't I read somwhere on this thread that the Tu-160 was being considered for maritime recon as well as more obvious roles?
So is this P-8/Nimrod bit in the same fray or I'm talking apples and oranges here?



posted on Apr, 16 2006 @ 04:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by Daedalus3
India more or less 'surrounds' Pakistan anyways!


Its quite debatable how surrounded they are.

Afganistan cannot defend itself let alone offer help to india. The pakistani army goes in and out all the times these days and i dont think the ISI hasn't got a good deal of the afgan government under its thumbs considering the ISI had be funcioning there since the soviet afgan war.

And the navy surrounding pakistan is also debatable. the '71 war and kargil and not good examples because it was a seperated pakistan or a pakistan in decine againest a united indian force. Pakistans navy and airforce in these few years are now in a huge tansition. Consider that anti-ship stand-off weapons and anti-sip ground based missile are now going in the 100s of kilometers and the pakistan cruise missile with a range of 500km, its still a open game for me


China does everything in 5 year plans rather than one year. Right now China's given itself five years to learn English.


Broken english. LoL.

But a big improvment in china in the language barrier. I remember watching CCTV 9 (the english CCTV channel) about a few years ago and it was like malaysian english. Now its more like british english. It still the same reporter. I never thought english would be a problem since there are many translation services around.

But then theirs people like me which speak perfect english/chinese and broken french, german and indonesian. and a few words of other languages. You just got to love the australians decision to cozy up to countries and learn their language for a year then get tried of it


What is India thinking? India's thinking big..
It works in FYPs too. Beyond that I feel its wise not to contribute much to this.


May i ask why?



posted on Apr, 16 2006 @ 06:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by chinawhite

Originally posted by Daedalus3
India more or less 'surrounds' Pakistan anyways!


Its quite debatable how surrounded they are.

Afganistan cannot defend itself let alone offer help to india. The pakistani army goes in and out all the times these days and i dont think the ISI hasn't got a good deal of the afgan government under its thumbs considering the ISI had be funcioning there since the soviet afgan war.

And the navy surrounding pakistan is also debatable. the '71 war and kargil and not good examples because it was a seperated pakistan or a pakistan in decine againest a united indian force. Pakistans navy and airforce in these few years are now in a huge tansition. Consider that anti-ship stand-off weapons and anti-sip ground based missile are now going in the 100s of kilometers and the pakistan cruise missile with a range of 500km, its still a open game for me

May i ask why?


hmm.. Instances of Pak Army regulars going in and out of Afghanitan at will?
I've haven't heard of any.
And the only pull the ISI had in Afghanistan was the Taliban. Whatever consitutes the Afghan Government now is totally anti-taliban and mostly Northern alliance. Hence the frustration in Pakistan. THey're especially pissed witht he appointment of the Foreign Minister Abdullah Abdullah a Northern Alliance Leader.

Pakistan: Musharraf Criticizes Afghan President On Taliban Claims


Here's Pakistan's view itself:


It needs to be realised and accepted as a fact of life, no matter how bitter, that today Pakistan has hardly any friends in Afghanistan. The Taliban, overwhelmingly Pakhtoon, once our favoured protégé and now all but disowned by us, can hardly be said to be on our side. The non-Pakhtoon Northern Alliance, now in office in Kabul, is yet to forget and forgive us for our sustained support to the ‘enemy’, the Taliban, all the way through the bitter struggle against their draconian regime in 1996-2001.

As Ambassador Rustam Mohmand (now a research associate at the Area Study Centre) would put it, Pakistan-Afghan relations affected ‘inevitably’, first, the non-Pukhtoon (Northern Alliance) and subsequently the Pakhtoons (Taliban) to make both view Pakistan with ‘suspicion bordering on hostility.’

Pakistan’s role through nearly a whole decade of the Afghan jihad (1979-89) and subsequently under President Najibullah (1989-1992) and the Mujahideen interregnum (1992-1996) until the advent of the Taliban has been one of a wartime ally rather than one of an honest broker. It made no serious effort to unite the seven recognized Mujahideen Tanzimat — warring groups — and let them fight the Soviet invaders each under its own party banner. Furthermore, Pakistan’s role through the jihad showed a marked pro-radical and sectarian tilt more than a pro-moderate preference. It favoured radicals like Gulbadin Hekmatyar and Abdur Rasool Sayyaf rather than moderates like Gilani, Rabbani and Mujeddadi.




And about the Navy blockade bit:

The cruise missile Babur you're talking about has more foreign origins that The Brahmos itself. The only place such a missile can come from is China. ITs pretty evident that Pakistan does not have the capability to desgin such a missile from scratch. Also with a range of 500km the missile if transferred from China is in clear violation of the MTCR(Brahmos abides by MTCR specs). Anyways the point being the Missile is subsonic and already has a counter onboard IN warships in the form of Barak I/II Anti-missile missiles.
Besides this missile needs to go into production and acquire Op status. It obv iisn't cheap and hence needs financing. The missile IMHO is more of a political statement rather than a military asset. Lets wait and see how many get into service.

The only real threat the PN had were the Agosta 90 diesel subs which are now offset by IN ASW capabilities.

India Could Enforce Naval Blockade : 2002

Maybe a blockade scenario is in order?



[edit on 16-4-2006 by Daedalus3]



posted on Apr, 16 2006 @ 07:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Daedalus3
hmm.. Instances of Pak Army regulars going in and out of Afghanitan at will?
I've haven't heard of any.


In the border areas as a example of how much power the afgan forces have on heir own border areas. There was a pakistani and coalition offensive just a few months ago


And the only pull the ISI had in Afghanistan was the Taliban. Whatever consitutes the Afghan Government now is totally anti-taliban and mostly Northern alliance.


Have you ever heard how the afgan forces fight war. One day they are keen supporters, die for the cause people. A suitfull of green backs and their not to keen for their cause. This is how the rapid advance of US forces were played out.

I doubt the ISI which has been operating with the mujahideen since the 80s left all their eggs in one basket


The cruise missile Babur you're talking about has more foreign origins that The Brahmos itself. The only place such a missile can come from is China. ITs pretty evident that Pakistan does not have the capability to desgin such a missile from scratch.


The actual accusation is that its a copy of the tomahawk. Whatever its origins its doesn't matter on how effective the missile is. And does everything pakistan has have to be connected to a wrong doing by china?



Anyways the point being the Missile is subsonic and already has a counter onboard IN warships in the form of Barak I/II Anti-missile missiles.


Firstly i do not believe the effectiness of the barak system. The babur as reported by pakistani TV almost touches the water. You need a 24hour AWACS system with a look down radar to find the babur. It can be fired from a submarine and land. It could cme from any direction.

The russians overflew a US carrier with two big planes. A US carrier with the most sophiciated defences was penerated by two low flying aircraft. Do you really think that the indian navy has more AWACS craft than the US navy?. Im quite sure if they find the babur they could easily destroy the babur. But its silly to thik hat everything will work as advertised


Maybe a blockade scenario is in order?


Sure, Your one or mine?



posted on Apr, 16 2006 @ 09:47 AM
link   
Btw, Dassault's official stance now is that they will not take orders for new Mirages, although they could take part in refurbishment / upgrade of existing planes. So much for the 20 new Mirages story.

For the Nimrod. I think that having the privilege of flying one of the ugliest planes in the world (I'd like to put "the ugliest" but there might be some awful faces I'm not aware of) is a very attractive perspective which importance should not be underestimated. My vote goes to the ugly brit beast. Looks like a very capable aircraft, although a new version of the Bear would probbaly be superior.



posted on Apr, 16 2006 @ 12:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by waynos
I would merely like to see the info.


www.globalsecurity.org...

Wonder how the Tupolev-160 Blackjacks with some bells and whistles from Israel will fit into the fray
and here is the article that speculates about it >> link

_________

Here is an article that says that the Mig-25 will be retired on May 1. The source also claims some exclusive acsess
:


May 1997: An IAF MiG-25R breaks the sound barrier over Islamabad, the sonic boom mistaken for a blast down below. Pak radars pick up the intruder, scramble F-16s but can’t get anywhere close. Pak says the MiG-25 pilot deliberately gave out aircraft signature to remind PAF it had no equal in its inventory.


Nine years later, the IAF is all set to retire its most closely guarded assets: the MiG-25R Foxbat, the great Cold War machine which entered IAF service in 1981 and flew secret reconnaissance missions over Pakistan and China
, will be officially phased out on May 1.

And this week, The Sunday Express became the first news organisation in the country ever to be given exclusive access to the Foxbat squadron, its pilots, technicians and maintenance hangars .

Wing Commander Alok Chauhan, a MiG-25 pilot with the Rapiers Squadron—in 2003 it took the Foxbats from the 102 Trisonics squadron—says it’s a rare privilege: “Most in the IAF have not even seen this base or the aircraft”. Until now, only a handful of IAF-released photographs of the Foxbats were in the public domain. Just why has the Bareilly base been a forbidden zone? Because the Foxbat was to the IAF what the SR-71 Blackbird was to the USAF. Eight MiG-25R variants and two MiG-25U for conversion training made the Trisonics squadron a “strategic reconnaissance” unit.
Flying at almost three times the speed of sound despite its 40-ton fully loaded weight—it was made of welded nickel-steel with titanium for heat critical areas—and cruising in the stratosphere at almost 100,000 feet, these mysterious jets could map all of Pakistan without letting the other side get a whiff. “These aircraft can map a country the size of Pakistan in a single-digit number of missions.
Frankly, we can push our Foxbats for another 2-3 years, but after three life extensions, it’s prudent to retire them now,” says Wing Commander Chauhan.

Bareilly base commander Air Commodore Shankar Mani agrees: “These aircraft were and are the envy of the world. After 25 years of yeoman service, it is now time to let them go. They have served us exceptionally. We have innovated and changed, we must move on now.At top speed, a Foxbat can zip away from missiles, allowing for almost trouble-free spying. The seniormost and most accomplished Foxbat pilot still in service, assistant chief Air Vice Marshal Sumit Mukerji said, “It feels pretty exclusive to be part of the Mach 3 club.
It’s sad that pilots may never get a chance to fly such a machine ever again.”
And until May 15, the Foxbats will remain in the air.

The void they leave behind at the Bareilly base will be rapidly filled by two new squadrons of Russian Sukhoi-30 MKIs
, aircraft that can fly farther, but not half as high or fast as the spy planes. It is to satellites that the IAF will now turn to enhance its capability once the Foxbats retire. The IAF has already proposed declassification of much of the Foxbat’s tenure. “We have taken up a case to declassify certain things, but it is ultimately up to the higher command. We would like to ultimately ring out to the country an object that has remained under a veil of secrecy,” says Wing Commander Manish Khanna, commanding officer of the Foxbat squadron.

Letting the Foxbats go has been deeply emotional. Wing Commander Sanjeev Taliyan speaks for the squadron: “From the height at which we fly, you can see the entire Himalayan range at one go. No aircraft has ever been able to achieve for us what the Foxbat has. We will miss flying them.”


Full Article >>

An excellent article.
. Hopefully these wonderbirds make way for the Mig-31 (read this !)
or even better - how 'bout the Global Hawk ... would that be too much to ask .. ?

Here are some cool new IAF Mig-25 pics in the "downloads" section of this link >> www.nationalgeographic.co.in...



[edit on 16/4/06 by Stealth Spy]



posted on Apr, 16 2006 @ 01:11 PM
link   

India's international military base is expected to become operational by the end of 2006 in Dushanbe, Tajikistan, as part of New Delhi's thrust into ...


From the Jane's cover page : jdw.janes.com...

The very base is to sport 2 sqds. of upgraded Mig-29's


This adds to India's alredy existant base in central Asia at Farkhor.

Additionally this link adds ... Tajikistan flies around 190 fighter aircraft such as MiG 21s, MiG 27s, MiG 29s and Sukhoi 24s, nearly all of which are operated by the Indian Air Force (IAF).

[edit on 16/4/06 by Stealth Spy]



posted on Apr, 16 2006 @ 01:13 PM
link   
Thanks for the link, some good info, though I don't see anything that is so far ahead of the Nirmrod, but with a $44Bn programme, they will certainly be planning something a bit special.

Upon reading the Boeing website, I notice that it mentions the P-8 that is being offered to India would be 'specially configured to meet that countries own needs'. Maybe its the cynic in me (maybe because of the UK's F-35 saga) but that reads to me like "we won't be giving away anything we don't have to' which means there is no reason to suggest that the exported P-8 will be anything like as advanced as the USN version, or the Nimrod. Just a thought.

I also notice that the USN is buying a fleet of 108 of these, how many aircraft does India require? Remeber what I said about endurance?

Obviously the systems argument is one thing, but as far as the suitability of the airframe for the task goes, nothing beats the Nimrod in the Maritime role.



posted on Apr, 16 2006 @ 01:14 PM
link   
The Kiran and its replacement :
(credits to Harry)

full sized image : www.myaviation.net...

Trivia : The HJT-36 (HAL's Sitata IJT pictured above)is called so because it was developed from a drawing board scratch to an flying type in 36 months !!! ... all thanks to the tech base and infrastructure that the LCA project helped build.

And not surprisingly, a HJT-39 project is alredy underway. Also cslled the CAT (Combat - Advanced Trainer) the -39 Advanced Jet Trainer equivalent to say the British Hawk.

It is intended to be completed by 39 months from the date the project started.

Here is an excellent compilation of the information available on the CAT with some cool mock cockpit shots >>

The HJT-39 CAT

More here >> img188.imageshack.us...

A Flight International article added that negotiations are underway with Yakovlev of Russia to act as a consultant for the project on the lines of its partnership with the Chinese L-15 project and a similar Iranian project.

[edit on 16/4/06 by Stealth Spy]



posted on Apr, 16 2006 @ 10:21 PM
link   
Hey SS, did that foxbat article come with all those emoticons/smileys?


Where is this Fakhroor base again?



posted on Apr, 16 2006 @ 10:22 PM
link   
The nozzles look a bit to small

www.myaviation.net...



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join