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.
Anyone want an obsolete Indian fighter?
In March the "Tejas" completed its 500th flight test. Flying at Mach 1.4 and capable of carrying weapons on seven hard points, the Tejas is the flagship in India's long struggle to develop an indigenous light fighter aircraft. But while the technology represents a major achievement for India's aviation industry, questions remain whether the effort is worth the money that is being poured into it.
It is by no means certain that even the Indian Air Force, which needs to replace its aging fleet of Russian-made MiG-21s, will buy the plane over the several other light fighters it could obtain from abroad. Nor are export prospects certain given the glut of superior US, French, Swedish and other light fighter aircraft now on the world's armaments market.
[..] New Delhi should swallow its pride and cancel the program before any more money is wasted. Cancellation should have minimal impact on the air force, as the number of aircraft that will be acquired from the recent bids should be more than enough for MiG-21 replacement. The funding and experience can be applied to India's other ambitious program, the Medium Combat Aircraft. Ultimately, it is up to the government to cut its losses before the Tejas makes its 1,000th "test" flight.
David Nguyen is a University of Hawaii alumnus with a degree in political science and Asian studies. [Independent Observer]
[..]The delay has led to criticism from many quarters, with even the Parliamentary Committee on Defence recently submitting a report warning that the aircraft could already be obsolete by the time it goes into operation.
Technical and cost problems stall India's LCA
India's 17-year-old Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) programme, delayed by more than a decade, continues to be plagued by serious technical uncertainties and cost overruns, according to India's Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG).
A new CAG report states that the LCA's development by the Aeronautical Development Agency, which is funded by the Defence Research and Development Organisation, is "beset with delays for almost every vital component of the aircraft".
Originally posted by emile
That must wage argue with S.S
五十步笑百步
Originally posted by Stealth Spy
""Never argue with an idiot, they drag you down to their level and beat you with experience"
P.S: Some of the replies on what i think, my posting, etc made for entertaining reading to say the least
Originally posted by chinawhite
I'll tell you now, china has come a much longer way than india has.
Originally posted by chinawhite
Main adversary
FC-1
Specifications
POWERPLANT - RD-93 turbofans, 49.4kN dry or 81.4kN with afterburning
Hardpoints - 7
Maximum Speed 1.8M,
Service Ceiling 59,055 feet.
Maximum External Stores Load 3,900kg
Combat radius 1,200km
Main armament - SD-10 missile.
Has three 8"x6" color MFD
LCA tejas
Specifications
POWERPLANT - GE F404 turbofan, 48.9 kN dry or 78.7 kN with afterburner
Hardpoints - 7
Maximum Speed Mach 1.7
Service Ceiling 50,000 feet.
Maximum External Stores Load 4000kg (8818 lbs.)
Combat radius - ??
Main armament - R-77
Has three 5"x5" color MFD
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Possible mix of the future pakistani airforce
18 Block 52 F-16s which are superior to the LCA in performace (possibly 18 more)
60 MLU F-16s which are superior to the LCA in performace
36 J-10 fighters which are superior to the LCA in performace
150-200 FC-1 fighters which are comparable to the LCA in performace
= 282 forth generation fighters which are deployed on the indian boarder. These offer a real challenge to the current indian airforce which needs more capable fighters than the LCA to combat a ever growing pakistani airforcce and a modernising chinese airforce
Chinese airforce (current, projected *)
76 - Su-27SK
76 - Su-30MK
100 - J-11 (to be upgraded to J-11B standard with PL-12 missiles)
100 - Su-27SKM*
50-100 J-10 (more to be produced later at a rate of 50 planes a year)
Unknown number of other BVR platforms in the PLAAF
= 476 known BVR platforms in service with the PLAAF. This figure does not include the J-8F planes or the JH-7A with BVR capable radars and have been seen fitted with BVR SD-10 missiles.
So the indian airforce needs to at least match or better these possible forces on its boarder. If we include MRCA aircraft this could better the future situation with pakistan and the current situation with china but in reality china will be moving in leaps and bounds in the near future. Because the LCA is a inferior aircraft, it would not make sense to put them in action when its bombload is so small and potentional roles would be filled by the Su-30MKI since the indians have moved away for point interdiction which was the LCA's intended role
Moreover, the indians already seem to want to buy more russian aircraft designs in the PAK-FA or the defuntant MiG-2000 (real designation unknown)
[edit on 16-8-2006 by chinawhite]
18 Block 52 F-16s which are superior to the LCA in performace (possibly 18 more)
60 MLU F-16s which are superior to the LCA in performace
36 J-10 fighters which are superior to the LCA in performace
150-200 FC-1 fighters which are comparable to the LCA in performace
In a related development, the IAF last week opened negotiations here with a delegation from Dassault to upgrade its 48 Mirage 2000's to Mirage 2000-9 standards.
Source
Originally posted by Daedalus3
Your mood swings and ridiculous bickerings can be conducted elsewhere.
Originally posted by Daedalus3
I'd REALLLLY like to know on which defence organisation's payroll Mr Nyugden is!
The India MRCA deal is in no way connected to the success or failure od the LCA.
The 18 block 52 F-16s are superior to the LCA in what aspects?
Targeting and Weapon Systems
For air/air missions, the aircraft is equipped with medium range missiles such as the AIM-120A AMRAAM. For close range combat, the aircraft can support the AIM-9X, IRIS-T, Python 4 and Python 5. The aircraft also retains the capability to use the six barrel 20mm Gatling gun. Block 52 configurations are also equipped with an advanced version of the APG-68 radar - the (V)9, while F-16E/F is fitted with the new APG-80 Active Electronic Scanning Array (AESA) system. These new radars have improved performance, higher processing speed and memory capacities and improved high-resolution synthetic aperture radar mode which allows the pilot to locate and recognize tactical ground targets from considerable distances. In conjunction with inertial aided weapons, the advanced F-16 gains an enhanced capability for all-weather precision strike from standoff distances. Modern F-16s of the advanced Block 50/52 can accommodate various targeting systems, including the Lockheed Martin Sniper XR/Pantera, and Northrop Grumman/RAFAEL Litening. These pods are used for target identification, acquisition and designation for smart, GPS guided munitions or laser guided bombs such as GBU-31 Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM), the AGM-154 Joint Standoff Weapon (JSOW), SPICE guided weapon, and CBU-103/104/105 Wind Corrected Munitions Dispenser (WCMD). The later can also be cued by target data provided directly from the radar, in low visibility conditions. On recce missions, advanced F-16s can also carry autonomous reconnaissance pods on the centerline, on intelligence gathering penetration or standoff sorties.
Wasn't it 150?
Anyways lets take a look at the IAF air superiority and MRCA(not fighter-bombers)sqdrn strength in accordance with the same timelines:
China on the other hand cannot afford to even think about maintaining more than 50-100 fighters dedicated to the Indian theater because of
1)PACCOM (Note this is a F-22/F-35 boosted PACCOM) with all forward AFBs and carrier groups
2)JASDF (Note that the JASDF getting F-22 is not an impossibility)
3)ROC AF
4)South Korea AF (calculating and deducting a numerical advantage of 2:1 against the North; inclusive of Japan)
5)Australia?
Notably the PAK-FA/Mig2000i/MCA angle can be considered as inevitable eventualities along with this
Yang wei, who is the chief engineer of Chengdu aircraft design and research institute(611), said that a new important prototype will start its maiden flight within five years.
According to several insiders, this prototype is a twin-engine stealth fighter with internal weapon bays.
Engines will be size reduced WS-10 modification with smaller by-pass ratio, thrust 110KN and t/w ratio 9.0
Originally posted by nawkturn
Originally posted by chinawhite
You know better than to make accusations. Are you implying that Mr Nguyen was paided to share his independent view on the LCA's progress?. Making speculation is fine but you should class you speculation as just that, speculation. From the information we know, his opinion was independent from defense industries while Atimes.com is definatly independent from the defence industry..
From open sourced material. The MRCA was formulated as a stop-gap solution because the LCA was taking so long to develop. The LCA was meet to be inducted in the 90's which was pushed into the 21st century while the MRCA had a comparable date to the LCAs original induction date. Both these programs were delayed by governemtn indecision and lobbying from both sides.
On that note, Mr Nguyen was more about noting the place of a MiG-21 replacment in the modern battlefield
I have always thought and still believed that the F-16Block 52 employ better avonics and ECM suite. I am not talking about MFDs or what you see on the outside, but what you get on the inside. I have been under the impression that countries who have brought the F-16 did so because they offered better performance than other systems found on the Gripen or Russian fighters.
All of this depends on what the Pakistani versions contain. But a standard Block 52 has more capability than the LCA (the version of indian components)
From different accounts there are different numbers, 150 was the contract deal and 50 more seems to have been the optional piece
I had these figures for the IAF in 2020, the PAF figures are for 2015
190 MKI
55-65 Mirage
73 MiG-29
140 Jaguars (?)
150-200 LCA
126 MRCA
Give or take some more MKI/Mirage or the LCA figures which leaves you with 794 aircraft or almost 40 SQN which is the perfect number of SQN the indian airforce needs
Although there has been talk of the Bison serving towards 2020-2025 and 70 MiG-27/23 being upgraded so the number can jump from different directions
That is a oxymoron because the PLAAF already stations more than 100 planes in the indian region/s and had done so since the 1960s. Lhasa airbase is the primary base and is located close to Lhasa. Then there is Golmud which is lower down the region in Qinghai, kashi airbase in Lanzhou military region in Xingjiang. Then the Chengdu airbase ,Kunming Airbase or Mengzi airbase, each of these are regimental size but these figures dont reflect the amount of deployable forces the area is able to sustain
1) Even with Forward deployed airbases, these are extremely far away to be helpful. The main obstacle is the aircraft carrier which has been assigned a large contingent of aircraft already based on chinas east coast. These include the JH-7, Su-30MK2, H-6M bombers armed with stand off cruise missiles which in total number more than 100 aircraft. Add this to the Future Su-33 and J-10s being produced by the time in 2015 and china has a lot of aircraft + their SAMs and navy
2) The JSDF is FAR FAR AWAY and wouldn't be able to deploy a lot of fighters. Thats if they were ever in the battle to begin with. The Japanese are not obliged to help the americans
3) Unless they get some real offensive power, they will be restricted to their own airspace which will be flooding with chinese aircraft and their assoicated munitions.
4) Unless you have anything to suggest otherwise, South Korea and the PRC are on very friendly terms and are more in agreement involving the 6 party talks than them and the Americans. They are the same with the South Koreans, they are not obliged to help the americans and would be unlikey to even allow american fighters to be stationed at south korean airfields
5) Your talking about a country almost half away around the world. How exactly are they going to reach china with their aircraft. 5 inflight re-fuelings?
76 - Su-27SK
76 - Su-30MK
100 - J-11 (to be upgraded to J-11B standard with PL-12 missiles)
100 - Su-27SKM*
200-300 J-10 (more to be produced later at a rate of 50 planes a year)
100-300 J-8II modifed into the J-8H/F variants. They are still in production as well
24 Su-30MK2
48 Su-33
Maximum force(the 300 figure) projected for 2010 of BVR craft - 1024. Minimum force - 624.
These are just BVR craft which does not include the JH-7/MiG-21/H-6M aircraft which are quite numerous
A recent comment(Zhuhai 2006) by the chieft designer of the J-10 has stated that a new prototype aircraft will be first flown in five more years. As you might have known, he is refering to the improved J-10 with internal bomb bays. That is in 2011. As you know, china is also developing UACVs for her forces as well
Yang wei, who is the chief engineer of Chengdu aircraft design and research institute(611), said that a new important prototype will start its maiden flight within five years.
According to several insiders, this prototype is a twin-engine stealth fighter with internal weapon bays.
Engines will be size reduced WS-10 modification with smaller by-pass ratio, thrust 110KN and t/w ratio 9.0
Originally posted by chinawhite
Originally posted by Daedalus3
Your mood swings and ridiculous bickerings can be conducted elsewhere.
Mood swings?. Have i ever conducted myself any different?. But you do realise that this thread is almost three months old and was recently pushed up by one of the recent posts
The only thing that possibly links the two, is the increase of the MRCA deal from ~130 to ~200.
He is still comparing the LCA to the likes of the F35 and Grippen
but I can safely say it is of high 4th gen std.
I was unaware that the PAF F-16s are going to be HMD. They are getting them nonetheless. Anyways this is a good summary of the F-16s the PAF will be eventually getting.
Note that when facing each other the electronic support for both a/c must also be taken into consideration.