On LCA they demanded a higher thrust engine before it can get in mas production and replace many of the old Mig 21. But if you compare it correctly, the MK1 offers comparable, thrust and weight as JF 17, or even the Gripen C/D that are in the same class.Why high requirement? DRDO has been working on each requirement for ages. And it would get experience/knowledge by mrca/pakfa. Saying IAF has not left any space!!
LCA MK1 6 to 6,5t and 83kN with the actual GE404IN
JF 17 6,4t and 84 kN
Gripen C/D 5,7t and 80kN
So if they can, or intend to produce it in higher numbers, why couldn't we dou it?
Also these insisting on indigenous parts only (in MCA again), although they now should understand that the technical capabilities of India, are not so far to offer comparable radar, or engines like western countries. MMR needed Israeli techs, Kaveri now French and they already said that the indigenous AESA development is not good enough and they search for a partner. But honestly, which country will offer a partnership in latest AESA development, if they can't use it for an own fighter?
Why not offer Isreal for example the partnership on MCA, instead serching for a partner only for radar development? Arent they desperatly searching for a platform to integrate their latest radar and avionics? Wouldn't they love to get a 5.gen fighter for way less than the F35 and moreover wouldn't it be the best for India too? A reliable partner with a lot of experiance in radar-, avionics - and weapon development, with enough money to join such a project and the need to replace several old fighters?
That's what I said, we have the chances to get western countries into such arms co-developemts (unlike China for example), but we are not using it!
I see it different:since we are going to have FGFA, MRCA, SU-30 for air superiority and LCA, MIRAGE(upgraded), MIG-29 can be used very effectively as point defence...WHY NOT DEVELOP MCA AS KICK@$$ STRIKE PLATFORM as replacement of JAGUARs. give it all the stealth, best radars and design it as primarly ground striker...
share your views..sahibs...
230 MKIs, 140 orded LCA (for IAF only), at least 126 MMRCA and now pretty sure about 250 FGFA and there are 50 more rumoured MKIs, 50 optional LCA Mk2s and even 74 optional MMRCAs, what means 746 multi role fighters for the next at least 2 decades!!!
Why do we need another type of multi role fighter for nearly the same time, that not even offer one capability, that those fighters can't offer?
Stealth - FGFA
Multi role - any of them
For air superiority - FGFA, MKI and MMRCA to support
For strike - FGFA and most likely MMRCA
Naval version - FGFA, MMRCA and even LCA is an option
Indigenous - LCA
Low cost - LCA
Wouldn't a 5. gen combo of FGFA and a stealth UCAV with that much 4+ fighters as a backup be the way better choice for IAF infuture?