What's new

Russian stealth fighter inferior to US-made F-35 and F-22 jets - IAF

ziaulislam

ELITE MEMBER
Apr 22, 2010
13,275
10
11,845
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
J-20 and other Chinese fighters are for rajakars/losers only.




JF-17? Even Chinese rejected that. They dumped it on Pakistan.



We have AESA equipped Jaguars, we have Mirage-2009 mk II, Mig-29SMT2, SU-30 MKI, Rafale, Tejas with AESA on the line. Do you think to fight Chinese FC-1 and vintage F-16 block 50 we need more? no.
IAF is comfortable when it comes to Pakistan with around 400 4th gen fighters at this moment (more when tejas, rafale comes) vs around 180 in PAF

but is hopelessly out numbered when it comes to china

j20 is going to slaughter IAF as its a generation ahead anything that india is going to field
india needs a fifth gen platform like an f35

now laugh on J20, J10, J11/J16, jf-17 and "vintage" f16 all you want but it will only make you look like a fool, it wont change reality on each of these platform performance

in my opionion, IAF needs catching up
it should do what IAF recommends

i.e dump tejas, induct either f-16/gripen under licence(gripen favorable given ease of induction with no other commitments made by LM) around 200 gripens with additional 36 rafalaes and additional su 30 should put IAF to around 36 squadrons by 2035 by which time AMCA should come on line.

navy and IAF should also meet togther and get some f35 may be 3 suardons each to counter j20

we know that jauguars are on last leg, should not be updated IMO, mirages and migs will have to go by 2035 too, the mig 27 and mig 21 need to be retired like yesterday

the 200 gripens+36 rafales+50 su 30= around 30-35 billion dollars

if IAF under pressures goes for alternative 300 tejas it would cost around 25-30 billion(Assuming the subsystem cost is around 8 billion dollars for 120 radars and engines per reports)

tejas doesn't suit IAF the same way jf-17 doesnt suit PLAAF
 

jamal18

SENIOR MEMBER
May 15, 2008
2,372
1
2,364
Country
Pakistan
Location
United Kingdom
I was told that the Americans made it a point to let the Russian's know about their exact stealth capabilities; so they know just how far behind they are.
 

GURU DUTT

BANNED
Oct 12, 2011
14,366
-75
20,038
Country
India
Location
India
IAF is comfortable when it comes to Pakistan with around 400 4th gen fighters at this moment (more when tejas, rafale comes) vs around 180 in PAF

but is hopelessly out numbered when it comes to china

j20 is going to slaughter IAF as its a generation ahead anything that india is going to field
india needs a fifth gen platform like an f35

now laugh on J20, J10, J11/J16, jf-17 and "vintage" f16 all you want but it will only make you look like a fool, it wont change reality on each of these platform performance

in my opionion, IAF needs catching up
it should do what IAF recommends

i.e dump tejas, induct either f-16/gripen under licence(gripen favorable given ease of induction with no other commitments made by LM) around 200 gripens with additional 36 rafalaes and additional su 30 should put IAF to around 36 squadrons by 2035 by which time AMCA should come on line.

navy and IAF should also meet togther and get some f35 may be 3 suardons each to counter j20

we know that jauguars are on last leg, should not be updated IMO, mirages and migs will have to go by 2035 too, the mig 27 and mig 21 need to be retired like yesterday

the 200 gripens+36 rafales+50 su 30= around 30-35 billion dollars

if IAF under pressures goes for alternative 300 tejas it would cost around 25-30 billion(Assuming the subsystem cost is around 8 billion dollars for 120 radars and engines per reports)

tejas doesn't suit IAF the same way jf-17 doesnt suit PLAAF
do not worry about your enemy and his war machine worry about your own prepairdness :haha:

make no mistake SAAB Grippen is never gonna make into IAF :coffee:

now all in all problem with russia curentlly is that Russia wanted india to share the cost of over all T57 project without goving any proper technology tanfsfer so india refused hence russia refused indian core demands like live testing by india pilots of FGFA or twin seat simontainous development which dragged hence slowly india started looking forother options but now russia has agreed to indian demands fully so lets see :coffee:
 

eldarlmari

SENIOR MEMBER
Mar 24, 2012
5,652
-21
9,367
Country
Singapore
Location
Singapore
LCA only came to fruition(after 33 years) as a result of the Mirage 2000
Similarly, there's no AMCA to talk about- with no FGFA to begin with.

You first make a domestic copy of a foreign plane by building the specialized infrastructure required and absorb the technologies that goes into it
Then make improvements to it that it beats the original plane in performance and quality.
Finally, u then create a whole new plane based on all the lessons learnt

It's a stepping stone to the other- there's no shortcuts. All fighter planes today(as well as tanks, APCs, artillery, submarines) can be said to have directly/indirectly descended from Nazi Germany's defense industry https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_re-armament

AMCA from NOWHERE? especially from a nation with hardly any notable entities in itsDefence MIC(aside from infantry helmets)?

Haha thanks.
 
Last edited:

A.P. Richelieu

SENIOR MEMBER
Dec 20, 2013
5,810
6
3,795
Country
Sweden
Location
Sweden
LCA only came to fruition(after 33 years) as a result of the Mirage 2000
There's no AMCA to talk about with no FGFA to begin with.

You first make a domestic copy of a foreign plane- absorb the technologies that goes into it
Then make improvements to it that it beats the original plane in performance and quality.
Finally, u then create a whole new plane based on all the lessons learnt

It's a stepping stone to the other- there's no shortcuts. All fighter planes today(as well as tanks, APCs, artillery, submarines) can be said to have descended from Nazi Germany's defense industry

AMCA from NOWHERE? especially from a nation with hardly any Defence MIC(aside from infantry helmets)?

Haha thanks.
Russian Tanks are not really descendants of Nazi Tank Technology.
NATO Tanks may have a Rheinmetall gun, what else?
Suspension, not really... Sloped armour - present on T-34 and Sherman.
Abrams Gas Turbine? Nope. The US had Jet Technology before the defeat of the Nazis.
Computers, Nope.
Optics, maybe, Germans are good on optics.
Chobham Armour? British Invention.

Fighter Planes? Swept Wings were a German Invention, but not the delta wings, nor the canards
Jet Engine was as much British as German.
Radar is more British.
Missile technology: Germans experimented with guided anti ship missiles, but so did the Americans (using pigeons :-).
List goes on.
There is very little Nazi Developed technology left in modern arms.
 

eldarlmari

SENIOR MEMBER
Mar 24, 2012
5,652
-21
9,367
Country
Singapore
Location
Singapore
Russian Tanks are not really descendants of Nazi Tank Technology.
NATO Tanks may have a Rheinmetall gun, what else?
Suspension, not really... Sloped armour - present on T-34 and Sherman.
Abrams Gas Turbine? Nope. The US had Jet Technology before the defeat of the Nazis.
Computers, Nope.
Optics, maybe, Germans are good on optics.
Chobham Armour? British Invention.

Fighter Planes? Swept Wings were a German Invention, but not the delta wings, nor the canards
Jet Engine was as much British as German.
Radar is more British.
Missile technology: Germans experimented with guided anti ship missiles, but so did the Americans (using pigeons :-).
List goes on.
There is very little Nazi Developed technology left in modern arms.
u're reading too deep into my lines.

my point: u always need a specimen to begin with
 

Ultima Thule

ELITE MEMBER
Jan 26, 2012
16,887
0
1,087
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
Russian Tanks are not really descendants of Nazi Tank Technology.
NATO Tanks may have a Rheinmetall gun, what else?
Suspension, not really... Sloped armour - present on T-34 and Sherman.
Abrams Gas Turbine? Nope. The US had Jet Technology before the defeat of the Nazis.
Computers, Nope.
Optics, maybe, Germans are good on optics.
Chobham Armour? British Invention.

Fighter Planes? Swept Wings were a German Invention, but not the delta wings, nor the canards
Jet Engine was as much British as German.
Radar is more British.
Missile technology: Germans experimented with guided anti ship missiles, but so did the Americans (using pigeons :-).
List goes on.
There is very little Nazi Developed technology left in modern arms.
V-1
Ancestor of modren cruise Missile
V1-Flying-Bomb-Title.jpg

V-2
father of ballistic missile
V-2.jpg

Horten-ho-229
father of stealth tech
h-45.jpg

and list go on @A.P. Richelieu :p:
 

A.P. Richelieu

SENIOR MEMBER
Dec 20, 2013
5,810
6
3,795
Country
Sweden
Location
Sweden
u're reading too deep into my lines.

my point: u always need a specimen to begin with
It has actually bern proven that if someone else has done a certain thing before, it is easier for everyone else to do the same thing, even if they are not aware of the results of the first guy.
One of the mysteries of the universe...
I do agree that it takes time and effort to develop something from scratch, and you are likely to miss out on important things, because you are not aware that they are important, until the design is complete and shown to others.
 

New Recruit

Feb 1, 2018
30
0
24
Country
United States
Location
United States
Indian Air Force finds Su-57 inferior to F-22 and F-35
A leading daily of India reported today that Indian Air Force finds Su-57 inferior to F-22 and F-35.

IAF is not in favour of continuation of the FGFA programme with Russia based on T-50. It believes it shall be saddled with an inferior product unless major changes are made to the overall design and engines of the aircraft.

Some higher functionaries in the Indian government though still support the continuation of programme, but Indian Defence Ministry finds the FGFA programme incredibly costly with a contract value of $ 4 billion.

The Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft (FGFA) project between Sukhoi and Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) is more than a decade old. India initially committed 100 million dollars to the programme and proposed a number of requirements for the final model. New Delhi aimed for a minimum of 108 units of FGFA.

But of late, IAF is having reservations with the degree of low observability of Su-57. Another major shortcoming cited is lack of ‘modular engine’ concept. According to Indian officials this makes maintenance and serviceability of the aircrafts highly problematic, given the less than satisfactory experience that India has had with regards to serviceability and maintenance of the existing fleet of Russian-origin aircrafts.

Incidentally, Moscow itself had curtailed its initial order of 150 FGFA to just a dozen odd aircrafts. This means that per unit cost of Su-57 and cost of spares needed over its lifetime would shoot up even if it is now modified.

Now Indian Defence Minister is due to visit Russia in the coming weeks. While deal for S-400 Triumph anti-missile system is on the cards, Indian government has categorically refused to commit anything on the FGFA programme.

On the other hand, Super Hornet – F-18 E/F Block III further customised for India’s requirements, is becoming a front runner to bag the multi-billion dollar deal for well over a hundred aircrafts. Recently Indian government specifically advised IAF to consider Super Hornet among other aircrats in the competition. Indian Navy alone purportedly needs 57 aircrafts that will fly from catapult equipped aircraft carrier as well as the ski jump carrier it has now, with another currently under construction.

In fact, the cozying up of the relation between USA and India may draw final nail in the FGFA programme and rather eventually equip the Indian Air Force with F-35. But USA has insisted that any project for the fifth generation fighter can only be undertaken post the culmination of India’s pending mega deal for aircrafts in the Super Hornet class.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)

Top