Search results

Why do you think in BVR, its a big deal??... we have Derby and python, whose confined range is 60KM.. and radar with 80KM range would be enough to suffice them, and 80 KM is a good distance, mostly AWACS and MKI will be the eye for all the fighters... with network centric farware enabled by...

Sancho, you got it wrong here.. you are talking about weapon integration which works on MIL standard provided the target also works on top of it... Israeli LGB works perfectly on standards thats why we are able to do that in Kargil easily but not on Mig - 29 or 21 , where as TOP HMS on MIG 29 is...

I am a novice.. but being an engineer i myself can see ways we can do it... like save real estate just by reducing the size of components, for (e.g.) FBL is a way you can save lot of space in reducing wires, new generation computers which can handle multiple things, increase radius of body by...

Sancho didnt get what is happening in the world.. the components gets merged and becomes smaller and smaller.. see the laptops and chips, earlier the work of 10 chips is done by a single chips now.. real estate is a problem, but in course of time things will work out... that is where R&D comes out

This is because the DRDO and ADA officially can work on Tejas, we dont have IP rights to change MKI or Rafale without informing them. simple as it is.. and we dont have source code of there software program to change for the modification of opening and closing bay.. This may be possible in MKI...

The reason is we dont have the CAD design structure to do that.. Rafale and LCA are now both in same category... If MK2 gets AESA it will be as good as Rafale in capabilities... the advantage of LCA is we can design or modify structure using computer design which would reduce lot of...

Do you think we can do re design on MKI or Rafale? we dont have there CAD design to make structural changes... And FGFA is not there any more, And having a silent Eagle Tejas would be more valuable to IAF compared to MKI or Rafale on which we cant do any changes

How do you know the delay is because of this reason?.. are you part of the Negotiation committee? or you are just guessing?.. if you are guessing forget it there are no proofs to claim the same..

yes it would be a major re design of tejas... what do you think ?? am i adding small changes to make it silent eagle.. this is as good as what has happened to F-15.. this would be more valuable than AMCA... if IAF is planning to buy medium twin engine 5th generation fighter then looking at AMCA...

Dont you think having couple of 5th generation fighter would be more headache to maintain?.. i guess we are not US or China.. we have a very limited budget.. and with budget cuts going on... i dont see AMCA an option in future.... PAK-FA would be a single solution and it is equal to 180+ .. may...

IAF will not be forced.. for (e.g.) there was a project for training entry level fighter pilots from govt.. but for IAF it never met requirement.. they went to MoD and said sorry we dont need this ... so the government with to swizz

See i see you being sensible... There are people in this forumn who are mature.... there are people who are not.. those who are not mature will bring this argument... I say JF-17 is a successful one.... because it meets the user requirements.... Many would agree with this...

Do you have a stat or by just appearance you define this? please dont say next time.. we do have next time right? For second point.. it is the reason why LCA is being developed.. if IAF is going for a new option in Lower category then we can say yeah.. they are not satisfied with LCA.... but i...

First define what is success... but not whish list... when you define success ... you need to give justification by having a comparing with a similar development life cycle of the competitors .. Mind you very few countries or almost no new countries opt for building a fighter these days...

So thats a point where LCA didnt score.... and give us more options on that.. this point alone is not necessary to prove it is bad.... your total aggregate is sum of all points you score in all subject ... not just one subject..

In a vs thread you need to give the stats to prove the fact... we would like to know how Grippen is a mercedes ? LCA has all systems and sub system which Grippen have and more than what Grippen holds.. thats why Grippen NG was pitched not Grippen... other wise SAAB will have no option to...

I would agree with this... basically every aeroplane will be designed with there user in mind... LCA does not need short landing like Grippen because we have many air fields to land... But coming for a vs thread this is an advantage design which Grippen have

One information to you is.... It is easy to criticize ... It is tough to do job... Gone are those days where you are talking about government employees ... DRDO is now with targets, deadlines etc... it has politics like any other company.. Do you think easy to make a flying model... make a toy...

I dont accept any of the fact except RAW was involved in any except for Smiling buddha ... it was just some person's vivid imagination .. RAW isnt a rogue organization.. it knows its priorities .... RAW is not involved in baluch nor splitting of Pakistan.. It was Pakistan which put mud on its...

Dont waste your time dude.. we will not be convinced for any of your arguments.. you have been arguing with us for a long time ... i havent seen any one abide by your talks... we are we.. we have our culture and heritage.. at present we are India.. formed from biggest struggle.. if anything...