kingdurgaking
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2010
- Messages
- 1,962
- Reaction score
- -2
IC, now I get it, but that depends on the situation I would say as well on the capabilities of the fighter. For example, we already have a good ammount of air superiority over PAF, because of more capable fighters in higher numbers, but can we do a preemptive strikes? No, because our ground attack fighters proved even to be less usfull in such a limited conflict like Kargil. They also have very limited self defense capabilities and always needs escorts, while real multi role fighters can defend themself, even during a strike mission.
I am not sure which air craft you are talking about as Air superiority... Is it Mig 29 or MKI... Mig 29 was an air superiority with the upgrade it is becoming a potent Mulit role craft... while MKI is already stamped as the best swing role fighter in our inventory.. and we can see MKI configured for Brahmos and Nirbhay ... which makes it the best option for deep strike penetration ... Can you be little more specific where we lag now on ground attacks?.... we have Mig 27, Jaguar assigned for that task... Mirages do configured for that in the upgrade... while i can see almost all top line air craft are multirole in exception to MKI.. which is a swing role which can target both air and ground assets at the same time...
i still believe we should have a dedicated Air superiorty fighter because With IAF 29 in air PAF 16 multi role where at bay during kargil.. and bombing was carried by 21's, jaguars and mirages .. even with AWACS and current BVR they will not risk going on combat against IAF all alone...
Agreed with AWACS across borders getting air superiority is difficult.. but every air force will try for that right??.. They will atleast make sure that enemy's sortie reduces with time...In this case the only option would be, like you pointed out, trying to get air superiority first, but even against PAF with increasing capabilities and AWACS support that won't be easy anymore and MMRCAs are meant against PLAAF. We can defend ourselfs against them, but it's doubtful that we would achieve air superiority to safely do strike missions as well and that's the point in MMRCA, when we talk about the operational capabilities.
MKI will remain the main air superiority fighter and MMRCA needs to serve alongside of it in air defense roles, but more important will be the strike component of them, because that is the field where IAF has the main problems now and needs new capabilities.
Sirjee i am not sure where you got MKI will be deployed only as air superiority?.. MKI came into operation as Air superiority but now it is changed a lot and still has more room for upgradation ..further it is upto the squadron how they get trained.. In Tezpur 2 squad's are deployed.. both for Air superiority and for ground attacks.. as far i am aware that is mainly configured for ground and deep penetration strikes.. with super upgrades in future i am sure MKI will become the precision strike weapon for deep penetration attack aka FGFA the air superiority...
First of all, it won't get CFTs, because they purposly went with a redesign of the airframe to increase the internal fuel instead of adding CFTs. Secondly no it's not a good choice for India, if strikes, ToT, offsets and strategic/political advantages are the keys in MMRCA, because in all these fiellds the Gripen/Saab/Sweden can't offer us what we want. Gripen is a good fighter and cheap, but that's exactly why we have LCA for, so no need for another similar fighter. Regarding single engine, I often stated that we made a mistake by going for a light single engine fighter like LCA, instead of going for an light to medium single engine fighter like F16/J10. However, that's the reality now and the only comparable single engine fighter in MMRCA is the F16IN and that is obviously not a good choice anymore.
Agreed it wont have CFT and no political clout.... but certainly all good technologies.. it will serve both as a2a and a2g unlike rafael ... but yes with less capability ... as i said earlier.. it is the weapons that will do the damage not the fighter.. with weapons being common platform and option for customization for indian weapons + AESA on being offer... it has all the features IAF has requested... if they give 100% ToT what else do you need??... yes some parts are sourced from US..the critical being engine.. except engine the deisgn of the entire fighter is done by SAAB.. the parts that come from US can be built locally by HAL tomorrow because SAAB gives you the specification and source code to us right...
LCA and griphen cant be compared.. and secondly what make you feel LCA is a mistake?? it is the requirement for IAF to defend our country.. so you mean to say Mig-21 is also a mistake which was part of 2 wars in which we won? To fight and defend the border in the north-east dont you think Griphen is more than enough?? war there wont be escalated as it will be at the fought at the borders only... any day Griphen can match with J-10 & J-11B for sure.. for our border at west... i guess Mig's are more than enough...
The only thing that is bothering me with Rafael/EFT is price and future upgrades... with EFT things are dim as the nations will be going for unnmanned aircraft.. while with Rafael what is there in future?? any customization will end up having the treatment like UAE(pay from your pocket for customization)... so better go for Griphen.. cheap and we get ToT which is what we need at this point of time.. as far political advantage no one will give a penny to India.. we will have to cross the well on our own..
Any way lets wait for the first filtering who makes to final round..