What's new

HAL pushes for AESA Equipped LCA Tejas Mark I-A (LCA-1P) as interim improved version of Mark I

.
there is no talk about the potential cost what USA has proposed but if its under 65 Million with latest AESA radar , other avionicks it just might take it all but there is no such talk but even if USA agrees to that costs weather it is ready to loosen the strings is the biggest sore point in any such potential deal and thats whats frenchies are pinning there hopes too
Even if per unit cost is more than 80 mil USD F16In should be bought as wasting time and energy on Rafales /Tejas will get you nothing , F16In are way to go.
 
. . . .
Wait and watch i think it will be either F16 IN or F18 , ideal would be 200 odd F16In to replace your Mig21/27
i cant confirm weather its right but fly away cost bieng nagociated for fully french buit rafale rafale is rumored very close to 85 million mark then why would IAF go for F-16s or F-18s for the same ammount :azn:
 
. .
You are such an indiot who ask the question again and again. It is there in artcle and HAL says that they can remove that. I am not designer nor it is mycliam or imagination like yours.

Yes, you know nothing about the topic so why are you so interested in making a joke of yourself?

tejas has havier landing gear than required which can be made ligh and weight may be reduced.

Says the keyboard engineer.

It is the body part. LCA has more than 5000 part and I do not have the list of all of them with a proposed replacement. Only idiots ask such stupid question.

Show a link which says LCA has more than 5000 parts.

If you do not have any idea of what you are typing about why do you make a mockery of yourself? The weight of a plane and the payload it is able to carry are directly related. Will weight reduction impact the weapons and fuel payload? Do you have any answers?

Of course you don't. Losers like you only come online to waste their time and money.
 
.
Question is why was Cobham no penalized for the delay. Or was it ?

What "justification" did they provide for the delay ? :azn:
Most foreign vendors do not subscribe to a penalty clause for development projects.
 
.
that cant happen till we have caste and relegion based reservation policy in owr goverment run institutions :coffee:

The biggest whiners of the change in policy will be BSP Mayawati. Nowadays Pappu is jumping into anything that looks like anti Modi.
Anyway its upto the PUC to forward its recommendations to the govt and its the responsibility of the govt, to talk with stakeholders to do away with reservation for strategic sectors alone.
Already I have seen many northerns cry afoul that ISRO, DRDO is filled with South Indians. Time to clear the misconceptions.
 
.
Most foreign vendors do not subscribe to a penalty clause for development projects.

Rubbish. When the Tech. specifications are provided and interface documents are provided and the vendor agree to build it, its not "development" project. The PO always specifies penalty. Its standard practice.
 
.
tejas mk 1 first squadron might be inducted in 2019-2020
the rate of production is 1 plane per 8 month:(
 
.
Wait and watch i think it will be either F16 IN or F18 , ideal would be 200 odd F16In to replace your Mig21/27
F18-Advanced-Super-Hornet-3.png
 
.
tejas mk 1 first squadron might be inducted in 2019-2020
the rate of production is 1 plane per 8 month:(

it ain't rocket science, if we can sought that out

I am sure sooner than later we will sought it out as well

by every passing year we have soughed out most of the bottlenecks
and I have no reason to doubt that we can't sought out rest of them

thanks for showing concern
 
.

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom