Suggest some hindustani members to learn manners on a professional defense forum.
The point is you passed an Aircraft because you got satisfied with its performance and all the complete package it is/would be offering. Now you switch you plans to include third party for many of its Systems...basically you are insulting Dassault..Dassault would go ahead with slapping you with no Thankyou look for someone else, knowing neither US not Nor Euro consortium would allow this dirty idea of alternate plans if you pick their Aircraft...
jat balwan...who told you about cost cuttings??? Hindustan is buying a whole lot & then planning modification ....why are you so angry about it mate??? we`ll deal wtih french.
member, I'm not mad about anything, I am here to post my view whether someone likes it or not as a member of this forum, please post standard posts.
Indeed it is cost cutting Dassault would not allow it. This particular potential deal does not allow buyer to modify by third party except for local upgrades IF buyer has the potential equipment-system available BUT MRCA will be paid in Full to the winner.
go of death...We will do whatever it takes to make our fighter jets more and more lethal and advance.
Does it mean you have no confidence in French Systems, Does it mean all that choosing the best out there in MRCA contest was a drama and not based on merit, So does it mean Rafale has no lethal systems and not advance enough, I'll ask again where is dr. somnath to clarify it to you people not to me because I do like Rafale F-3.
I was hoping a sensable professional contributor would join in here because there is a thread running by dr. somnath that is praising Rafale to the edge including you thanks and some other and here you say Rafale is terrible and it needs israeli system to be advanced.
You are a senior member, don't twist logic like this. Just because we replace SOME systems or subsystems on an aircraft doesn't mean the aircraft is terrible. Nobody here said anything like that. We selected rafale in the MRCA competition because it was found to be the best aircraft available for purchase on the world market. Airframe-wise, it is better in air-to-air combat than anything flying in the neighbourhood, and air-to-ground, it is more capable than anything flying in the neighbourhood. As simple as that. Now we also see that some of the systems on it have more advanced versions available from 3rd party manufacturers, and we want to spend OUR money to give the best to OUR forces. It is in keeping with what we have done with other aircrafts in the past. Almost every aircraft in IAF inventory has subsystems from 3rd party manufacturers, superior to the ones developed by the OEM.
It is not a binary choice between advanced versus terrible. There are many levels in between. An advanced plane can become more advanced, without the original having to be deemed terrible. Are you sure you are really unaware of this?
