Navy's rejection of Tejas is a lesson, failure of DRDO

[The Eagle]

here many threads are going on where others used to drag india,IA,IAF or indian people irrespective of the topic,but i have not seen any one complaining,(want the links?? better leave it)but its ok from now on i will wait for others to derail the thread first okey .

A clear rule, report such posts that you find offensive or against the rules of Forum but such posts does not allow you or anyone else to troll in response which may lead to an action for both. Others derail it, just report it and do not quote, a simple formula that will be beneficial for all the readers.

second i have read here on this forum about pak members naming it as a frontline fighter along with f16, not even frontline some of them were discussing about upgrades that will make jf17 land and takeoff from water too, well actually i stopped reading after this type of baby talk so i dont know the name of that water landing jf17 version.
also i am posting a link of DAWN NEWS stating jf17 as frontline interceptor aircraft ..but since its a multirole i left interceptor.
http://www.dawn.com/news/1254985 - third para under "
The JF-17 Thunder's operational history".

JF-17 is going to be our work horse like a multirole fighter that can fulfill our different missions requirement or in other words, one bird for many purposes. By the same definition, in some places, JF-17 actually provides more and better punch than our other fighters in inventory. Thanks for the tweet though, that made my day, shows a troll that is trying to portray a fighter aircraft of PAF as merely a trainer and I hope you wouldn't ask further but will understand the difference.

Land & take-off from water, I couldn't understand such term every used but seems like someone trolling. However, if you mean by an Aircraft Carrier version, you have to read in depth about Pakistan Navy that currently we don't have any ACC nor their is any plan at all hence, no Naval JF-17 version at all. Read the complete contexts as it is not just a trainer but a front-line aircraft with active service duty.

JF-17s capabilities to be par with F-16 in different departments/areas, therefore, it has been discussed as an F-16 for us which is not completely like F-16s but almost and provides a comfort in our front-line operation requirements and reducing the burden from F-16s fleet for different roles/areas. For better understanding, you need to read in details and understand the contexts of the words as well as statements. A comparison name like F-16 for JF-17 means that it's capabilities are satisfactory and provides maximum punch that we have in shape of F-16s or you can call it a quality measurement.

plus i use smartphone to type as usual all over world(not talking about pakistan) (and spell mistakes are common) but thanks to pointing out that , i know now that how smart u guys are

No need to taunt as such... I quoted your word in previous post to understand your opinion rather than making any guess from my end or creating any misunderstanding hence, asked you directly that I don't think may be taken as offensive or feel offended. The purpose was not to highlight your mistake but wanted to know your intention/word.

 

[chandrak]

A clear rule, report such posts that you find offensive or against the rules of Forum but such posts does not allow you or anyone else to troll in response which may lead to an action for both. Others derail it, just report it and do not quote, a simple formula that will be beneficial for all the readers.




JF-17 is going to be our work horse like a multirole fighter that can fulfill our different missions requirement or in other words, one bird for many purposes. By the same definition, in some places, JF-17 actually provides more and better punch than our other fighters in inventory.

Land & take-off from water, I couldn't understand such term every used but seems like someone trolling. However, if you mean by an Aircraft Carrier version, you have to read in depth about Pakistan Navy that currently we don't have any ACC nor their is any plan at all hence, no Naval JF-17 version at all. Read the complete contexts as it is not just a trainer but a front-line aircraft with active service duty.

JF-17s capabilities to be par with F-16 in different departments/areas, therefore, it has been discussed as an F-16 for us which is not completely like F-16s but almost and provides a comfort in our front-line operation requirements and reducing the burden from F-16s fleet for different roles/areas. For better understanding, you need to read in details and understand the contexts of the words as well as statements. A comparison name like F-16 for JF-17 means that it's capabilities are satisfactory and provides maximum punch that we have in shape of F-16s or you can call it a quality measurement.




No need to taunt as such... I quoted your word in previous post to understand your opinion rather than making any guess from my end or creating any misunderstanding hence, asked you directly that I don't think may be taken as offensive or feel offended. The purpose was not to highlight your mistake but wanted to know your intention/word.

rating is bcz u explained the rules without discrimination.
second - i understand carrier based aircraft quite well, actually that discussion was about making jf17 something like shinmaywa 2 aircraft.
3rd - here is the tweet of official pakinstan forum

https://twitter.com/x/status/719842092281950208

and why i told jf17 less effective then tejas i can explain.. no doubt jf17 is a workhorse for paf and is a good support aircraft also but whatever i said was not a false claim

 

[The Eagle]

rating is bcz u explained the rules without discrimination.

As you have joined recently, read as follows....

Forum Rules

second - i understand carrier based aircraft quite well, actually that discussion was about making jf17 something like shinmaywa 2 aircraft.
3rd - here is the tweet of official pakinstan forum


and why i told jf17 less effective then tejas i can explain.. no doubt jf17 is a workhorse for paf and is a good support aircraft also but whatever i said was not a false claim

Actually you misunderstood maritime strike role with something totally irrelevant.... Read following thread to understand...

JF17 now maritime strike role

No more off-topic discussion and try to stick with topic so there is no need to prove Tajas over JF-17 effective or not.

The Tejas is rejected which is more or less a failure through political will as well as a hammer hit to DRDO and all that working of years that IN rejected the plane IMO, for the foreign fighter due to many reasons that may include the love for imported gadgets and less confidence in home made things. Actually, such rejection shows either Tejas cannot be that type of aircraft which may fulfill the role as it was claimed to be saying that Naval Variant or it is IN that deliberately rejected the plane either for possibility of kickbacks or love of foreign fighters yet there is possibility that Tejas is not up-to such standard at all. Read the Op article fully and understand the topic to quote further or share your opinion as JF-17 is not the subject here nor rejected by PN but it is Tejas that is rejected by IN.

 

[Water Car Engineer]

JF17 now maritime strike role

No more off-topic discussion and try to stick with topic so there is no need to prove Tajas over JF-17 effective or not.

The Tejas is rejected which is more or less a failure through political will as well as a hammer hit to DRDO and all that working of years that IN rejected the plane IMO, for the foreign fighter due to many reasons that may include the love for imported gadgets and less confidence in home made things. Actually, such rejection shows either Tejas cannot be that type of aircraft which may fulfill the role as it was claimed to be saying that Naval Variant or it is IN that deliberately rejected the plane either for possibility of kickbacks or love of foreign fighters yet there is possibility that Tejas is not up-to such standard at all. Read the Op article fully and understand the topic to quote further or share your opinion as JF-17 is not the subject here nor rejected by PN but it is Tejas that is rejected by IN.

This in itself is off topic, we're NOT talking about a land based naval fighter. We're talking about carrier operated aircraft, why bring this up?

You do now by IN standards, the JF is NO where close being considered? Right?

This RFI is basically pointing at these two.

The navy was crazy to even consider a short legged bird any ways, they are however still supporting it as a TD. It's certification experience will go into the eventual N-AMCA.

Btw, the IAF Tejas got an expended 80 orders.

 

[Hamza913]

does jf17 is in service??

Atrocious English aside, it is and it's been used to bomb militants.

 

[Water Car Engineer]

I dont know why you Pakistanis are rejoicing at the idea of carrier-Tejas being rejected, now you'll have a Rafale M or F18 Super Hornet + Mig 29K combo on your flank. Along with several of IAF's assets.

It's like laughing at your enemy now having a AK instead of a pistol.

 

[Rajaraja Chola]

When NLCA made its debut, Navy and DRDO made sure that this ac is just an TD, and with its current engine F404 is inadequate to operate from a carrier. Its a platform for testing naval carrier landing technology.

Its just Navy is unimpressed in the way the undercarriage strengthening work is yet to be completed. Mk2, with GE 414 engine or N-AMCA will be the real naval fighter to look for.

I dont know why you Pakistanis are rejoicing at the idea of carrier-Tejas being rejected, now you'll have a Rafale M or F18 Super Hornet + Mig 29K combo on your flank. Along with several of IAF's assets.

It's like laughing at your enemy now having a AK instead of a pistol.

They know the truth. But want to have a troll at DRDO and India nevertheless. The comparison btw Maritime strike version of JF17 with N-LCA is enough proof some here are more than naive.

 

[Crixus]

First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.

Mahatma Gandhi
Read more at: https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/m/mahatmagan103630.html

I dont know why you Pakistanis are rejoicing at the idea of carrier-Tejas being rejected, now you'll have a Rafale M or F18 Super Hornet + Mig 29K combo on your flank. Along with several of IAF's assets.

It's like laughing at your enemy now having a AK instead of a pistol.

 

[Water Car Engineer]

It'll still complete arrester hook trials. It has completed 200 meter take off.

Knowing the IN, they probably will induct the Naval Mark 2, but they shouldnt wait on it. This was the right move.

 

[The Eagle]

This in itself is off topic, we're NOT talking about a land based naval fighter. We're talking about carrier operated aircraft, why bring this up?

You do now by IN standards, the JF is NO where close being considered? Right?

This RFI is basically pointing at these two.

The navy was crazy to even consider a short legged bird any ways, they are however still supporting it as a TD. It's certification experience will go into the eventual N-AMCA.

Btw, the IAF Tejas got an expended 80 orders.

Expended 80 or so orders for IAF and the subject is totally for IN that rejected the Naval Version so what was hard to understand in that simple post that I was quoting the person to start with a conversation subject to Article/Op. Is TD an official term used here and confirmed by officials or IN rejected the plane totally for induction though will be used as only a test bird.

The comparison btw Maritime strike version of JF17 with N-LCA is enough proof some here are more than naive.

The quoted member was reading JF-17 Maritime Strike Role with something else or was expecting something like N-LCA that is explained in previous post to him by providing him the links to understand the same. Go through the posts of quoted member. None compared JF-17 Maritime Strike Role with N-LCA (carrier aircraft) at all.

 

[ranadd]

Funny how Pakistanis just say LCA Tejas not in service.

This article is for the Naval variant or mk1. Air force variant entered limited service already with mk1. mk1A will be completed 2017 fiscal. Mk1's will be converted to Mk1A.

It was obvious from the the get go that IN wont go for Tejas mk1. They want the mk2, which they are already pumping money into. Even the K10 or the updated kaveri with Safran project is proceeding.

But lets not use sense, go on...

 

[Water Car Engineer]

@The Eagle

Okay, whatever. Everyone need to stop pointlessly bringing in fighters that dont belong in the discussion.

If you want to talk about the possible replacement, there is only 2. I doubt F35 will make it. SAAB has a concept, but the IN wants a bird that's ready in carrier ops.

 

[αℓρнα ωσℓf™]

Lol i cant control my lauge when see that some one posted a serous topic to descus their upcoming projets about tejas..but their own ppl want to make fun of it..

 

[The Eagle]

Funny how Pakistanis just say LCA Tejas not in service.

This article is for the Naval variant or mk1. Air force variant entered limited service already with mk1. mk1A will be completed 2017 fiscal. Mk1's will be converted to Mk1A.

It was obvious from the the get go that IN wont go for Tejas mk1. They want the mk2, which they are already pumping money into. Even the K10 or the updated kaveri with Safran project is proceeding.

But lets not use sense, go on...

Members can express their opinion based upon the one's observations or findings. However.....

The Source is Indian stating as such...

@The Eagle

Okay, whatever. Everyone need to stop pointlessly bringing in fighters that dont belong in the discussion.

If you want to talk about the possible replacement, there is only 2. I doubt F35 will make it. SAAB has a concept, but the IN wants a bird that's ready in carrier ops.

That's what I tried to inform the members that not to derail the topic.

Rest about the choice as you stated regarding possible replacement, IMO, while looking at the developments and previous IAF Rafale Contract and to seek possible discount through Make In India, the ready product etc, seems like Rafale-M is strong contender or I would say, got the tender already. Opting F-35 Naval Version or SAAB would be like stretching the legs more than ever expected that can result in disaster of handling/maintenance.

While observing the language of Op/Article seems like it was a political and lobby hit to N-LCA,IMO.

 

[hussain0216]

First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.

Mahatma Gandhi
Read more at: https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/m/mahatmagan103630.html

Seems very apt for the delusions Indians ate suffering with, with JF17s, Babur 2 and 3 and Ababeel MIRV