What's new

New Chinese stealth fighter heightens dilemma for Indian Navy

Keep believing what you want. :lol:

When people say that we can't possibly build a 5th generation fighter, we build two of them and get them flying.

When people say we can't send people into space or build or own space lab, we go ahead and do that in front of the world.

When people say that an ASBM "carrier killer" missile is impossible because USA/Russia haven't done it yet, we go ahead and make it operational.

We'll keep doing these things, and proving the naysayers wrong. The sad thing is that the ones who are trying to develop themselves like we did (India) are the biggest naysayers of all.

The questions raised by Abingdonboy are logical.

How china is making so much progress 5th Gen Fighters Field?

My answer> Huge Funds and, perhaps, absorption of several Ex-Soviet Scientists and Engineers previously working in Soviet Jet Design Bureaus and now working for China.

Anyway, China has done very good progress in this field.
 
. .
we made it , India fail. I mean you can't reverse a Mig21 even nowadays, which makes you have a gap to fill up.

We don't do it, not that we cant do it.

If we could convert a SLV (SLV 3) into a strategic missile (A 2)-back in 1990s-why cant we reverse engineer Mig 21 now?

But we don't believe in Reverse Engineering.
 
.
we made it , India fail. I mean you can't reverse a Mig21 even nowadays, which makes you have a gap to fill up.

Over 600 MiG-21s have been made in India since the time we started buying the jets. Except the initial 140-150, all were made by HAL and they served IAF beautifully in all the wars during its peak time.

Please open your mouth after knowing the reality rather than the trash that CCP feeds you.

We respected the Soviet license manufacturing unlike you who brutally cheated your own friends who found your country's technical prowess.
 
. .
You and I dont know what IN has in mind for a naval fighter, so no point in speculating that likely AMCA will be a catapault.

No need to speculate here, because IN has stated it from the planing stages of IAC 1, that they want CATOBAR carriers and repeatedly said this now for IAC2. Today they even openly say that they want the latest EMALS catapult system, so that is no secret.

For catapault fighter, the only other thing that will require effort will be strengthening the airframe. Rafale M gained 500kg extra wait when navalised and maintains 95% commonality with the Af variant, so it wont be that hard to modify AMCA into a catapult launch naval fighter if reuqired.

Because Rafale was developed not as an air force fighter and then was navalised, but was developed as a CATOBAR fighter first, with an air force varient later. EF is the perfect other side, developed only for air force needs, can be navalised for ski-jump take off, but for catapult launch you have to completely re-design the fighter again, because too many changes would be needed to strenghten the airframe and gears for the way more complicated catapult launch!


Did HAL was involved in the design process of Pakfa?? how different will be fgfa from PAKFA?

HAL is involved in the design changes of FGFA with Sukhoi assistance, Russians offered co-development of the NG engine and we will get ToT of the AESA radar, which we already got for MKI radars anyway.

It will be a similar story as with SU30

That's what you claim, but you ignore that we never had any rights in MKI, it was always a purely Russian fighter while FGFA will be 50% own by India, including all intellectual rights! Our contribution in the development is lower, because we haven't the needed know how and that's why we can't develop an own stealth fighter, before we learned about stealth design, NG radar, engines and avionics. That's why FGFA co-development and Rafale licence production are so important for our indigenous industry and any future developments.
The same can be seen btw at Brahmos co-development, Maitri SAM co-development, MTA co-development, Shakti engine co-development, Kaveri/Snecma co-development. All with minor contribution from Indian side, while the rights belong to both countries and with the aim to gain knowledge for the future!
 
.
No need to speculate here, because IN has stated it from the planing stages of IAC 1, that they want CATOBAR carriers and repeatedly said this now for IAC2. Today they even openly say that they want the latest EMALS catapult system, so that is no secret.

Well, it's pretty obvious that after gaining experience in building smaller (40k tonne) carrier, the right way is to go for a larger & tech. superior AC, I m sure IN will now go for a 65k tonne (which they have said time & again) carrier with either of a CATOBAR or EMALS configuration, but i think IN is more bent on CATOBAR rather than EMALS, but the thing is that for this tech. they have to go to the US & will make one of the most important asset of IN dependent on there conditions :hitwall:

That's what you claim, but you ignore that we never had any rights in MKI, it was always a purely Russian fighter while FGFA will be 50% own by India, including all intellectual rights! Our contribution in the development is lower, because we haven't the needed know how and that's why we can't develop an own stealth fighter, before we learned about stealth design, NG radar, engines and avionics. That's why FGFA co-development and Rafale licence production are so important for our indigenous industry and any future developments.
The same can be seen btw at Brahmos co-development, Maitri SAM co-development, MTA co-development, Shakti engine co-development, Kaveri/Snecma co-development. All with minor contribution from Indian side, while the rights belong to both countries and with the aim to gain knowledge for the future!

you have rightly said, i think from a time where we used to buy everything off the shelf, we have come a long way where we are either co-developing or getting it made under license production & getting complete TOT for it, this is the right way to go & will serve our purpose of getting self sustained in important weapon systems.
 
.
Well, it's pretty obvious that after gaining experience in building smaller (40k tonne) carrier, the right way is to go for a larger & tech. superior AC, I m sure IN will now go for a 65k tonne (which they have said time & again) carrier with either of a CATOBAR or EMALS configuration, but i think IN is more bent on CATOBAR rather than EMALS, but the thing is that for this tech. they have to go to the US & will make one of the most important asset of IN dependent on there conditions :hitwall:



you have rightly said, i think from a time where we used to buy everything off the shelf, we have come a long way where we are either co-developing or getting it made under license production & getting complete TOT for it, this is the right way to go & will serve our purpose of getting self sustained in important weapon systems.

right.

I too think that INS Vishal is not just rumor.
 
.
Well, it's pretty obvious that after gaining experience in building smaller (40k tonne) carrier, the right way is to go for a larger & tech. superior AC, I m sure IN will now go for a 65k tonne (which they have said time & again) carrier with either of a CATOBAR or EMALS configuration, but i think IN is more bent on CATOBAR rather than EMALS, but the thing is that for this tech. they have to go to the US & will make one of the most important asset of IN dependent on there conditions :hitwall:

It's not the size of the carrier that is important here, but a good layout and catapults, be it normal steam once or latest EMALS once, because that increases capability and carrier operations by far. Take the current French carrier as an example, it has similar size as Gorshkov, but can carry less aircrafts only and with less payloads as well. We are dependent on AEW helicopters, while they can use E-2Ds..., that's why IN might take the risk of making the carriers dependent on US (btw engines are from the US as well) in favour for better operational performance.



you have rightly said, i think from a time where we used to buy everything off the shelf, we have come a long way where we are either co-developing or getting it made under license production & getting complete TOT for it, this is the right way to go & will serve our purpose of getting self sustained in important weapon systems.[/QUOTE]
 
.
The Horton 229 A Ho 2-29 prototype made a successful test flight just before Christmas 1944



The Northrop Grumman defense-contracting corporation used original Nazi blueprints and the only surviving Ho 2-29, which has been stored in a U.S. government facility for more than 50 years.

The all-wing Ho 2-29 looked more like today's U.S. B-2 bomber.




Enough said.
 
. .
The Horton 229 A Ho 2-29 prototype made a successful test flight just before Christmas 1944



The Northrop Grumman defense-contracting corporation used original Nazi blueprints and the only surviving Ho 2-29, which has been stored in a U.S. government facility for more than 50 years.

The all-wing Ho 2-29 looked more like today's U.S. B-2 bomber.

http://imageshpg[/IMG
Enough said.
Nazis are awesome!! All this in early 1940s! I have seen this documentary. They tested a life sized copy of Horton at Lockheed Martin's stealth measuring fields, and this fighter(yup, it's a fighter with decent maneuverability) reduced detection ranges for upto 20% WITH LONG WAVE ANTI-STEALTH RADARS. Imagine its stealth with x-band fighter plane radars- it would be extremely hard to detect.
 
.
Nazis are awesome!! All this in early 1940s! I have seen this documentary. They tested a life sized copy of Horton at Lockheed Martin's stealth measuring fields, and this fighter(yup, it's a fighter with decent maneuverability) reduced detection ranges for upto 20% WITH LONG WAVE ANTI-STEALTH RADARS. Imagine its stealth with x-band fighter plane radars- it would be extremely hard to detect.

nothing motivates like the certainity of death !!!
 
.
The Horton 229 A Ho 2-29 prototype made a successful test flight just before Christmas 1944



The Northrop Grumman defense-contracting corporation used original Nazi blueprints and the only surviving Ho 2-29, which has been stored in a U.S. government facility for more than 50 years.

The all-wing Ho 2-29 looked more like today's U.S. B-2 bomber.




Enough said.
Search up Jack Northrop and the Xb-35.
 
.
Keep believing what you want. :lol:

When people say that we can't possibly build a 5th generation fighter, we build two of them and get them flying.

When people say we can't send people into space or build or own space lab, we go ahead and do that in front of the world.

When people say that an ASBM "carrier killer" missile is impossible because USA/Russia haven't done it yet, we go ahead and make it operational.

We'll keep doing these things, and proving the naysayers wrong. The sad thing is that the ones who are trying to develop themselves like we did (India) are the biggest naysayers of all.

don't forget about the Chinese GPS. When Europe did their Galileo, they excluded China because they believed China brought nothing to the table.

Then China launches and beat the Europeans at their own game. Started 2 years late, and still beat the Europeans.

If you Indian dudes were intellectually honest, you'd acknowledge the fact that China has consistently outperformed expectations,while India has done just the opposite.

Then again, I fully expect that my telling of the truth will be met with indignant cries and insults from the unwashed masses.

To which I say, do your best.
 
.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom