What's new

Tejas pilots pull 8 ‘g’ and beyond clearing critical FOC point

If the aircraft done it then no one is saying it can't be however, India has been claiming a lot about LCA so the claims cannot be rebutted until & unless the bird is finalized as per them. Rest the delays and a continue line of dates, is yet another story that no one can deny and success of JFT is already seen, can be saw and will be seen. Though no need to drag JFT or J-10 into it.
Thing is corruption in purchase department of MOD and IAF which is the main reason for delay in LCA do you know all the parameters IAF has set for LCA are only avilable in some front line twin seater fighters of IAF like IFR and internal jammers and that LCA has more combat range better radar and BVR missiles and more hard points, weapon load capacity internal feul than the fighter it is to replace
 
Thing is corruption in purchase department of MOD and IAF which is the main reason for delay in LCA do you know all the parameters IAF has set for LCA are only avilable in some front line twin seater fighters of IAF like IFR and internal jammers and that LCA has more combat range better BVR missiles and more hard points, weapon load capacity internal feul than the fighter it is to replace

Of course there would be parameters and every AF has it to have a potent aircraft so also who wouldn't love to have a complete package. The thing is, whether all the claims are just claims and paper story or it going to be truly inducted. So these questions will be answered once the machine is ready. I just pointed out to avoid dragging the JFT and J-10 into this subject which alone speaks about LCA. However, once you claimed things i mean HAL for LCA and then a thread came-up so then you must be prepare with answers or something for healthy discussion rather starts pulling the legs of others. This thread is about LCA so definitely that's the bird ought to be discussed whether those are positive or negative points for LCA but if the things are real then one cannot say no by closing eyes.
 
Of course there would be parameters and every AF has it to have a potent aircraft so also who wouldn't love to have a complete package. The thing is, whether all the claims are just claims and paper story or it going to be truly inducted. So these questions will be answered once the machine is ready. I just pointed out to avoid dragging the JFT and J-10 into this subject which alone speaks about LCA. However, once you claimed things i mean HAL for LCA and then a thread came-up so then you must be prepare with answers or something for healthy discussion rather starts pulling the legs of others. This thread is about LCA so definitely that's the bird ought to be discussed whether those are positive or negative points for LCA but if the things are real then one cannot say no by closing eyes.

Decission have been made, so what is left for questioning such things. FOC is more of the certification work. What question you want to ask now.
 
Decission have been made, so what is left for questioning such things. FOC is more of the certification work. What question you want to ask now.

The only thing which came to mind is, Operational by IAF.
 
it will soon be operational every thing takes time :-)

and that's the thing SOON which i have been saying very friendly, which is yet another date but at this belated stage, soon wouldn't be enough or not enough to explain the delay. It's just does not work now. ;)
 
and that's the thing SOON which i have been saying very friendly, which is yet another date but at this belated stage, soon wouldn't be enough or not enough to explain the delay. It's just does not work now. ;)
point is LCA is a 'point defence fighter' so we are not in a hurry as the bulk of IAF work load is already been taken care of
 
Breaking news, person from country that has failed to develop even a cycle claims to know more about what a plane can do than the developers do.
Still, it's better than boasting to others about having "developed" an obsolete junk plane - while being slapped by the actual developers when you tried to sell that plane, who loudly told everyone you have no rights on that aircraft. Now that's humiliation, people still laugh at you at airshows and you are too shameless to realise it.
Another breaking news..khemkaran was captured but later on as a gesture of goodwill returned back, but after all this humiliation he decided to move to britain and enjoying life on benefits with a nice palace in council estate.
 
and that's the thing SOON which i have been saying very friendly, which is yet another date but at this belated stage, soon wouldn't be enough or not enough to explain the delay. It's just does not work now. ;)
when LCA will be operational JF-17 will be flying from atleast 8 squadrons and 2 or 3 countries also have this fighter jet.but sooner or later LCA is also going to fly my friend and give jf-17 a tuff time in air
 
point is LCA is a 'point defence fighter' so we are not in a hurry as the bulk of IAF work load is already been taken care of

Well i respect No Hurry situation but doesn't looks like "couldn't done in time turned into no hurry".
 
when LCA will be operational JF-17 will be flying from atleast 8 squadrons and 2 or 3 countries also have this fighter jet.but sooner or later LCA is also going to fly my friend and give jf-17 a tuff time in air

well mate... JFT is another story of success and continue (don't want to derail the topic) though there is no tough time thing yet by LCA, as being realistic let it be into the air first.
 
Well i respect No Hurry situation but doesn't looks like "couldn't done in time turned into no hurry".
that happens when you move the goal post 'a little further' every time the goals are met but water down goals for foreign vendors and to get kickbacks have no problem to send your rookie pilots to train in 40 year old systems/flying coffins but reject a home grown platform just because 'all its systems' are not checked and re checked and due to this constant goal post change it is some 500 Kg heavier now what do you call that ?
 
Back
Top Bottom