What's new

Winner of MRCA: time to place ur bets

Which fighter aircraft do you think will win MRCA deal?

  • Rafale

    Votes: 48 27.7%
  • Eurofighter (typhoon)

    Votes: 57 32.9%
  • Mig-35

    Votes: 17 9.8%
  • F-16 super viper

    Votes: 2 1.2%
  • F-18 super hornet

    Votes: 38 22.0%
  • SAAB Gripen

    Votes: 11 6.4%

  • Total voters
    173
Uh..karthic I wasn't necessarily referring to buying the Mig-35, more of a point regarding the demeaning remarks made by the poster.
Again, that is a very elusive prospect considering that twice the Indian lobby was successful in averting a Purchase of Russian aircraft back in the 90's. Not much will change now, And I dont think the Mig fit any requirement the PAF has, The Mix has been decided.. Jf-17/F-16/J-10.

Chal..i too suspected that...but just wanted to make sure...:lol:

the Rafale.. well lets just leave it at that.

Any specific reasons...?I always thought it was an excellent aircraft best suited for IAF

The SH is a good option too, but its more of a bomb truck.. its A2A capabilities lie in its off boresight capability ala JHCMS,

Again its the strike capability that the IAF is sorely missing with just the Floggers and jaguars and to some extent MKI left to do the job.

So any fighter with a dedicated strike capability (Rafale,SH) is welcome in IAF.

something the Gripen will come with too.
Plus, on the off side the LCA is delayed further, the Gripen order can be increased to compensate since it covers that category as well.
Regards.

Nope mate..almost all the tests on the LCA is over and it is slated to achieve (confirmed) its IOC late this year or early next year.
There is a lingering fear that selecting Gripen will kill LCA-Mark II program thats on the anvil.

@ Santro :

Is it ur dog in ur avatar...? loooking cutie cute......
 
Crazy to buy the super expensive EF or Rafale. The IAF does not need air dominance fighters.The MKI is more than enough for any need.What they need is Air to ground attack crafts. The Mig 27 and Jags are pretty useless now. I mean after Kargil where these aircraft could not even work properly and the Mirages saved the day,it would be criminal not to get a dedicated Air to Ground aircraft. The Super Hornet is a bomb truck.Plus American products get delivered on time. It should be a welcome change to the Indian forces after the Russian and domestic experience of delays.
 
Id not go for the Rafale for two outstanding reasons, one, in almost every competition it took part in, it placed poorly, the Korean FSX, the Singaporean FSX.. and recently things arent looking too good with the Swiss either.
Agreed op req make a difference, but there must be some commonality with the IAF's ASR too that somehow I feel the Rafale wont make it(or it could be they announce it as the winner.. life is funny).
The Rafale's strike capability is much touted by the French, but in recent deployments for ISAF it had to rely on a mirage to lase the targets while it dropped. On the other hand the Gripen has made self lased drops already.

I agree the SH is a good choice, but all things considered, a single engined jet with similar capabilities and better maneuverability seems more appropriate, also it keeps the IAF from having to totally depend on a single supplier for TOT, the Gripen has its hands in many pockets, and even American companies benefit from it, so it still keeps the Americans a little happy while ensuring that in case..in case things go a little awry with corporate corridors the IAF has nothing to worry about. Since the engine on the Gripen is of the same F404 stock, the LCA program can be kept happy too..(so can the SH).. and it makes it possible to ditch the Kaveri with a little less heartburn in case it doesn't make the grade.
But probably the greatest advantage it has is its short field capbility, too many of the IAF's bases are currently close to the border, while it does allow for an easier reach and they may be well defended, I'm not what is the current status but most of IAF's current fleet apart from the Migs aren't too friendly with impromptu FOB's. Would it not be better, say in a scenario where the Indian forces manage to break deep into Chinese or Pakistani terribly to have an aircraft capable of flying from closer to the front lines??..with an 900m takeoff run.. the Gripen can carry a respectable CAS load, get to the target faster, get back faster and still be able to keep up with any expeditionary fighting force.

I have a personal dislike for the LCA which is not motivated by nationalism but rather by disappointment, I actually wished the LCA to look something like the S-56.. and would have looked much much nicer, flown much better and would have been easier to adapt for a Naval requirement. I suppose the DRDO had its reasons to go with the french delta philosophy.. I just don't like it.

Yeah thats my dog.. Ginger rani
 
Crazy to buy the super expensive EF or Rafale. The IAF does not need air dominance fighters.The MKI is more than enough for any need.What they need is Air to ground attack crafts. The Mig 27 and Jags are pretty useless now. I mean after Kargil where these aircraft could not even work properly and the Mirages saved the day,it would be criminal not to get a dedicated Air to Ground aircraft. The Super Hornet is a bomb truck.Plus American products get delivered on time. It should be a welcome change to the Indian forces after the Russian and domestic experience of delays.

u r right that's why f-18 SH and EF is best among them...but which one is best F-16IN Super Viper OR F-18 super Hornet....
 
Id not go for the Rafale for two outstanding reasons, one, in almost every competition it took part in, it placed poorly, the Korean FSX, the Singaporean FSX.. and recently things arent looking too good with the Swiss either.
Agreed op req make a difference, but there must be some commonality with the IAF's ASR too that somehow I feel the Rafale wont make it(or it could be they announce it as the winner.. life is funny).
The Rafale's strike capability is much touted by the French, but in recent deployments for ISAF it had to rely on a mirage to lase the targets while it dropped. On the other hand the Gripen has made self lased drops already.

I agree the SH is a good choice, but all things considered, a single engined jet with similar capabilities and better maneuverability seems more appropriate, also it keeps the IAF from having to totally depend on a single supplier for TOT, the Gripen has its hands in many pockets, and even American companies benefit from it, so it still keeps the Americans a little happy while ensuring that in case..in case things go a little awry with corporate corridors the IAF has nothing to worry about. Since the engine on the Gripen is of the same F404 stock, the LCA program can be kept happy too..(so can the SH).. and it makes it possible to ditch the Kaveri with a little less heartburn in case it doesn't make the grade.
But probably the greatest advantage it has is its short field capbility, too many of the IAF's bases are currently close to the border, while it does allow for an easier reach and they may be well defended, I'm not what is the current status but most of IAF's current fleet apart from the Migs aren't too friendly with impromptu FOB's. Would it not be better, say in a scenario where the Indian forces manage to break deep into Chinese or Pakistani terribly to have an aircraft capable of flying from closer to the front lines??..with an 900m takeoff run.. the Gripen can carry a respectable CAS load, get to the target faster, get back faster and still be able to keep up with any expeditionary fighting force.

I have a personal dislike for the LCA which is not motivated by nationalism but rather by disappointment, I actually wished the LCA to look something like the S-56.. and would have looked much much nicer, flown much better and would have been easier to adapt for a Naval requirement. I suppose the DRDO had its reasons to go with the french delta philosophy.. I just don't like it.

Yeah thats my dog.. Ginger rani

If the Gripen is chosen the LCA is doomed. However bad the LCA is there is no choice but to develop the aircraft and then use the expertise gained to make better planes. You cannot learn design unless you actually design something and make it work.
 
u r right that's why f-18 SH and EF is best among them...but which one is best F-16IN Super Viper OR F-18 super Hornet....

The F-16 IN and the F-18 are strong in different ways...the F-16 is a comparatively light aircraft good at high speed dogfighting while the F-18 is a superb air to ground aircraft which is also great at dog fighting at low speeds.
 
The F-16 IN and the F-18 are strong in different ways...the F-16 is a comparatively light aircraft good at high speed dogfighting while the F-18 is a superb air to ground aircraft which is also great at dog fighting at low speeds.

is USA govt i ready for full technology transfer which is main condition of MRCA..how ever Gripen,Rafael,EF and Mig-35 is ready for that..
 
Id not go for the Rafale for two outstanding reasons, one, in almost every competition it took part in, it placed poorly, the Korean FSX, the Singaporean FSX.. and recently things arent looking too good with the Swiss either.
Agreed op req make a difference, but there must be some commonality with the IAF's ASR too that somehow I feel the Rafale wont make it(or it could be they announce it as the winner.. life is funny).
The Rafale's strike capability is much touted by the French, but in recent deployments for ISAF it had to rely on a mirage to lase the targets while it dropped. On the other hand the Gripen has made self lased drops already.

Santro ,
I missed that bold part , was it in the news/blogs . Love to hear more about it .

What I am aware of is that Damocles is not integrated on Rafale was reported by DID on 14 July .

France’s AASM Precision-Guided Bombs
 
Id not go for the Rafale for two outstanding reasons, one, in almost every competition it took part in, it placed poorly, the Korean FSX, the Singaporean FSX.. and recently things arent looking too good with the Swiss either.
Agreed op req make a difference, but there must be some commonality with the IAF's ASR too that somehow I feel the Rafale wont make it(or it could be they announce it as the winner.. life is funny).
The Rafale's strike capability is much touted by the French, but in recent deployments for ISAF it had to rely on a mirage to lase the targets while it dropped. On the other hand the Gripen has made self lased drops already.

I agree the SH is a good choice, but all things considered, a single engined jet with similar capabilities and better maneuverability seems more appropriate, also it keeps the IAF from having to totally depend on a single supplier for TOT, the Gripen has its hands in many pockets, and even American companies benefit from it, so it still keeps the Americans a little happy while ensuring that in case..in case things go a little awry with corporate corridors the IAF has nothing to worry about. Since the engine on the Gripen is of the same F404 stock, the LCA program can be kept happy too..(so can the SH).. and it makes it possible to ditch the Kaveri with a little less heartburn in case it doesn't make the grade.
But probably the greatest advantage it has is its short field capbility, too many of the IAF's bases are currently close to the border, while it does allow for an easier reach and they may be well defended, I'm not what is the current status but most of IAF's current fleet apart from the Migs aren't too friendly with impromptu FOB's. Would it not be better, say in a scenario where the Indian forces manage to break deep into Chinese or Pakistani terribly to have an aircraft capable of flying from closer to the front lines??..with an 900m takeoff run.. the Gripen can carry a respectable CAS load, get to the target faster, get back faster and still be able to keep up with any expeditionary fighting force.

I have a personal dislike for the LCA which is not motivated by nationalism but rather by disappointment, I actually wished the LCA to look something like the S-56.. and would have looked much much nicer, flown much better and would have been easier to adapt for a Naval requirement. I suppose the DRDO had its reasons to go with the french delta philosophy.. I just don't like it.

Yeah thats my dog.. Ginger rani

I am a dog lover and i think ur dog is so cute... What a funny name Ginger rani :lol: nice though. I think they can take away all the tention of a day in seconds. I too had a dog for 8 years but lost it, it was a pamarian (name is please don't laugh juicy) :cry:.

Back to topic i too liked the Gripen but i don't know why my gut feeling says F-16 could turn out to be a surprise. who knows , if that happens what will be the reaction of Pakistan??? Shock i suppose :lol:
 
The Rafale's strike capability is much touted by the French, but in recent deployments for ISAF it had to rely on a mirage to lase the targets while it dropped. On the other hand the Gripen has made self lased drops already.

Do u have some sources for that...I dont think thats possible for an advanced fighter like Rafale to not have targeting pods. :what:


I agree the SH is a good choice, but all things considered, a single engined jet with similar capabilities and better maneuverability seems more appropriate

the IAF doctrine favours twin engined jets and the F-16 being more maneuvarable than the F-18 does not have similar capability as the F-18...F-18 is an out and out strike aircraft and the best in its class and category.

the LCA program can be kept happy too..(so can the SH)..

LCA prog uses the F 404 only for the mark 1.....already the Engine RFP for the Mk II has been given for F 414 (used for SH) and EJ200 of Typhoon.

So no sense in going for F 404

But probably the greatest advantage it has is its short field capbility, too many of the IAF's bases are currently close to the border, while it does allow for an easier reach and they may be well defended, I'm not what is the current status but most of IAF's current fleet apart from the Migs aren't too friendly with impromptu FOB's. Would it not be better, say in a scenario where the Indian forces manage to break deep into Chinese or Pakistani terribly to have an aircraft capable of flying from closer to the front lines??..with an 900m takeoff run.. the Gripen can carry a respectable CAS load, get to the target faster, get back faster and still be able to keep up with any expeditionary fighting force.

Almost all the fighters in MRCA tender can land or take off from stips of 900 m long...the only adv Gripen has it can take off from strips 400 m long.....but that adv useful it mayb for Swedish conditions maynot be "so much useful" for Indian strips which are long.

I have a personal dislike for the LCA which is not motivated by nationalism but rather by disappointment, I actually wished the LCA to look something like the S-56.. and would have looked much much nicer, flown much better..I suppose the DRDO had its reasons to go with the french delta philosophy.. I just don't like it.

Hi..see this is our first attempt at a modern 4 ++ gen fighter and as far as it has come I see HAL has done a decent job with it notwitstanding the delays (which were beneficial in a way we developed some critical technologies by ourselves)
This is the way to go and im sure they ll make a fighter that u ll like in their next attempt (no sarcasm).

p.s.: the same goes for the Kaveri engine..Even the mighty Chinese with their much vaunted industry are finding it challenging to build a modern turbofan engine.


would have been easier to adapt for a Naval requirement.

N-LCA prototype -I has already rolled out and ground and taxi trials are underway.
See

Yeah thats my dog.. Ginger rani

Luv it.
 
I betted on Rafale for 1 rupee :lol:


If it wins the thread starter should give me 2 rupees:bunny::bunny:
 
Santro ,
I missed that bold part , was it in the news/blogs . Love to hear more about it .

What I am aware of is that Damocles is not integrated on Rafale was reported by DID on 14 July .

France’s AASM Precision-Guided Bombs

Yup.. this was in AFM, cant remember which one. Damocles may be active now, but no one knows for sure if it has been tested operationally, The Gripen can use Litening III pods, since they are from Israel.. another friend happy.
And I believe time has come for India to field its own stand off weapon. DRDO is more than capable of that...(if it has I am unaware of it).

Karthic if the IAF is all for the twin engined doctrine then the purchase of the LCA makes no sense at all or the mirage for that matter, I do sense a twin seat doctrine.. but no twin engine.
Thanks for the 400m correction, and I have written why that may be useful,and what if the enemy manages to break through and chops your runway in two or three, Is it not better to have a fighter that can still takeoff in the remaining useful runway and put up a fight?
The Chinese turbofan's are actually deployed with test squadrons, problem is their lack of knowledge regarding alloy development for critical areas and their FADEC.
The Gripen NG's engine is a derivative of the F414.

Indushek
If the F-16 does win, it wont shock Pakistan, It will infact lead to a very unusual stalemate in term of capabilities, and while the F-16IN will have superior avionics.. all in all, it will still be very similar to what Pakistan knows all about. The PAF knows the F-16 inside out, its limitations, what it can and cannot do aerodynamically. Where it stinks, what are its quirks. So the advantage that the IAF gains in a large number of unknowns in capability presented to the PAF.. in this case that is reduced. I will be surprised if the F-16 wins.. or the Mig-35 for that matter, they are all at the apogee of their design age. And unlike the SH which is still an entirely new aircraft, the F-16IN and Mig-35 are simply their originals on steroids.
Shahrukh khan can make more abs and do full frontals.. but he is still Shahrukh khan.. we know all about him.:P
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom