You're all over the place. Impressive as all those pictures and images are, they have been posted and posted again multiple times.
Yeah so? You expect members to capture 1st hand images like journalist/photographer? I had a good collection of DoD pics, documentaries & clips since late 1990s when internet parlors came, unfortunately my old HDD at that time crashed.
I'll just stick to the topic you wanted to discuss, you seem to be way too emotional about this to discuss anything else. On the internet, you will be called out quite easily.
Yes pls just stick to topic. We should not discuss anything else. Internet is the only place to be "called out" easily bcoz nobody can catch u.
In any case, Saab's MAWS didn't meet IAF requirements because it was UV-based, the Israeli one did, which was IR. For whatever reasons, technological of course, even Saab is using Israeli IR MAWS on Gripen E. And Su-35's MAWS cannot be installed on the MKI, the same hasn't been done on Russia's Su-30SM either. Plus neither the Russians nor the Indians want to make holes in the Su-30's airframe in exchange for airframe integrity, which meant even the application of the bigger Israeli DC-MAWS wasn't possible. Maybe the Russians will add MAWS to Su-30SM2 and Su-34M, with airframe modifications, maybe. The Malaysians have no such qualms with regards to airframe integrity because they don't plan on using the jet for as long and with as much gusto as the IAF wants to, plus they were fine with UV MAWS.
Last time i checked - UV MAWS has better background/ground clutter removal capability reducing false alarms, compared to IR MAWS which are better at higher altitudes or clean background.
If the above logic is true then the Russian & European jets fly in higher lattitudes or colder areas, may be that's why they are comfortable with IR MAWS. And tropical area jets would better suit the UV MAWS perhaps that's why Malaysians chose it.
If MiG-29 can be turned into MiG-35, Su-30 into Su-35, if HAL has plans to modify the entire cockpit as per Super-Sukhoi upgrade & they have recently attached jammer pods at wing tips then SOAR & SOLO sensors can be installed on MKI with slight modifications. There is no reason to compare Su-30SM & MKI as there is no dependency, just like we don't compare MKI with MKK or MKA.
All the legacy jets are getting modified to install MAWS & LWR. Even Pakistani JF-17 also now has MAWS so this excuse of airframe integrity doesn't hold at all. And still if a face sized hole or slit is undesirable then a small external attachment can be made like the MAW-300 on MKM.
We also don't want to use Russian electronics because they generally "steal" some components that go into electronics and it becomes a diplomatic problem for us. Countries generally bypass IPR for national security reasons, which India doesn't. Plus even the Russian one would likely have failed to beat the Israeli MAWS for the MKI. Now we are going for pod-based solutions for MAWS and EA. Chalk it up to bad luck if you want.
So earlier u were aggresively defending Russian tech, now u changed focus to Israeli
No issues, just don't pounce on me.
If we wanna go for Israeli MAWS it can be fitted as external attachment like we are seeing on many legacy jets.
The pod solution is the worst solution wasting a precious hardpoint + the upper hemisphere is not covered, the airframe itself acts as huge blindspot.
DRDO has put up pylon based solution too which even western countries have implemented. What's the problem in that? Like i shared earlier, there are even different models with combo of MAWS, RWR, LWR, CMDS, jammers, etc.
The Russians have invested most of their R&D money into the Su-57, so that's where their best tech is. While the IRST uses QWIP with an unknown but high resolution, the MAWS is UV-based, which is not suitable for the IAF. Plus a lot of what they make for themselves is not for export, also why the FGFA and MKI, along with many other platforms we buy from them have Indo-Western electronics. We also avoid having to deal with their bureaucracy for the servicing of the electronics.
Avoiding their bureaucracy & dependency is a valid point.
We are successfully integrating Indo-Western avionics & flying the MKI, if Russia has problem with this then only it is a dead end.
UV MAWS is ok for RMAF MKM but not IAF MKI, this needs more clarification.
The Su-57 also has an EOTS below the canopy along with the nose-mounted OLS.
No, the chin doesn't have EOTS but DIRCM & MAWS. It needs external pod for laser designation & single target track.
PS: I'm not a "fan" of Russian, French or American aircraft, I simply analyse information as it comes. And on forums, I generally take a contrarian view so there's actual exchange of ideas, regardless of whether I support the same idea or not. As it stands today, there isn't a more advanced jet than the Su-57M around, at least in 2025. NGAD, Tempest, J-XX, FCAS etc may exceed it in 10-20 years, but right now the F-22 and F-35 aren't suitable enough to compete with it.
I'm also not fan of any country, especially USA but i'm F-22 fan since 1990s with no regrets but that doesn't mean i blindly favor it in every aspect.
I also analyse things unofficially in best of my technical qualification & comprehension.
Exchange of ideas doesn't need "contrarian" combative behavior, u just saw what it leads to, in F2F discussions people will show you the door.
Lastly, i already said that i respect your belief that Su-57 is best, no issues. Similarly i'll maintain my view that F-22 will have upper-hand in BVR & Su-57 in close combat, that's all. And i don't like F-35 overall, i like some of its sub-systems like HMDS, DAS, EOTS, sensor fused avionics.
