Mirage 2000H, MiG-29UPG, Jaguar DARIN III - Medium Multirole Aircraft of IAF

_Anonymous_ said:
Apart from the Rafale & TEDBF what are the other TE projects between the IN & IAF?
Click to expand...

AMCA and PAK FA of course.

AMCA has been designed in such a way that PAK FA has become an obvious requirement. AMCA cannot carry heavy weapons internally whereas the PAK FA has a whole host of heavy internal weapons coming up, including hypersonic ones. MSA can replace one or both of them.

And naturally, the navy also will want a next gen fighter jet beyond TEDBF.
 
randomradio said:
Good deal if you can provide the forces with both options so that they do not make excuses.
Click to expand...
The problem is that TE design suffers from SE performance in case of one engine out and that restricts the payload from a STOBAR design. I do not believe that CATOBAR is superiror to STOBAR for many reasons. I still prefer SE design for carrier operations. A-4 Skyhawk has delivered more bombs in Vietnam war than F-4 Phantoms. and they had less cases of failures for non combat reasons than F-4s.
 
randomradio said:
AMCA and PAK FA of course.

AMCA has been designed in such a way that PAK FA has become an obvious requirement. AMCA cannot carry heavy weapons internally whereas the PAK FA has a whole host of heavy internal weapons coming up, including hypersonic ones. MSA can replace one or both of them.

And naturally, the navy also will want a next gen fighter jet beyond TEDBF.
Click to expand...
As of now, PAKFA is speculation. Though I think we may have no option but to go on for it post 2025 when it matures sufficiently. Post TEDBF, isn't it going to be N AMCA? Don't see where MSA fits in.
 
vstol Jockey said:
The problem is that TE design suffers from SE performance in case of one engine out and that restricts the payload from a STOBAR design. I do not believe that CATOBAR is superiror to STOBAR for many reasons. I still prefer SE design for carrier operations. A-4 Skyhawk has delivered more bombs in Vietnam war than F-4 Phantoms. and they had less cases of failures for non combat reasons than F-4s.
Click to expand...

IN wants CATOBAR because they also want to operate the E-2D and C-2. The V-22 Osprey can easily supercede the C-2/E-2 combo though.

When it comes to launching fighter jets, there's little to no difference. So yeah, STOBAR + Osprey should do well. The Osprey can land on other ships as well.

As for single and twin engine debate, it will be really difficult to convince the services when the terrain is mountain/ice or sea. And even one crash can kill your own jet program.
 
_Anonymous_ said:
As of now, PAKFA is speculation. Though I think we may have no option but to go on for it post 2025 when it matures sufficiently.
Click to expand...

A hole will create itself automatically once MMRCA and MWF contracts are signed by 2025, and the IAF will point at that hole after 2025 in support of Su-57's induction since AMCA won't be enough. Another argument in 2025 would be that the Su-57 is now available whereas the AMCA prototype is yet to begin flying.

However the MSA can at least delay the Su-57's induction in favour of something much more capable, like a Su-57 Mk2, the French NGF or something from the US, or a post-AMCA Indian design. Even a larger MSA can be designed around two XF9s negating the need for any other aircraft.

So the larger MSA will remove Su-57 Mk1's need and smaller MSA will delay Su-57 Mk1's induction by 10 years, but AMCA will do neither of these. I hope they do something about AMCA's internal bays.

Post TEDBF, isn't it going to be N AMCA? Don't see where MSA fits in.
Click to expand...

I don't think there is an N-AMCA. The IN will want their own independent design, and their future carrier plans will justify the numbers necessary. Anyway, I don't think they are in a hurry since such future plans will only be possible well after 2030, for induction in the mid-2040s. ADA was also talking about designing a carrier aircraft after AMCA is done with. For now, there's only TEDBF.
 
Better to bring another advertisement like Stealth MMRCA 1.0 , call all contestants like we did in MMRCA 1.0, learn about design and technology and implement in AMCA :D
For example, we learnt the design from Grippen and now we are implementing it in MK2.
 
_Anonymous_ said:
If the re engining of the Jaguars are ruled out & the present engines are subject to de rating thanks to wear & tear apart from the number of years of service put in , how will these AESA radars be powered? Something doesn't quite add up. Are these radars for the Jaguars or the Mk1a?
Click to expand...

Jaguar will carry very limited payload

Maximum One Tonnes with Two CCMs

They are used in Packs of 4

To carry out high speed low level bombing
 
STEPHEN COHEN said:
Jaguar will carry very limited payload

Maximum One Tonnes with Two CCMs

They are used in Packs of 4

To carry out high speed low level bombing
Click to expand...
What has a limited payload got to do with a power source? The Jaguars were known to be notoriously underpowered even when they were factory fresh. All these years have taken a further toll on their power plant. Now we've news that the much awaited re engining under DARIN - III has been abandoned. How will you power these AESA radars?
 
_Anonymous_ said:
What has a limited payload got to do with a power source? The Jaguars were known to be notoriously underpowered even when they were factory fresh. All these years have taken a further toll on their power plant. Now we've news that the much awaited re engining under DARIN - III has been abandoned. How will you power these AESA radars?
Click to expand...

Engine power is distributed for everything

Carrying the payload and powering the avionics

I read somewhere that AESA Radar' s main problem is cooling requirements
Not power supply

They must have calculated everything
 
STEPHEN COHEN said:
Engine power is distributed for everything

Carrying the payload and powering the avionics

I read somewhere that AESA Radar' s main problem is cooling requirements
Not power supply

They must have calculated everything
Click to expand...
What is the usage of AESA radar for jaguar? Rather that money could have been used in MK1A.
 
_Anonymous_ said:
If the re engining of the Jaguars are ruled out & the present engines are subject to de rating thanks to wear & tear apart from the number of years of service put in , how will these AESA radars be powered? Something doesn't quite add up. Are these radars for the Jaguars or the Mk1a?
Click to expand...
wear & tear compared to what? The last batch is as new as 2004.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom