America wasn't a viable option for us 'cause ToT would have been extremely limited and we would have pissed off the SU in the process when we needed their help in developing a space and ballistic missile program.
MMRCA 2.0 - Updates and Discussions
- Thread starter Picdelamirand-oil
- Start date
America wasn't a viable option for us 'cause ToT would have been extremely limited and we would have pissed off the SU in the process when we needed their help in developing a space and ballistic missile program.
I had asked RST to read the book - The Tejas Story by AVM Philip Rajkumar (the same person who headed NFTC - ADA between 1994-2001 until his retirement ) which documented the entire development story up until 2001 fairly competently.
And we're expected to believe the IAF was shoved out of the project. Of course asking for documentary evidence is like personally abusing him which is the reason he ignores to respect protocol.
I see he seems to have graduated to Bluff Master from Resident Story Teller which in itself was an upgrade from Resident Optimist given his recent shenanigans here. First it was Mk-2 = Mk-1a / Mk-1 + Plug analogous to Mk2 = AMCA Mk-1 + TE + IWB & now this toxicity he's subjecting us too.
And we're expected to believe the IAF was shoved out of the project. Of course asking for documentary evidence is like personally abusing him which is the reason he ignores to respect protocol.
I see he seems to have graduated to Bluff Master from Resident Story Teller which in itself was an upgrade from Resident Optimist given his recent shenanigans here. First it was Mk-2 = Mk-1a / Mk-1 + Plug analogous to Mk2 = AMCA Mk-1 + TE + IWB & now this toxicity he's subjecting us too.
DRDO should have stuck with the initial LCA plans, the IAF would have bought an old M2000 configured version with a less advanced French FBW had it come by the mid-90s, which the French would have helped deliver. People tend to forget that the IAF operated the M2000 with the same configuration until just a decade ago.
Then IAF would have bought 6 squadrons of that until 2002 or so, followed by more 2 more tranches of 6 squadrons each in more advanced configurations. Then we would've proceeded with the development of the old semi-stealth strike AMCA, which would have entered service in large numbers by now.
It's quite ironic but while ADA chose the big bang approach, the most successful labs in DRDO followed iterative development, like electronics and missiles. Similarly, ARDE followed the big bang approach and failed at making rifles. The successful ones kept their goals modest and kept expanding on those while taking foreign assistance wherever possible. And Mk1A is seen as a success because HAL followed that iterative development path ADA abandoned. Now ADA's following the iterative development path too, so we are bound to see some success in the future.
DRDO also should have kept the IAF in LCA since 1987 instead of bringing them in only after 2011.
Even with all the missteps, I think ADA might've managed to deliver LCA Mk1 more or less on time, had the US not sanctioned us post-Pokhran.
It's ironic to think today that around the time NG was helping China perfect the FC-1 design, the US chose to stick it to us by freezing the FBW for LCA, delaying the prog for years.
It's ironic to think today that around the time NG was helping China perfect the FC-1 design, the US chose to stick it to us by freezing the FBW for LCA, delaying the prog for years.
The tejas mk1 for now are just good replacements of mig27 and 23. We still need mk1a in numbers. On top of the flankers. The MMRCA needs to be scrapped entirely and we should do G2G deal with the Americans and the French. Just be done with it. The typhoon is not an option as we are dumb enough to not enter gcap.