You aren't getting the enhanced engine. So i don't know why you put up a link to it?
At this stage, it is the INS6 you are getting and the power specs are the same 22,000lb for the 400, As i showed and someone else said.
At this stage, it is the INS6 you are getting and the power specs are the same 22,000lb for the 400, As i showed and someone else said.
No clue. More importantly, we need to see how these drones will fare from a ramp. Others don't have a problem because they are CATOBAR.
MKI doesn't have range. Su-57 is much better, but we need dedicated bombers.
The IAF needs the ability to support the IN anywhere in the IOR. So the combat radius requirement is up to 5000Km. Even Su-57 provides only half that.
It's why I supported the purchase of the SH. The SH combined with P-8I, MQ-9B, MQ-4C and B-1B provides more capability than what just one Rafale provides. In the future, even something like the RQ-180 would have been possible. It's not a substitute to actually having supercarriers and larger destroyers, but it's a good stopgap for 15-20 years. It would have given us sea denial capability. Now we just have to do the same with Rafale and less connectivity to American platforms.
I can't see it changing. I think he doesn't like it when it's pointed out, that the FA-18 may be more capable.
Modi ji didn't "officially" name Rafale M because (anti)I.N.D.I.A. would start to cry hoarse during the next election campaign. But Dassault has already got the word from GOI. Here is the official announcement from the other side: India selects the Navy Rafale - Press kits
Only way this deal will fall now if Modi loses next year's election and Arvind Kejriwal/Nitish Kumar or likes become India's I.N.D.I.A.N. PM, lol
Yes, agreed.
MKI has 1500km combat range on internal fuel. But with mid-air refuelling it should have enough range to support Rafale M/our CBG.
Regarding Su-57? Well we don't have it. Secondly, does it have a comparable big stick like MKI's Brahmos A? Don't think so.
Yes both yours and Vstol sirs' viewpoint was very clear. But still I am happy with Rafale M
Because it isn't, period.
That's not enough. A refueller will have to accompany the aircraft so that's pointless.
A better option would be to just launch missiles using the refueller itself. Like the C-130J's Rapid Dragon.
Su-57 can be modified to carry 2 Brahmos As. But it's still not as good as a dedicated bomber.
Its not done in this country unless its signed.
No honest opinion after following australian procurements ballooning. Look at Hobart-class destroyer or Collins Class submarines. Compare it with your peers like south korea or Japan. See how efficient they are.
I guess the difference here is that they face the enemy and preparing for it. While for australia its far off. Defence is good to have.
Reminds me of this:
The Brahmos RCS is too large and supersonic all the way, if at high altitude, the target is too obvious, if at low altitude, the supersonic drag is too high, the range is too short,.
The collins and the replacement decisions, or lack of. Has a long and sorry history. Having said that and it's not hard to google all the issues. It is still a world class sub and the MLU will make it better. It's final replacement will be a joint UK/AU nuke sub. It was a long and winding road full of potholes, but we got there.
Last edited:
What if we can integrate Brahmos A with P-8I(yes, politically gonna be very difficult)? And with that, voilà we'll have our own Naval bomber for IOC region.
I think time has come for us to seriously look towards having a bomber fleet of our own. Tu-160 should be preferred by us over the Lancer.
Either bomber is fine with me.
Same argument as Rafale vs SH, both meet requirements. We only need them until we can build our own or we can replace it with something better.
Better option is to bring the Tupolevs back with an experimental UTTAM variant and jugaad the BrahMos in. Use it only as a bomb truck and not for anythin gelse.
Yes, both do meet the requirement. But as far as advance weaponry is concerned both Mother Russia and Le French are waaaaay more dependable and trusted than Uncle Sam. Thus, I prefer Tu-160M2. Plus being Russian, we will be able to integrate Brahmos A into it without much muster. That can't be said about B-1B though.
Tu-160M2 is now being newly made. Tu-142 would be really hard to resurrect, IMO.
I don't think advanced weapons will be a problem for either bomber. The Americans are working on a hypersonic missile too. It's called HACM.
Brahmos-A can't be carried internally by either bomber. We need whole new weapons for them.
Whatever we choose(and we surely will, just a matter of time), we also must tag that purchase with future 6th gen Long Range Stealth Bomber program, i.e., future definite purchase of B-21 Raider or PAK-DA.
We can't afford to lag behind PLAAF(H-20) in future. I just hope our war planners are keeping an eye on future (neighbouring) trends and warfare.
PS: If Tu-160M2 can carry KH-101, then it could definitely be modified for internal carriage of Brahmos-A. Dimension/weight wise, both seem quite similar(with Kh-101 being slightly wider and Brahmos A being slightly longer).
Once again you prove how dumb you really are! As per IAF, Brahmos is not only supersonic but its RCS is also very low. In fact, as per our respected AM(retired) SBP Sinha it has stealth too. Read this:
Source:BrahMos Supersonic Cruise Missile-Superlative Weapon For ‘Cruise Missile Triad’ - Indian Aerospace and Defence Bulletin - News for aerospace and defence in India
Yeah, I'd like to see the B-1B or Tu-160 giving way to a stealth bomber. The Russians are more likely to follow through with that. But the Russians could sell us that even without a Tu-160 contract.
The Kh-101 has been designed to the upper limits of the weapons bays, it can't get better than that. But Brahmos NG will do.
To be read with my other collins post to you.
I also saw this US video, both good and bad about the collins.
An unclassified operation and exercises over 3 years. As you know the 688 is the Los Angeles-class SSN
Last edited:
All your offensive hardware is American. Your style of warfare is closer to Americans than the British.
We should rather focus on getting the agm-129's and JASSM-XR from the Americans and try integrating that on p-8's.
No it's not, infact Tibetan air is thinner. It's good enough for threatening nearby Chinese bases.
In the same post..Don't you see what you said?
As to our hardware, you might want to look at wiki. That would be good enough to show your mistake.