Which is totally unsuitable and I really don’t perceive why Gripen supporters always say this? It’s better on some points, agreed, however mainly on specific techs, or weapons. In any respect fundamental specs LCA MK2 will probably be very close to Gripen NG, which is even logical, as a result of they’ve so many similarities in design. As for the LCA programme I have supported it all the time and I have no need to criticise it, IMO IAF should have ordered more LCA even if it is less capable as a result of its our personal fighter. However what I wouldn’t have is blind nationalism projecting it as on par with more successful designs like the Gripen while it has not proved something.
My recommendation to the Indian Govt. & MoD: split MMRCA purchase between Gripen & Rafale as a proviso for JV with SAAB on AMCA and Dassault on nEUROn (a renegotiation of offset terms could also be required). Bits ‘n’ bobs from a brand new edition of Eurofighter World. Very a lot centered on India and the MMRCA competitors. And for tomorrow, you support heavier 5G programs, and a UCAV which isn’t even around or ready, as versus aircrafts which the IAF would have a much better probability of getting prepared.
The Peace time operation costs of all the twin engine heavies will bear down heavily on the IAF especially contemplating the increased number of squadrons. The money thus saved could be invested in different areas (extra Cruise Missiles, Sensible Bombs, SRBMS and the likes) which will give more of an edge during the battle. As regards high-heavy, given IAF faces hundreds of heavy aircraft such as the J-eleven, Su-27, Su-30, and now even the J-20 and so forth – it has every right to determine its … Read the rest