CCS clears AMCA for IAF

[kaku]

Surely not, and at least for now and many years to come I haven't heard a counterargument against what I said: The one is flying since years in several prototypes whereas the the other is still a project.

Why you hear counterargument here.
This is not a V/S thrad or comparitive one.
But if this is your argument, then all the arguments of your comparisions and claims of Chinese fighters are invalid, because Chinese dont share a single thing in public. But here you were already claiming it as Fifth gen fighter

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Dont be a hypocrite. You try to hide your agenda, but its really hard in this world of internet.

 

[kaku]

That's how long it took for the F-35, a notoriously cost overrun and delayed fighter jet.

That doesn't meant all nations have the same criteria, or issues.

You're assuming a lot of things.

First you're assuming that the 17000 hours was a set perimeter when your own article only suggests that this is just how long the fighter flew without issues before it was basically cleared.

Second you're assuming that this is how long it should take other programs, which is a weird expectation to have considering that's not how any of this works.

You cannot assume things based upon a single circumstantial point.

How we know it was cost over-run and delayed?

US was the only country that achieved such capability, and they are the one who setting the metric and criteria.

Lets see in how much time (if they able to), Turkiye or Korea able to do it.
But for AMCA, I am quite sure, it wont be less than 6000-8000 hours for Mk1 and 12000-14000 hours for achieving Mk2 capability.

 

[kaku]

Whatever comes out to ease of manufacturing and capabilities in balance should be the logical choice but we know that isn’t always the case with local produce in India.

Tejas was the logical choice, you have to create manufacturing infrastructure for it.

You have to develop autoclaves, CNC machines etc,, and that havent happened without this program.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Deino]

Why you hear counterargument here.
This is not a V/S thrad or comparitive one.
But if this is your argument, then all the arguments of your comparisions and claims of Chinese fighters are invalid, because Chinese dont share a single thing in public. But here you were already claiming it as Fifth gen fighter

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Dont be a hypocrite. You try to hide your agenda, but its really hard in this world of internet.

Thanks a lot for exactly proving my point even if you try to put some wrong words into my with and twist it as long as it fits your agenda: Therefore just back to the question … in the very beginning of this strange thread, someone asked how to compare both and I said - admitted with some fun - the J-35 is flyingsince years, the AMCA is a project only! Thsiis neither wrong, nor a politically bias claim or hypocrite; in fact it is just a FACT and reality! PERIOD.

And concerning your quoted Tweet, again thanks you are proving my claim: Yes for sure, for China we have barely confirmed facts, but to spin the story from it China‘s fighter are not fifth, but the Indian projects with even lesser confirmed facts are, is plain ridicolous.

As such, yes it makes no sense in the 2020s to keep developing another variant of a 4th generation fighter like the Tejas 2 which will enter service at best in the 2030s, it makes no sense to develop a type like the TEDBF - in fact a Rafale look alike (so much on Indian‘s do not copy!) and try to purchase another deck-based fighter and MRF fighter for the IAF … and why developing a Marut-like jet-trainer NOW? It makes no sense at all especially in comparison to China.

 

[vkdindian]

AMCA is still on drawing boards while many others including China are far ahead of India. Any bombastic claims at this stage, wouldn’t be of much value.

Should India develop only 5th gen aircraft is another matter though. In the theatres of likely conflict, India isn’t likely to encounter only 5th or 6th gen aircraft. These aircraft also come with serious penalties of cost to maintain and service them, which has forced even the USA to induct non stealth aircraft in large numbers.
It isn’t out of order for India too, to maintain a decent fleet strength with a mix of various types and capabilities that would suit them in this theatre. MK II and TEDBF would probably fit in that equation.

Moreover, many of the technologies that need to be proven would be employed in these, before inclusion in AMCA. After all India is no Turkey that can break all the records from drawing boards to first flight, like they have done with KAAN. We like it slow and dragging with few delays thrown in to spice up things.

 

[MirageBlue]

Thanks a lot for exactly proving my point even if you try to put some wrong words into my with and twist it as long as it fits your agenda: Therefore just back to the question … in the very beginning of this strange thread, someone asked how to compare both and I said - admitted with some fun - the J-35 is flyingsince years, the AMCA is a project only! Thsiis neither wrong, nor a politically bias claim or hypocrite; in fact it is just a FACT and reality! PERIOD.

And concerning your quoted Tweet, again thanks you are proving my claim: Yes for sure, for China we have barely confirmed facts, but to spin the story from it China‘s fighter are not fifth, but the Indian projects with even lesser confirmed facts are, is plain ridicolous.

As such, yes it makes no sense in the 2020s to keep developing another variant of a 4th generation fighter like the Tejas 2 which will enter service at best in the 2030s, it makes no sense to develop a type like the TEDBF - in fact a Rafale look alike (so much on Indian‘s do not copy!) and try to purchase another deck-based fighter and MRF fighter for the IAF … and why developing a Marut-like jet-trainer NOW? It makes no sense at all especially in comparison to China.

I hope you're aware that the French intend to keep the Rafale in service till 2060 at least, if not longer. They're still placing orders for new build Rafales for themselves that will only enter service 2030 onwards.

Meanwhile, Gripen E is still not fully operational and will see service till 2060 at least as well, for the Brazilian as well as Swedish AF.

And those European Next gen fighters are going to be so prohibitively expensive that if any nation depends on just those, they'll either have to massively increase their defence budget or decide to use their 4th gen fighters much longer.

India has a very large number of fighters it needs to replace in the coming decade and half and the answer to replacing the bulk of them is a capable 4.5 gen fighter.

BTW, what is so technologically advanced about the JL-9 or JL-10? Or take for that matter the Boeing T-7A? If the design is sound aerodynamically, airframe is good structurally, engine is reliable, it has FBW and the avionics are top notch to be able to replicate the cockpit of other fighters then it more than meets the basic requirements.

So what is the issue with having a Marut inspired trainer? You can be specific.

 

[That_Guy]

How we know it was cost over-run and delayed?

US was the only country that achieved such capability, and they are the one who setting the metric and criteria.

Lets see in how much time (if they able to), Turkiye or Korea able to do it.
But for AMCA, I am quite sure, it wont be less than 6000-8000 hours for Mk1 and 12000-14000 hours for achieving Mk2 capability.

How do we know? Because the Pentagon said so, multiple times. This is already established fact, and I will not be arguing with you over this.

Seriously. You're arguing for the sake of arguing.

 

[kaku]

Thanks a lot for exactly proving my point even if you try to put some wrong words into my with and twist it as long as it fits your agenda: Therefore just back to the question … in the very beginning of this strange thread, someone asked how to compare both and I said - admitted with some fun - the J-35 is flyingsince years, the AMCA is a project only! Thsiis neither wrong, nor a politically bias claim or hypocrite; in fact it is just a FACT and reality! PERIOD.

And concerning your quoted Tweet, again thanks you are proving my claim: Yes for sure, for China we have barely confirmed facts, but to spin the story from it China‘s fighter are not fifth, but the Indian projects with even lesser confirmed facts are, is plain ridicolous.

As such, yes it makes no sense in the 2020s to keep developing another variant of a 4th generation fighter like the Tejas 2 which will enter service at best in the 2030s, it makes no sense to develop a type like the TEDBF - in fact a Rafale look alike (so much on Indian‘s do not copy!) and try to purchase another deck-based fighter and MRF fighter for the IAF … and why developing a Marut-like jet-trainer NOW? It makes no sense at all especially in comparison to China.

-
So you abdicatted your duty as a mod?

Secondly, by your analogy AMCA cant be compared with J-35 or J-20, but by god's grace J-35 and J-20 are automatically fifth generation.

Furthur, you have no idea how force-mix work, 4/4.5 gen fighters are going nowhere. If we start to adopt what you say, IAF start to get bankrupt within a decade.

Furthur, why its okey for China to develop L-15, but not for India?

 

[kaku]

How do we know? Because the Pentagon said so, multiple times. This is already established fact, and I will not be arguing with you over this.

Seriously. You're arguing for the sake of arguing.

Because thats the only metric exist. If you dont want to believe it, thats upto you.

But last time too, it was US which decided criteria and metrics for 4/4.5 gen with F-16 and F/A-18 Hornets/Super Hornets.

 

[That_Guy]

Because thats the only metric exist. If you dont want to believe it, thats upto you.

But last time too, it was US which decided criteria and metrics for 4/4.5 gen with F-16 and F/A-18 Hornets/Super Hornets.

It is NOT the only metric that exists.

The F-22 came before the F-35. The J-20 also has publically available timelines as well.

You have no idea what you're talking about.

If this is the best argument you can come up with, then we're done here. Best to just move on.

 

[kaku]

It is NOT the only metric that exists.

The F-22 came before the F-35. The J-20 also has publically available timelines as well.

You have no idea what you're talking about.

If this is the best argument you can come up with, then we're done here. Best to just move on.

If you believe so

After two circuits on a triangular route around north Georgia, Metz touched down fifty-eight minutes later. As he rolled up the taxiway, he turned the jet slightly, tapped the brakes and the jet bowed to the appreciative crowd. The maiden flight was the first of 3,496 flights and 7,616 test hours to come in the F-22’s engineering and manufacturing development phase. The Air Force would declare the F-22 operational in 2005.

F-22 Raptor History

After nearly 44,000 wind tunnel test hours, 13,000 material sample tests, six years of development, and a trio of program rephasings mandated by Congress, the F-22 was finally airborne.

www.lockheedmartin.com

 

[That_Guy]

If you believe so

F-22 Raptor History

After nearly 44,000 wind tunnel test hours, 13,000 material sample tests, six years of development, and a trio of program rephasings mandated by Congress, the F-22 was finally airborne.

www.lockheedmartin.com

Yeah, there's no getting through to you.

By this article itself, it's 44000 hours, not 17000 hours.

Your goal posts just changed.

Be consistent, if you want to argue with me.

Otherwise,

Your article supports my views, not yours. Actually read your own articles before posting them first.

 

[kaku]

Yeah, there's no getting through to you.

By this article itself, it's 44000 hours, not 17000 hours.

Your goal posts just changed.

44000 hours is wind tunnel, you do understand you have to do wind tunnel. And then they had done 7616 flying hours for testing.

After two circuits on a triangular route around north Georgia, Metz touched down fifty-eight minutes later. As he rolled up the taxiway, he turned the jet slightly, tapped the brakes and the jet bowed to the appreciative crowd. The maiden flight was the first of 3,496 flights and 7,616 test hours to come in the F-22’s engineering and manufacturing development phase. The Air Force would declare the F-22 operational in 2005.

Thats why I said, AMCA going to take 6000-8000 hours for Mk1 and 12000-14000 hours for Mk2..

Moreover, I cant explain it furthur, you are shooting things in blind right now. Its useless right now, you believe in miracles. This would be my last reply to you.

 

[That_Guy]

44000 hours is wind tunnel, you do understand you have to do wind tunnel. And then they had done 7616 flying hours for testing.


Thats why I said, AMCA going to take 6000-8000 hours for Mk1 and 12000-14000 hours for Mk2..

Moreover, I cant explain it furthur, you are shooting things in blind right now. Its useless right now, you believe in miracles. This would be my last reply to you.

But you realize that just proves my point further, right?

Your own comment now proves how inconsistent you are in your own claims.

7616 is nowhere near the 17000 flight time you originally claimed.

 

[kaku]

But you realize that just proves my point further, right?

Your own comment now proves how inconsistent you are in your own claims.

7616 is nowhere near the 17000 flight time you originally claimed.

F-22 is nowhere near the capability of F-35. For analogy, AMCA Mk.1 achieve F-22 like capability, Mk-2 able to like of F-35.

You comparing apple with oranges.