This is from a game, Shiv, get your ass in order and stop posting junk.
The design seems to be good.
Good god almighty!! THAT is the PAK-FA !!?? Its stunning. I really didn't think it would be this sweet. It'd be wicked if Mr.Dultsev's rendition is even partially close to the end product. Bloody good catch Shiv![more shots at, http://www.duler.ru/design.html ]
Looks fantastic! But are you sure these its not just another fan art? Coz i've seen another series of PAK-FA supposed to have been released by the UAC itself!
Hope this beautiful bird seees the light.
first anon, these are artist's impressions, not from a game. indeed, it appears that your aft portion needs serious inspection! lol.
Why are India and Russia designing a fighter for " PAK "
It looks very similar to the F22 raptor.As a lover of Russian airplanes, I hope & pray this bird materializes.
This is just an artist (Alexander's) imagination (infact wishful thinking on the line of. No evidence that the PAK-FA looks like this!!!!Though I admit if this was true it would have been the sexiest fighter flying!!!!
This has been around for a while on the internet. Find more concepts in http://www.duler.ru/design.htmlThink the speculations should be put off till we get some kind of idea on the mockups or the prototypes.
Shiv, It looks like even you have been fooled. Rhese designs are nothing but the authors view of what a PAK-FA should look like. If u look at his site he gives three models one mimicking the cross between Su-30 and F-22 and other a cross between berkut and F-22 and one more new model.-Raj
good aircraft but i still doubt...we r seeing these pics for years..not a good work shiv ...sorry
Folks, of course these are "impressions"! Do read the heading. The Berkut testbed is on show at MAKS, Zhukovsky from tomorrow.
If this is not the PAC-FA, then I hope Indias MCA look like this.
Shiv, Can you post some info on small arms that India develops and/or manufactures. Especially, about the MSMC (uzi like) carbine developed by DRDO. It has been a long time, since read something about small arms.
Why are you posting old (infact very old) impressions of Raptor-ski?
The Berkut is useless. What are Indians so obsessed with flashy junk?
almost similar to F-22 raptor .... great desigh and clearly shows its a stealth fighter ..... all the very best
Real stunnerz to believe to be true!
Shiv, i hope you keep putting up pics from the MAKS 2009 as they keep coming. Also needles to say, do keep us updated on the news that emanates from the event!
What a bunch of clowns! The 'dramatic' external looks does nothing for effectiveness of a fighter. It is air combat, not a beauty contest for aircrafts. भगवान बचाए इस देश क़ो.
Hasnt this project been shelved?
These pictures have appeared in the blog 'THE DEW LINE" at flight global. I think one should be truthful to attribute the source of these concept pictures.
Nose is a little bit bent too much..like Concord when its landing..dont think this will pass wind tunnelwithout some mind-boggling turbulence numbers..;-)Serious hot though..Good for taking on Raptor in HAWK X..ha ha
It is interesting to note that unlike existing 'stealth fighters' - F-22, F-35 (not yet inducted), F-117 (retired) - this impression of the PAK FA shows relatively 'smooth/curved' features. All the planes mentioned above have relatively angular/jagged features. The notable exception is the B-2(which is a bomber, not a fighter, and a veritable 'flying wing') The 'smooth/curved' features of this PAK FA impression makes it look more like an YF-23 rather than the F-22. A pic of YF-23 pasted below:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Northrop_YF-23_DFRC.jpgThe YF-23 lost to the YF-22 (now F-22) in a competitive fly-off and hence it has been relegated to the annals of history.Although there are obvious differences between this PAK FA impression and the YF-23 (most notably that in this impression the wing essentially blends/merges into the tail, but not so in the YF-23), perhaps this artist was 'inspired' a little by the YF-23.Just a thought.
Wrong place but I have a concern. All modern armies have a heavy dose of heavy machine guns providing support to their troops ( namely 50mm or 12.7 mm ).An example is Pakistan which has mountains of 12.7 mms mounted on huges tripods proliferating its outposts.However we seem to have not progressed beyond our ancient Medium Machine Gun or the good old LMG . Our troops seem to rely exclusively on the Carl Gustav for heavy troop level support . We are manufacturng the Russian HMG's for our T-72's and 30 mm for the BMP's. I wonder when shall our troops get some heavies themselves for area suppression .Secondly do we have any plans to replace our mmg and lmg with better versions . I keep hearing about the Isreali Negev but have not seen them with our troops.
Shiv-ji,I personally don't wish to see Pak-Fa like F-22 aped in reality.. For curiosity a question for you - Why IAF prefers dual seater for attack aircraft( i mean non-training aircraft) when rest of the world prefers single seater?? I am awaiting eagerly for your reply
@Anonymous Its true that we clearly lack HMG capabilities especially having them on squad level vehicles. I guess somewhere in the 80s the army decided to focus more on the FN MAG than trying to buy the license for making Browning 50cals though I am not sure about the PKT (Soviet 12.7mm). Good point something we should really be thinking about. I hope Shiv decides to note this observation about heavy calibre machine guns and try writing an article about it :). What do you say Shiv?
Vin@9.02PM: to answer your question, let me quote former HAL chairman AK Baweja's press interaction last September: "Two separate prototypes with common minimum technology will be developed -- one by Russia (designated the Sukhoi T-50) and a separate one by India (designated FGFA for now). While the Russian aircraft will be a single-seater, the Indian FGFA will be a twin seater, but not a trainer version of the Russian counterpart. As per IAF doctrinal inputs, they want a mix of both single and twin seaters, though they would prefer the Indian sider to develop a twin-seater platform. HAL will be contributing largely to composites, cockpits and avionics."
To srivan truthful? r u fu**ing blind?Shiv has given credit to the artist, before u open ur idiotic mouthplz read what he has posted.morons like u should stay away from this blog.by the way thx Shiv nice find.Arun.
Vin >> [i]Why IAF prefers dual seater for attack aircraft( i mean non-training aircraft) when rest of the world prefers single seater?? [/i]It's one of the lessons learnt in Kargil. Flying the aircraft and attacking enemy targets put too much workload on the pilots.Someone in the know tells me that this is the reason why the new Mirage-2000s and Jaguars are two seaters.
@ Shiv-ji,Glad to see your response. It filled my thirst of curiosty :-
Why IAF prefers dual seater for attack aircraft( i mean non-training aircraft) when rest of the world prefers single seater??IAF doctrine mandates air superiority using a two-seater fighter, as it gives an extra pair of eyes and ears and another brain, to split the pilot workload between the pilot and WSO.
Why IAF prefers dual seater for attack aircraft( i mean non-training aircraft) when rest of the world prefers single seater??It is not correct to say the 'rest of the world' prefers single seater.The logic is as Anthony says - but this is not a new concept. Essentially 2-seaters are present in many large/heavy 'multi-role' aircraft i.e. those tasked with both air-air and air-ground duties. Probably the first aircraft to have a WSO (i.e. 'Weapon Systems Officer' or the guy in the back seat) was the F-4 Phantom - this trend is also visible in the F-15E (but not in the F15C which is purely for air-air missions and not 'multi-role'). Notable exceptions to this 'rule' are the F-14 Tomcat (essentially only air-air but with a WSO) and the F/A-18 (multirole, yet single-seat). To add - most fighters also have a 2 seat version for training/joy ride purposes (The guy in the back is the trainee).Final point - even 'heavy/large' attack choppers (e.g. the AH-64 Apache, Mi-24 Hind etc.) have a WSO for the same reason - but in this case the WSO is the guy in the front/lower seat (since the pilot has better visibility in the rear/elevated seat of a chopper).
Only India can base their entire pilot requirements, *and ignoring the advances in sensor fusion and automation in 5th gen aircraft*, on a limited conflict like Kargil.The lesson of Kargil to me is - don't fly Russian planes.Note that the F-22 and F-35 don't come in twin seaters at all, the use of advanced technology has allowed pilots to fly, bomb and process information alone and make the best decision.but India, India is special. It refuses to learn the lessons of others which is why people giggle behind their hands at this once great country.
mihir,"Someone in the know tells me that this is the reason why the new Mirage-2000s and Jaguars are two seaters."Those are 4th generation. You would expect more pilot productivity in a 5th generation aircraft. Does it have to do more with 'follow the book' strategy? Or the IAF doesn't expect much pilot productivity improvements in PAKFA.
great plane..............good work shiv..............cn i know one thing shiv why does indian government is not proceeding for purchase of artilleries and howitzers.......
See@0 10:05 and Anon@ 8:13,Even with all the advances in sensor fusion and cockpit ergonomics in the world, there is a limit to the information a pilot can process while attacking enemy targets and avoiding/evading air defences. Hence the need for a two seat multi-role aircraft.This has got nothing to do with "5th generation technologies" or Russian planes. Even the Rafale, with its very advanced cockpit, imposes an overwhelming workload on its pilots, especially in A2G missions, as the French have discovered. Their new Rafales will all be twin-seaters. At the end of their procurement, the AdlA will have 139 twin-seat and 95 single-seat Rafales.
Nonsense. More assertions without evidence.Btw, sorry to break your heart, but the Rafale is outdated. It can't even designate its own target when bombing. Just read the discussion here:http://www.strategypage.com/militaryforums/6-57541/page8.aspx(don't worry about strategypage, its stuff is crap but the forum goers aren't)If you're using the example of other air forces, then why not use the example of by far the strongest military force in the world? How come they are able to bomb and fly using only one pilot? Are you saying that their extended trials and war experience, second to none, in addition to research funding, are wrong, and then you're the secret genius in the garden of weevils?Just saying.
Vincent,Is the F-15E also outdated? Since it is a two-seater it surely must be outdated by your logic.btw, it is used by the 'strongest military force' in the world. So tell the USAF that the F-15E is outdated and see their reaction. The F-35 will never be able to replace the F-15E because of the sheer diversity/payload of air-ground weapons carried by the F-15E.fyi - the F-22 is a single-seater since it is primarily an air-air aircraft with very limited air-ground capabilities. The F-35 has better air-ground capabilities but since it would preferably use its internal carriage for such weapons the array and payload of such weapons is limited.The Su-30 series, F-15E and similar planes were designed from the ground up to carry a formidable array/payload of air-ground weapons and at the same time retain a very effective air-air capability. The consequent multitasking required in such planes is best addressed by having a 2 seater aircraft.Similarly the F-16I (Soufa) used by Israel has much better air-ground capabilities than most US Air Force F-16s....and other models of the F-16 used throughout the world...hence the F-16I is also a two-seater. If you don't trust the Indian Air Force's preference for a 2-seater surely you will trust the insight of the Israeli Air Force? (which essentially has almost the same 'combat experience' as the USAF, if not greater). Also, the US in general has a very limited number of '2 seaters' since with its mammoth military budget it has the luxury of having dedicated Air-Air aircraft (e.g. F-15C), and many dedicated air-ground aircraft (e.g. A-10 etc.). No other Air Force can afford such a large number of single-mission dedicated aircraft, hence they go in for truly 'multi-role' aircraft - hence two seaters.Where ignorance is bliss it is folly to be wise.One last point: your anti-russian venom in virtually all your posts is always without substance so it continues to fall on deaf ears. Give it a rest.
Vishal, you forget one salient point.The F-15E was inducted in 1988 (look it up).The PAK-FA is supposed to be inducted in 2015 (but more like 2020).Now, are you saying 32 years after the IOC of the Strike Eagle, the avionics of the Russian 5th gen fighter has not been able to improve on it in terms of pilot workload and sensor fusion?If so, why are you buying this piece of junk? Why not buy a Strike Eagle like South Korea and Singapore just recently did, and you can get the first one in 2010 instead of 2020?The 5th gen is supposed to offer a quantum leap in terms of capability harnessed by a human pilot. Not the PAK-FA as envisioned by the Indians though.Your Israeli example is wrong-headed as well. They are happy with a one-pilot F-35. In fact, they have already ordered their first squadron. They recognize that the generational leap is not just in terms of flying capability, such as supercruise or unlimited AOA, but also in terms of all round capability.Furthermore, the F-35 is a strike fighter, a multi-purpose plane, not the single purpose plane you envision. In fact, the Russian Air Force is the major single purpose plane user. Which of their planes are truly multi-role, a Western concept? Even the Mig-23 comes in two flavors, the 23 and 27 (the latter for ground attack). The MKI is supposed to be 'multi-role' but isn't so the Russians lose here as well. Why the venom for Russian planes? Because you Indians are frankly fools. You are now accorded the freedom to purchase the best of breed from the West, which a country like China will kill for, but you are mixing it all up in a haze of confusion about friendship (trust me, there are no friends when it comes to geopolitics or money, look at Gorshkov), about fear of new things and change and new technology, and about very naive spite about arming Pakistan with light weapons.Russian weapons ALWAYS GET OWNED. Even Georgians with Russian weapons owned Russian weapons as well, shooting down 7 Russian planes in a 2 days war. Can India afford this loss rate against China?If the USA allowed China tomorrow, despite its support for Taiwan, to purchase US weapons, would China buy them? You bet your tanned ass China will. So why can't India buy weapons from the no. 1 super power in the world by far, whose military has been calculated as worth over 60 trillion in capital and asset accumulation?(whiny Indian voice) because they sold 18 F-16 to Pakistan, boohoohoo. Wake the hell up.
Vincent,Perhaps we will take you more seriously the day your posts stop dripping venom at the Russians and your brain starts working faster than your fingers.Till then, you will remain this blog's version of the Kashmiri rage boy. Little substance, just a lot of heat and noise and great entertainment.
Vincent,I know your kind. You see the latest toy or hear the latest buzzword, and begin to believe that it is the be-all and end-all or warfare, without any understanding of the real issues, and your silly little hate-filled conclusions flow from that. In that sense, you would be better off posting on strategypage.Can you prove to us that all this fancy sensor fusion and other fancy items reduce pilot workload in a situation where he has to avoid/evade air defences, launch precision attacks against targets and ensure that the damn plane doesn't fly smack into a mountain? And something better than strategypage, please! How about an actual paper from a military journal or a quotation from a book written by someone who knows his stuff?This stuff would be good to have, no doubt, but the critical variable affecting pilot workload today is the nature of the missions he has to undertake and not necessarily the technology and "sensor fusion".As for the strongest military force in the world", do tell us how India can bring into a conflict the kind of support systems and force multipliers the way they do, and then fart about "Russian junk" and how it doesn't come with "sensor fusion". The Rafale is outdated? In which dimension? In sensor fusion and pilot workload reduction, the Rafale is better than any MRCA contender. Stop foisting your fantasies upon us as facts, please.The F-15E was introduced in 1988? How about the F/A-18F, eh genius? Or the EA-18G? And do tell us which single-seat aircraft will replace the Strike Eagle.You say that Russian weapons always get OWNED. Why not PWNED? Isn't that the latest chat lingo for the have-computer-will-fart, wikipedia-is everything, and freerepublic-and-strategypage-are-so-cool gang? Russian weapons get "owned" indeed! Perhaps you remember 1971 as the year the asteroid struck, wiping out the dinosaurs. I doubt you are old enough to even remember 1999.
Vincent,Don't want to get personal here - but are you on the payroll of Lockheed Martin, or Boeing or Northrop or all of these? Or is it the pentagon?Maybe all of the above.Perhaps you need better reading glasses - for I never wrote a word about the PAK-FA, I never said the Israelis had not ordered the F-35, I never said the F-35 is a 'single purpose' aircraft (I merely said its air-ground capabilities are not in the same league as that of the F-15E), I never said the Russkies don't have single-mission aircraft etc. - read my comments carefully - I could go on but there's no talking sense into you.As usual there is no substance in your posts - just your whims and personnel preferences.And pls. don't tell me when the F-15E was inducted - you are off by 1 yr. - but by your standard of knowledge its a major achievement.One last point - The US (and off course you) simply just can't digest the fact that the Su-30 series has truly levelled the playing field with the American 'teen series' of fighters (i.e. F-16, F-15 and F-18). The US has always won in the air because of its hitherto uneven advantage (i.e. American planes have always been up against less capable planes) - which is now being eroded by the Su-30 series. The US never wants to fight in an 'even combat' situation - and hence needs the F-22 to maintain its edge. The F-22 is truly their silver bullet - hence their reluctance to sell it to anyone (even to Isreal and Japan) - at least for now. I feel India would be happy to buy US weapons (despite the fear of sanctions, a la those affecting Indian Navy Sea Kings etc - even though the Sea King is a British product, but alas uses US sub-systems) - so long as India is offered the cutting edge of US technology - but the F-22 is currently not for sale - and India can't rest on its butt hoping it ultimately will be - hence the PAK FA. Also, it has never been proven that US aircraft are better than Russian aircraft because there has never been a fight wherein the opponent aircraft were 'even' in terms of capabilities. In all modern air-air combat (be it in Vietnam, Arabs vs. Israelis, US vs. Libya or Iraq etc.) the American planes have won because they have never been up against an equally capable fighter aircraft. One of the few known modern air-air engagements wherein there was even a modicum of an 'even fight' was in the Gulf War with F-15s vs. Iraqi Mig-29s...but most sources indicate that the Iraqi planes were not equipped with BVR missiles - and even if they were, the Iraqis AA-7 Apex/AA-10 Alamo missiles would be no match for the AMRAAM (the Iraqis certainly didn't have the AA-12 Adder) - hence this wasn't an 'even' fight either. The American pilot/plane has never been tested in a truly 'even fight' - and we won't know who will win in such a fight till it actually happens - but at least now the playing field has been levelled (assuming the F-22/F-35 aren't prowling the airspace at that time - hence the need for the PAK FA) - in such a situation, tactics, better situational awareness from AWACS etc., the pilots skill and a little bit of luck will decide who goes home to his airbase. I can't wait to see what happens when Su-30 series fighters are up against F-15s, F-16s and F/A-18s - it won't be a one-sided splashdown affair that's for sure.Welcome to the new World Order in air combat. btw, I really don't want to waste any more of my time on such forums - where individuals like you are spreading ignorance (but thank god for people like Mihir! - so there is hope yet). Vincent - you are now free to continue with your sales spiel of American weapons - I won't reply to your posts, no matter what you write - it's not worth it. And so I bid all you guys adieu on livefist - at least for a long while.Shiv,Your blog is great - keep it going, but the readers should really peruse some of the comments with a bucket of salt.
Good posts, Vishal! Looking forward to more :)I have one minor nitpick though. In the 1991 Gulf War, the F-15 v/s MiG-29 battle was not even close to even. Those Fulcrums were meant to operate in concert with the Iraqi IADS and other support (GCI, AEW, airborne EW, etc). That system, inadequate as it was, was taken out by US stealth fighter-bombers, cruise missiles, and SEAD aircraft. And when the F-15s fought, they rarely did so without support from AWACS and EF-111A Ravens (Once, two Ravens supporting an F-15E strike were driven away by Iraqi MiG-25s, because of which a Strike Eagle was lost to a SAM). It is no surprise that the Iraqi Fulcrums were mauled.
Mihir,I don’t know your kind, because I live in a first world country, not third where nothing is more important than childish short term posturing of interests and belief in permanent elder brother-like friends. It is laughable that you say I am easily duped by brochure claims. Who is the number one brochure bashers, if not the Russians? All these fancy artists impressions and mock-up weapons, tell me, have they ever been used in anger before, or even tested, or even flown?In contrast, the F-18E today routinely takes off from a carrier in the Persian Gulf to strike targets hundreds of kilometres deep in the mountains of the Hindu Kush or the desert sands of the Euphrates. Its sensors have been repeatedly used to detect, monitor and elminate fleeting targets, or used to lock up and identify suspicious flying aircraft along the borders of its areas of interests. But hey, we saw the Russian ‘AESA’ in an MAKS 2009 display, it’s the same OMGLOLZIt is remarkable that you claim the Americans are unable to prove that sensor fusion works, when the F-18C single seater was the first, 20 years ago in the Gulf war, when two aircraft was laden with bombs, to switch to air to air mode with a single flick of the switch and then shoot down two Iraqi aircraft with AMRAAMs? Or the fact that German pilots who first flew the Mig-29 and then Western aircraft, remarked that the F-16 is able with HOTAS to lock on to an enemy with two button flicks, while the older Mig-29 needed at least 12-14?What more proof do you need? The fact that single seater F-18Es and F-16Cs are routinely blasting insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan with ease, using laser designation, GPS, or both, while your Russian aircraft are unable to even use precision guided munitions in Kargil? Is this proof enough, or do you need the special kind of proof that involves dancing around trees and deep-rooted social prejudices?About the F-35, enough said. Just look at the displays – 2 wide screens, no analogues, no flicky buttons on the edges, all touch screen and voice controlled. If you’re betting the 35 billion dollar F-35 project is not going to advance pilot information to that stage, then God forgive you, for you are already in a dreamland heaven of your own making.One example:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ELETsvJZwvI
The only reason your country wants to build a 5th gen with Russia, when it has never built a stealth plane before while the Americans are into their 4th generation stealth, is because you are unthinking karma driven creatures who handle their sense of inferiority and fear of change by denying the outside world and walking well-travelled tracks (while the Chinese do it by copying everything).If you knew anything about carrier aviation, you would know that they almost always come in 2 seaters as well, which are used to perform specialized tasks such as forward air control, electronic warfare (G version) or bomb damage assessment. It does not reflect on the vulnerability of the F-18E in any way, in fact the majority are single seaters. They are also modifying the double seaters to control a fleet of drones in flight, because it is no longer necessary with JDAMs to have someone designate the target in flight.The F-35 will replace the F-15E. Along with drones.But Russian weapons always get crushed. In Chechnya, where the barrels of their tanks oops could not elevate past a certain height, in Georgia where short range missiles wiped out their Frogfoots which needed to come down to a certain height to release their unguided bombs, etc. The M1 tanks killed 5000 Russian tanks alone without air support in the first Gulf War, suck on that.And that is the point isn’t it, to use the F-18 as the first stepping stone to tap into Western power multipliers and training, to see how everything comes together in the most advanced systems in the world to eliminate the enemy. It is the only chance you have against China in a large conflict, not a bloody brawl where your numbers are smaller and your strategically critical cities are closer to the front line than theirs.But keep on doing the same thing, wallah boy, after all Bharat has more land to lose.
Vishal,Don’t want to get personal here – but why are you always talking like a Pakistani, with deeply involved conspiracy plots and a tendency to blame entrenched powers instead of you own glaring limitations?I can dismiss your long and windy argument by one stroke – amateurs think about planes like knights heading for a one-on-one jousting, professionals think about systems.Americans crave full spectrum dominance. The wonderful thing about their strategy is that it is scalable. If you don’t have 24 E-3s on call, 4 Phalcons using the same rigorous system of identification and execution can boost your own air war.Hence, there is no point talking about even odds, just like how the Muslims call American soldiers cowards because they don’t go one on one with rfiles. It is the mark of the primitive to dismiss what they don’t understand as cowardly or unhonorable, when the only honorable thing in 21st century warfare is to win, given the wide spectrum of threats that can collapse a nation. The stakes are too high to think about warplanes as mano-a-mano, and it needs a special person, as in special needs, to talk with such arrogance like you. You know nothing.F-18 will give India fantastic insight of how NATO builds end-to-end aerial dominance systems for any battlefield – CAS, strategic destruction, nuclear attacks, carrier groups, etc. It is flown every day and attacks targets every day. All these make up a system – the missiles, the detection systems, the bombs, the planes, everthing. So here is YOUR chance to learn how to build a complete aerial system, the MRCA is only a stepping stone. Learn how to build a modern air force, for your air force looks like one designed in Mediocrityland.The PAK-FA is not even a mock-up made of wood, contrary to the wet dreams of it supporters.The F-18E is CUTTING EDGE to India. None of your airplanes are as good a strike fighter as it, by far. No radar as good, no carrier capability as good, and certainly no maintenance quality as good (18 manhours for every flight hour, compared to 50 for MKI).NATO is designed to defeat hordes of the Red Army pouring over the East European frontier. It has superlative quality to defeat superlative quantity. When the Chinese hordes come over the Himalayas or through Burma, with a fair degree of quality, India should have learnt by then how to defeat this kind of opposing force, or it is toast.But people like you, with overly pronounced concerns about balls, don’t care. Ignorance and familiarity over technology and results, just like a good old tanned farmboy.
Yes Vincent - an F18 attacking insurgents with ak-47s surely demonstrates what a great plane the F18 is. And therefore India should buy it. What an ass you are.Your brain totally sucks and it would be good if you left this forum and let knowledgeable people like vishal an anthony actually write stuff that make sense. Post you crap elsewhere and dont spoil this blog.
If operational experience of the F-18E doesn't prove much, what does non-operational non-experience of the Mig-29K, Su-35 or PAK-FA prove? The super hornet has at least shown it is a great bomber, able to attack day or night, in all weather, and then bring back substantial load back to a restless carrier, what has Russian planes ever shown?Rat face.
Russia doesn't wage wars to 'prove' its weapons work u dork!!...no country except the US can afford that...in fact the US military industrial complex needs wars precisely for this reason...so wake ur a@# up!!You brain has to be less than a size of a pea-nut. I pity you.
what has morality got to do with the technical efficiency and capability of weapons?shouldn't you come to wipe my table and serve me drinks already, babu?
Vincent,Oh, you live in a lah-de-dah first world country do you? Well bully for you! Going by your comprehensions skills, one can't be blamed for thinking that you are a descendant of Tarzan himself! When did I ever say that the "Americans are unable to prove that sensor fusion works". My point was that sensor fusion is not a silver bullet tha twill solve all the problems of air combat present today. For example, sensor fusion can't reduce pilot workload in a situation where he has to avoid/evade air defences, launch precision attacks against targets and ensure that the damn plane doesn't fly smack into a mountain. I get a nagging feeling we've been through this one before. Perhaps all the "first world" pot you've been smoking led you to magically ignore this statement?You say that the F-35 will replace the F-15E? Uhh, which post full of gyan on strategypage told you that? The F-35 will replace only the F-16, AV-8, and A-10. NOT the F-15E. Go to a "first world" library and read a book before you open the vomit valve please! The Indian air force, which you say looks like "one designed in Mediocrityland", has proven itself time and again, in exercises like Dope India, Indradhanush, and even Red Flag. It doesn't have prove anything to a whiny little twerp who thinks he knows air combat better than anybody else and believes that every post is a pissing contest. As for childish posturing, we can all see who is indulging it it!I haven't responded to the rest of your post, because going by all the verbal diarrhea you've been spewing (unthinking karma driven creatures, wallah boy, tanned farmboy, etc) I can plainly see that you are a a regular coconut (brown on the outside, racist white idiot on the inside). Well, let your ignorance shine through, coconut boy! I'll have to stoop to an impossibly low level to continue this slugfest with you, and the effort simply isn't worth it.
I'll wipe your table Vincent if you wipe my ass.
******ALERT******----------------------- the person who posts as Vishal Bhatia is none other than Mr. Mihir it seems Mr.Mihir has not learned his lessons despite getting his ass pawned repeatedly on this forum on many occasions...
Mihir, my friend,you make me laugh as heartily as a good stock Brahmin watching the brown backs make his agricultural gold grow.why are you upset i am living in a first world country? the day when i watch CSI: Tamil Nadu will be the day when I acknowledge your world view is as sophisticated as mine!So much text in yours. Let me cut through the morass like a Nadi reader:1. Sensor Fusionhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SnqeqEtbvo8If Russians do not believe in sensor fusion, how come their PAKFA planes will only have 1 pilot?2. F-15es are old. There will be a radical shift in ground attacks in the USAF, including the use of drones. The change is not one-for-one, not when you take a revolutionary step.3. India is the only country in the world which holds a national holiday when it wins at a military exercise. Again, see first world-third world factor. Old F-15Cs, no AMRAAMs, odds of 3 to 1, flying against unfamiliar scenarios.4. Come here and massage my back, babu.
Vincent - the guru of googling info, copying and pasting - should leave this forum permanently.we want people here who know what they are writing so that others can learn.Vincent = amoeba sized brain = ignore
Vincent is a two bit a$$hole who posts on BRF under the name Brando.He is actually an American of Chinese descent. BTW, take a look at the twerps English, all those years brown nosing actual citizens (unlike his folks who had to run to the US to escape good old uncle Mao) and still his English sucks.Best part is how Brando aka Vincent sucks up to the moderators on BR, and keeps rubbing his nose on the floor in front of them, and is busy posturing here.Wannabe.
Mihir, Sensor fusion does help when persecuting multiple roles simultaneously, basically one display with all the info concisely posted. Of course, this doesnt take away from your overall arguement nor am I supporting that idiot Brando aka Vincent.All the MMRCA contenders have sensor fusion depicted except MiG-35 which has not made any explicit comments in this regard.F-16 Block 60, EF, Rafale, F/A-18 E/F and Gripen C all have sensor fusion. The F-16IN and Gripen NG will also have it.
Guys, this is just a FAN ART. The real PAK FA resembles the F22 raptor closely...or looks more like the yf22 that the f22 is based on. So chillSuch a delta wing design with movable canards will never be really work.
Vincent,Riddle me this, why would india buy a fourth gen fighter with a perhaps good radar than go build its own fifth gen fighter with russia?.Besides the obvious argment of superiority, let us see the strategic front. Why the F would india buy a last gen f18 when pakistan is given many of it for free?.afterall the planes will only be used to counter pakistani offence, then why buy the same one?. Besides why give 120 plane order to the US who support the Pakistanis however they can?.(same money will come back and haunt us in the form of free f-35 lightnings in a few decades.Believe it or not the US is not the current financial capital of the world. Australia is and china will be. This money should we give them is sure to come back to hurt us badly. So, no thanks. As about the service requirements, well india has the best workforce in the service industry, they'll manage, thanks for the concern though.If the money goes to russia on the other hand, it will only haunt the US and Pakis.
Post a Comment