Anyone know what this is? For the ESM or data link maybe?
Attachments
-
6.9 KB Views: 3
HAL is desperate for its first export sale. The RMAF is that it desires a common airframe for both the LIFT and LCA requirement; to achieve commonality. The conundrum is that Platform A might be ideal as a LIFT but less so as a LCA and vice versa; trade offs/compromises will have to be made.Sometimes it's entertaining watching 'sales campaign' like this.
Yes I understand about the problem with RD-33, and good probability that RMAF wants to avoid using that engine again. However Tejas is not the only contenders in RMAF LIFT/LCA that using GE 404. This article in my opinion clearly wrote by someone that have 'interest' with Tejas. Shown the strength of Tejas, highlight the problem of its rival, but at same time hide similar strength from other contenders.issues the article mentions were actually because of the TBO of the RD-33s compared to other engines the RMAF was used to
The RMAF would actually want to avoid buying anything Russian; not because of the actual performance or efficacy of Russian stuff but because of certain inherent issues with buying and using Russian.good probability that RMAF wants to avoid using that engine again.
The funny thing of this article is that they completely ignore the fact that the HAL Tejas LCA has the most Israeli content of all the candidates.Yes I understand about the problem with RD-33, and good probability that RMAF wants to avoid using that engine again. However Tejas is not the only contenders in RMAF LIFT/LCA that using GE 404. This article in my opinion clearly wrote by someone that have 'interest' with Tejas. Shown the strength of Tejas, highlight the problem of its rival, but at same time hide similar strength from other contenders.
Like I said it's smell more on sales agent article, just like some I saw in several defense enthusiasts sources, on Indonesian sites, Pinoy ones, or even Korean and Turkish ones. I'm not going to talk on Indian, Pakistan or Chinese ones, as it's clearly very toxic on nationalistic bravadoes on their own defense products strength.
Anyway I do hope RMAF choices going to narrow on either Tejas or FA-50. The Indian Airframes perhaps more optimal on LCA sides while the Korean ones have tendency toward LIFT side. However all of them try to work on the combined LIFT/LCA market, cause seems many AF demand one Airframe for both function. Efficiency for both function been done with one Airframe also happen on Turboprop Trainer/COIN function. After all most AF now aim on affordability.
Are there any plans to give the F-18D and Hawk Mk.108/Mk.208 an upgrade or MLU?The USAF has released pics of a pair of B-52s that flew in formation with RMAF fighters.
Gripen could be called an LCA by modern standards, especially Gripen C, which was stil available the last I heard. That has essentially the same engine as the T/TA/FA-50 or Tejas.I'm very suprised the Russians even bothered to offer the MiG-35 as the requirement calls for 18 aircraft, some configured as "LCAs" and some as "LIFTs" - the MiG-35 falls in neither category. Come to think of it, Gripen was previously offered although like the MiG-35 it's neither a"LCA" or a "LIFT".