What to read next

16 Comments

  1. 1

    Vijay

    Best of luck to them. lets have either this or the EF.

    Say not to Amirkhan products!

    Reply
  2. 2

    Kartik

    so the NG demo aircraft is not coming for the trials..I wonder how they'll evaluate the Gripen D and then compare it to the NG which has different engine and increased weight.

    Reply
  3. 3

    Venu

    I know, not many people will like this, but I seriously wish to see MRCA order split between a single engine and a double engine ones. Single engine for the Gripen NG and a Euro canard for the double engine. There is also a talk that final number might increase from the present 128 to more than 150. So a split of 100 Gripens and remaining euro canards will be a good balance.

    Reply
  4. 4

    Anonymous

    @ venu…any specific reasoning behind the suggestion for two different families and associated peripherals???

    Reply
  5. 5

    Anonymous

    If only this plane flew on EJ200 it would have been the most suitable.

    Reply
  6. 6

    Anonymous

    According to the DPP, the OEM should provide the proposed version of the product and not and older one.
    Gripen D and Gripen IN NG aren't similar at all…
    Competitors will appreciate this mistake!

    Reply
  7. 7

    Hardik Patidar

    I don't want any of these
    I want hundreds of LCAs

    Reply
  8. 8

    jigsaw

    I don't want any of these
    I want hundreds of LCAs
    ————————–
    well, LCA is not MCA, IAF is seeking MCA.

    Reply
  9. 9

    Anonymous

    I think one american and one europeon product will come and the count will go around 200 or more.LCA's should come but by the time 50 LCA will come 50 or more of these selected fighters would have been inducted in IAF.

    Reply
  10. 10

    Rahul

    Why i can't say, its all over for gripen?

    Reply
  11. 11

    Venu

    @ Anon 1:39- It is a simple balance of numbers, cost, technology and Geo-politics.

    Everyone knew that Euro canards are best technologically but are costly. We can benefit politically to some extent as well. whereas Gripen is relatively cheap, technologically superior. Even though Sweden has nothing to offer, that should not be a hinder ones appreciation of quality. Beleive me, and ofc Shiv, Gripen NG is a marvelous jet which when completed and inducted will be a potent platform and IAF pilots will like it.

    Even though US has lots of tech stuff to offer, we cannot trust him. A good enemy is better than a cunning friend.

    Even though the Russian MiG-35 is touted as a very good platform, it is yet to come out and is some time away from production. Also I dont think Russians will worry too much if they lose in MRCA as they have lot more in pipeline than to worry.

    Did that leave any other option?

    People might say that split may create a logistical problem. But tell me when did that not happend. It happend when Mirages were inducted, Mig-29's were inducted. So if you see, when ever a new instrument is inducted, it will take some time to get used to it. As the time goes, every thing will iron out.

    Reply
  12. 12

    Venu

    Mind the spellings and grammar. Typed it when my manager was around. Got no time to spell check.

    Reply
  13. 13

    Anonymous

    @ venu….
    beg to differ…
    two different platforms involves two sets of maintenance , preparation and the actual flying of course….
    unless we look at deploying them in different roles…there is not real reason to choose the second best

    Wrong spelling will not be tolerated here :P..lolz

    Reply
  14. 14

    Anonymous

    Why bring the Grippen-D when the product on offer is the Grippen-NG ?

    Reply
  15. 15

    Hw

    Becuase the Gripen NG Demo is currently being evaluated by SwAF and i dont think it has been certified to fly abroad. sadly 🙁

    Reply
  16. 16

    sunil

    BETTER TO TAKE US F18 WITH MORE ADVANCE ELECTRONICS ….
    ….. DO WE USE ANY OF THIS WAREQUITMENT ……????

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © . All rights reserved.