What to read next

18 Comments

  1. 1

    BigLulli

    Only now has the ACM realised this. Pity. Ofcourse one way to ease they strain is have a certain degree of commonality between the platforms. For that reason alone, MMRCA deal is going to the Hornet or Gripen. My lulli and I are not buying this "no connection" baloney one bit.

    Reply
  2. 2

    indian

    i strongly agree with air chief,,in mmrca better to go with typhoon and f16 to have good relation with us and Europe… i think typhoon is better then f18

    Reply
  3. 3

    Anonymous

    "If it were upto me, I would have a single aircraft type".

    Well… one of the MMRCA contenders is build to replace all aircraft type. The Rafale is the only real multirole platform in MMRCA, no doubts it will be shortlisted.

    Reply
  4. 4

    Anonymous

    All the more the reason for commonality of components, such as engine, avionics, etc., across the light n medium categories. If novice bloggers can u/stand this simple economies of scale, I am quite sure he knows it too well too. Then why does he contradict himself by saying that the MMRCA is not connected to the choice of Tejas MkII engine. Either he was sozzled when he said so or he thinks the public of India is too naive n gullible.

    Reply
  5. 5

    Mr. Ra

    Actually it should be a strength. It provides diverse knowledge, know how, experiences, flexibility and opportunities.

    Reply
  6. 6

    Anonymous

    When it comes to appease the P-5 – India devides the defense purchase between these 4 nations barring China, with whome we are increasing the trade leverage in thier favour.

    India is damned without P-5 seat – It must have it!

    Reply
  7. 7

    Anonymous

    ok i understand logistics is easier with just single type,,but ist it easy for enemy to plan against single type,,vs may be 2-3 varieties depending on need,,,sigh

    Reply
  8. 8

    Anonymous

    Only nations that develop and build their OWN planes can risk having one plane AF. Others have to diversify to reduce the risk of too much dependence.

    Reply
  9. 9

    Anonymous

    With the Arrival of AMCA, we can remove the MRCA and Tejas-II as well as Su-30 MKI making it just two type of Aircraft in our inventory. The PAK-FA and AMCA. By 2020 we will be developed nation and will be capable of mass producing both AMCA and license production of PAK-FA

    Reply
  10. 10

    Mahendra

    "If it were upto me, I would have a single aircraft type".

    Not a particularly wise comment coming from a person of his position. Would he ground the entire air force if suddenly a few planes crashed and manufacturer's investigation revealed a structural flaw in the airframe? Why would one want to put all the eggs in one basket?

    Reply
  11. 11

    Anonymous

    array of inventory in such a technology and cost intensive affair is inevitable, it would make tactical sense too…we can't pack a team with 10(ten)dulkars..isn't it !! i don't know why ACM has to waste energy on this.. Air Forces world over operate in such an environment, be it indigenous or foreign acquisition.

    Reply
  12. 12

    lal sher

    [email protected] 7.00 am
    india a developed nation by 2020
    ha ha ha ha ha
    good joke.
    i am an indian .but still it seems like a joke for me.
    no offence towards anyone.

    Reply
  13. 13

    Mertz

    The chief knows what he is talking about. Have any of you heard the following:

    "Amateurs strategy. Professionals talk logistics."

    In war this is one of the major factor that determines who wins.

    Reply
  14. 15

    Anonymous

    so no upgraded M2k ?

    Reply
  15. 16

    Ram

    Multiple fighter inventory is some thin g which India cannot avoid unless we have a proven indigenous fighter which can qualify for being an MMRCA. Till such time to reduce the dependency and any e future embargo we need to have diversity of equipment. I will not agree that Rafael is a complete aircraft that could fit in variety of roles. Its yet to be ascertained and tested in real scenario.

    Reply
  16. 17

    Anonymous

    Did anyone notice the visible size difference between Su 30 and Pakfa?

    Reply
  17. 18

    Durgesh

    I disagree with ACM, having mutiple types of aircraft would actually mitigates the design limitations that every aircraft has. As it happened during World War II, once the enemy got to know the limitations of a particular aircaft, it tried to take full advantage of that. Imagine having only one model a/c AF, and the enemy capitalising on that limitation.It will turn out to be Achilies Heel for us, how much ever big our AF be or trained our pilots be.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © . All rights reserved.