Quote:
Originally Posted by sohamsri
Seriously....CHEERS !
That is an excellent overall package ! I hope the government doesnt ignore them just because its single engined.
|
I drink old monk rum, neat, so still want to share a peg.
They do not seem anything like a independent choice (in comparison to say the French option).
I do not know the AF will look at the whole thing
- Transfer of technology, AESA radar, Preformance (engine thrust- maneuverability etc.), EW suite, Weapons inventory, Net centric capability, Range-payload etc. etc.
All of this @ cost and political ease.
So its not going to be clear untill it is clear, and a lot of time to go i just hope they finish the MMRCA early its not like i know something the AF does not know.
What is better multi role combat aircraft, a air defense fighter that has added ground attack capability or a strike fighter with air to air capability, or does that even matter in these multi role aircrafts?
126-180 Rafale/typhoon might be a bit overkill in the Afghanistan/Bangladesh/Bhutan/Burma/China/Maldives/Nepal/Pakistan/Sri-Lanka type of a neighbourhood, and a F-16 type of a plane in good numbers should do the job for the AF, until the Chinese and Russians come up with magically produced 5th gen planes then the place might see another little race.