Never-seen battle in Indian skies (Mig-35 vs Super Hornet)

**Tronic** · 07 May 08,, 03:09

Originally Posted by sohamsri

i swear on my life this is true. its not nonsense i read it in a news website.... i'm frantically searching for the article but i don't remember which one it was.

Guess not a too reliable one. The guy you're speaking to works in the industry.

**sohamsri** · 07 May 08,, 17:41

i ask again, does the delta wing configuration make much of a difference ?

**kuku** · 08 May 08,, 03:55

Originally Posted by sohamsri

i ask again, does the delta wing configuration make much of a difference ?

Plenty of stuff available online about this, google it and read it yourself.
for example:
Delta wing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Aerodynamics of the Delta Wing

**GAU-8** · 08 May 08,, 04:47

Originally Posted by sohamsri

i ask again, does the delta wing configuration make much of a difference ?

Kuku's link on the aerodynamics of a delta wing is excellent. Great post.

In a subsonic turning fight, a delta wing is going to bleed off a lot of energy fast. If I flew a delta wing fighter, I'd be in the "one pass haul a$$" mode.

Delta wings are beautiful. They perform well where they belong:

Straight and level and fast.

IMHO.

**sohamsri** · 09 May 08,, 14:35

can anyone please put in something to keep this thread alive ?? anything related and interesting ??

**highsea** · 09 May 08,, 15:13

Originally Posted by sohamsri

...its not nonsense i read it in a news website...

Yes, it is nonsense.

An airframe doesn't care whether an afterburner is lit or not.

**kuku** · 09 May 08,, 17:57

Originally Posted by sohamsri

Can anyone please put in something to keep this thread alive ?

Anything related and interesting ?

This must be the 1000th version of the Indian MMRCA thread.

)

**sohamsri** · 10 May 08,, 07:07

Originally Posted by highsea

Yes, it is nonsense.

An airframe doesn't care whether an afterburner is lit or not.

ITS NOT NONSENSE. The airframe is the main part of aerodynamism and what maximum speed its been made to tolerate.

the report might have been false. but i read it read it read it.

**kuku** · 10 May 08,, 10:00

Originally Posted by sohamsri

ITS NOT NONSENSE. The airframe is the main part of aerodynamism and what maximum speed its been made to tolerate.

the report might have been false. but i read it read it read it.

I think that is the point you are missing, the airframe has nothing to do with it, its built to operate at supersonic speeds, It can sustain a speed of Mach 1.89 at 40,000 feet.
Its up to the engine to give that speed using the after burner, or without it.

**Yusuf** · 11 May 08,, 07:10

The choice of aircraft is going to be a strategic affair. I have a strong feeling that it will be an American jet after all the hurdles are cleared like the ones witnessed with USS Trenton.
If we go for the super hornet, it will open up the possibility of getting higher tech platforms like f 35 which was already offered by Lockheed if India goes for the F 16. Also technology wise no compromise is there in going for the Super hornet. its a proven fighter with the best AF in the world. will come with the best Radar. Boeing has also offered licensed manufacture of it and has already started the process or working on the 50% offset clause with various tie ups.
Going for the European Aircraft doest offer that big a strategic benefit, plus the cost is way higher.
IMO go for the Super Hornets, after thrashing out potential deal breakers which im sure the American Govt will take care considering whats at stake

**sohamsri** · 12 May 08,, 15:20

Originally Posted by Yusuf

The choice of aircraft is going to be a strategic affair. I have a strong feeling that it will be an American jet after all the hurdles are cleared like the ones witnessed with USS Trenton.
If we go for the super hornet, it will open up the possibility of getting higher tech platforms like f 35 which was already offered by Lockheed if India goes for the F 16. Also technology wise no compromise is there in going for the Super hornet. its a proven fighter with the best AF in the world. will come with the best Radar. Boeing has also offered licensed manufacture of it and has already started the process or working on the 50% offset clause with various tie ups.
Going for the European Aircraft doest offer that big a strategic benefit, plus the cost is way higher.
IMO go for the Super Hornets, after thrashing out potential deal breakers which im sure the American Govt will take care considering whats at stake

the benefits are at their place. India gets access to more technology by gettin eurofighter also.

The thing with buying the hornets is that their sanctions are pissing off.
Any nuke test we conduct, US imposes sanctions all spares are gone !! And our politicians have made it clear that India will not refrain from conducting nuclear tests under any foreign pressure(advani said that).

Such problem is not their in the european companies. Gripen might be a problem because the engine is american, rest should do fine.

Also the mig-35 is...... awsome

**BenRoethig** · 12 May 08,, 19:58

If you're going to continue with those tests, I'd rather you not have super hornets. Anyone who still wants those weapons has no respect for them what so ever.

**Tronic** · 12 May 08,, 22:23

Originally Posted by sohamsri

The thing with buying the hornets is that their sanctions are pissing off.
Any nuke test we conduct, US imposes sanctions all spares are gone !! And our politicians have made it clear that India will not refrain from conducting nuclear tests under any foreign pressure(advani said that).

Advani is not the be all and end all; it is only politics, if Sonia was in his shoes, they would both be talking each others language. Remember, in India, the job of the opposition is to always oppose the ruling party.

)

As for the Indian government as a whole; It has just made its intentions clear that it will not be refrained by anyone from testing nuclear weapons if it wants to. Now does India want to test nukes? With a booming economy, still having a lot of people to uplift from poverty; which idiot in parliament would even suggest conducting another test?

**~~gamercube~~** · 13 May 08,, 04:57

Maybe an "idiot" who puts national security above all else? There's a point to poverty alleviation if you first survive as a nation.....everything else comes after.

**Tronic** · 13 May 08,, 05:25

Originally Posted by gamercube

Maybe an "idiot" who puts national security above all else? There's a point to poverty alleviation if you first survive as a nation.....everything else comes after.

gamercube, it is amusing to see an Indian communist talk of national security. Today, India doesn't need to test any bombs, it needs to grow its economic clout, but your communist comrades are making a fuss about testing the bomb and "national security". Back, in 1974, these same comrades of yours were up in arms when India tested its first bomb (but were celebrating when China tested theirs, hell even labelled the Chinese nuke as a "people's bomb"); and that was the time when India truly needed to test it for the sake of national security, not now! A good reason as to why the rest of the country has made the word "communist" synonymous with "traitor".