印度：对战斗机MMRCA的疑虑毫无根据 [印度媒体]

MMRCA Misgivings Unfounded 

对MMRCA的疑虑毫无根据



By Manmohan Bahadur 

作者Manmohan Bahadur

Published: 02nd August 2014 06:00 AM 

出版：2014年8月2日

The founders of our Constitution gave us the freedom of speech, but they possibly didn’t realise that there would be something called a Medium Multi Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) of the IAF that would be so set upon by some armchair critics as to blur the fine line between free speech and misinformation. Bharat Karnad’s “Why Rafale is a Big Mistake” (TNIE, July 25) does just that, besides being full of innuendos and disinformation. To be sure, this writer is just an academic now but one who spent the better part of three decades smelling burnt aviation turbine fuel on the flight line, including flight testing aircraft, and in a senior position pushing tri-service procurement proposals in HQ Integrated Defence Staff.

我们宪法的创立者们给与我们言论自由，但是，他们可能没有想到印度空军会有一个叫做中型多任务战斗机（MMRCA）的项目，这个项目让那些键盘评论家混淆了言论自由和错误信息之间的界限。Bharat Karnad的《为什么购买阵风是个大错误的文章》（7月25日）就是这样的例子。诚然，这个作者目前是一个学者，而不是一个大半辈子都闻着航空发动机的尾气味，包括飞行测试，在联合防务总部推动三军采购建议的高级工作人员。

It would be good to give the readers of this newspaper a low-down on how the MMRCA requirement came about. The IAF, around the turn of the century, after carrying out a threat assessment found the need for a capability to be acquired to fill a void in its combat fleet to address the conflict spectrum that India was likely to face. 

给本报的读者透露一个内幕，这对于明白MMRCA是怎么开始的有帮助。在世纪转换之际，印度空军经过威胁评估后认为需要填补印度处理未来可能面临的冲突的能力空白。

Accordingly, a requirement for 126 Mirage 2000-5 aircraft (improved version of Mirage 2000) was projected to the government in 2000. The Mirages had performed very creditably in the Kargil conflict and since a drawdown in fleet strength was looming due to obsolescence of the MiG-21s and ground attack fleet, it was felt that the improved version of the Mirage would fit in as a replacement. 

因此，在2000年，将126架幻影2000-5战机的采购计划呈交给政府。幻影在卡吉尔战争期间的表现备受赞誉。随着米格21和对地攻击机的报废，空军的力量发生衰退，我们感觉幻影的改进版满足空军更新换代的要求。

But post-Kargil, the Defence Procurement Procedure (DPP) came into vogue in 2002 and a multi-vendor process (as mandated by the DPP) commenced with revised Qualitative Requirements (QRs). The Request for Proposal for the almost $10.5 billion project was sent in 2007 to all six aircraft manufacturers who make this class of aircraft, other than China, who then applied in the mandated two-bid format, with each vendor giving a technical bid and a commercial bid at the same time; it is important to understand this as it implies that the price bid of a company got fixed in dollar/Euro terms at that point. As per the DPP, initially only the technical bids are opened and the equipment put through an evaluation process which includes a field evaluation trial. This technical evaluation throws up vendors who meet the QRs that had been projected and only their commercial bids are opened and assessed to select the winner.

但是在卡吉尔战争之后，2002年，从修改了定性需求开始，国防采购程序（DPP）和多供应商程序（由DPP强制执行）开始流行起来。在2007年，差不多105亿美元的采购项目征求意见发给了所有能够生产这一类型产品的6家飞机生产商，除了中国，并且强制执行两标模式，也就是说每个供应商都要同时提交商务标和技术标；理解这一点是很重要的，因为这意味着一个公司的竞标价格在那个阶段是以美元或欧元计价并固定的。根据DPP的规定，开始只开技术标，设备要通过包括现场测试环节的评估。技术评估选出满足QR（译注：质量和可靠性）规定的供应商，这时再开商务标，评估并选出中标者。

The MMRCA evaluation followed the DPP to the ‘t’ with not a whiff of any controversy, and after very rigorous ground and flight evaluations, two vendors qualified. The evaluation of their commercial bids saw the selection of the French Rafale in 2011. An attempt is now being made to make a textbook evaluation and selection process mired in controversy of performance criteria (QRs), costs, and surprisingly a corruption allegation.

MMRCA评估按照DPP的规定进行，没有任何争议，在非常严格的地面和飞行评估后，两个供应商胜出。2011年，他们的商务标评估显示法国阵风胜出。现在却正在使这样一个教科书式的评估和筛选流程陷入性能标准（QR）、成本和惊人的腐败指控的泥沼中。

That the cost of the project in rupee terms (and not dollar value) would increase is a no-brainer as more than three years have elapsed in decision-making and the rupee value has depreciated. Any further delay will jack it up further but that would have happened with whichever aircraft had met the criteria. What Karnad is now questioning is the force composition of the IAF arrived at by professional planners and, without being an air power expert himself, suggesting a new mix of “..Tejas Mk I for short range air defence, Tejas MkII as MMRCA and the Su-50 PAK FA as fifth generation fighter”. 

项目的成本以卢比计价（不是美元）将会增长简直是明摆着的，因为做决定已经浪费了超过3年，卢比已经贬值。越延迟成本就越高，而且无论哪一个飞机满足标准，这一点都会发生。Karnad提出的问题，通过规划，不用进口，使印度空军构成达到要求。“光辉 MK I作为近程防空，光辉MK II作为MMRCA，和第五代战机su-50 PAK FA一起。”

This is a perfect example of the ignorant trying to drive defence force structuring as the yet-to-be inducted Tejas Mk I is unsuitable for IAF operational requirements (and hence would limited to only two squadrons) and Tejas Mk II would have less than one-third the flight range and armament capability of the MMRCA and just qualify to be a MiG 21 replacement. Why the use of future tense? Because Tejas Mk II is still on DRDO’s drawing board and would NOT enter squadron service before 2020-22, just like the fifth generation fighter (which would be 2025 or later). But the requirement is literally now, as the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Defence (15th Lok Sabha) itself despairingly noted that the IAF strength was down to 34 squadrons (instead of the sanctioned 42) and reducing further, thus requiring new timely acquisitions.

这是一个典型的无知的试图去构建国防力量的例子，因为尚未入役的光辉 MK I 不满足印度空军的要求（因此仅装备两个中队），并且光辉 MK II 还将达不到MMRCA的航程和挂载能力要求的三分之一，仅仅适合替换米格21。我为什么要用未来时态？因为光辉 MK II还仅仅在DRDO（译注：国防研究与发展组织）的图纸上，2020到2022年都不会服役，就像第五代战机一样（这个要到2025年或更晚）。但是需求是现在就要，就像议会国防常务委员会（第15次下院）自己绝望的宣布的那样，印度空军力量下降到34个中队（而不是批准建立的42个中队），未来还会进一步减少，因此需要及时采购新机。

It is most unprofessional to link defence acquisitions of one country with the threat perception of another as Karnad has done and it is downright spiteful for doubting the competence of test pilots and test engineers of the IAF by saying that the Brazilians had doubts about Rafale’s radar and its head-up display. Do Brazil, Canada, the Netherlands, Norway, Singapore and Morocco (cited by Karnad as having rejected the Rafale) have two nuclear armed nations as adversaries? Have these nations ever gone to war with their neighbours in the past six decades? Costs, albeit important, don’t decide acquisitions; it is the capability one desires that is the driving factor and it’s our misfortune that HAL has not delivered this to the nation. The IAF just looks at getting the right product to safeguard the national skies, as it is its duty to do so. The IAF is accountable to the nation if it does not perform; pray, what is the responsibility attached to Karnad for his alternative force composition suggestion for the IAF?

将国防采购和其他的负面感知联系起来是最不专业的，就像Karnad所做的那样。他说巴西人已经怀疑阵风的雷达和平显（HUD），这是完全充满恶意的去怀疑印度试飞员和空军工程师的能力。巴西，加拿大，荷兰，挪威，新加坡和摩洛哥（Karnad说他们都拒绝了阵风）有两个核武装的敌人吗？过去的六十年这些国家有和邻国发生过战争吗？成本，尽管重要，但并不决定是否采购；对能力的要求才是驱动因素。遗憾的是HAL（译注：印度斯坦航空有限公司）没能给这个国家提供这种能力。印度空军着眼于得到适当的产品去保卫印度的天空，因为那是他们的责任。如果印度空军无能那是要对国家负责的；请问，对于给IAF（印度空军）提意见Karnad要负什么责任？

The visit of the French foreign minister and his supposed canvassing for the Rafale, that Karnad finds fault with, is something that any politician would do for his country; hopefully, there would come a day when the Indian foreign minister would do the same for a HAL-produced aircraft, Inshallah! Till then, let the professionals do their job of recommending what is good for the defence of the nation. Please trust someone. In the case of the IAF, it is a crack team of test pilots and test engineers on whom the country has spent a fortune to train. Let armchair critics not derail a capability provider that successive IAF chiefs have urged the government to procure. This trend to doubt recommendations of service chiefs is dangerous and is conspicuous by the surety of it being raised each time a big-ticket item of any of the three services is close to fruition. Disagreements based on professionally sound arguments are always welcome—but they come with a caveat in matters of national security. The naysayers must be held responsible, too. 

法国外长来访，估计是来游说阵风的，Karnad对此颇有微词，而这是任何政治家都会为国家而做的；希望有这么一天，印度外长也为HAL生产的飞机做同样的事情，老天保佑吧！到了那时，再让那些专家去评论什么才是对国防有益的。请相信他们，就IAF来讲，国家花费巨资培养的试飞员和测试工程师是一个优秀的团队。不要让这些键盘批评家妨碍历任IAF部长向政府力推的有能力的供应商。怀疑后勤部长的推荐的趋势是危险的，显而易见，随着每次（采购延期），保证三种接近服役期限的飞机的（战斗力）的费用越来越高。一直欢迎专业的质疑声音，但是事关国家安全时，反对者也必须负责任。

The writer, a retired Air Vice Marshal, is a distinguished fellow at Centre for Air Power Studies.

作者：退休空军少将，空中力量研究中心着名研究员。



Pranav Pathaka year ago
Mr. Bahadur you should consider Eurofighter typhoon facts before supporting rafale deal. Eurofighter is operating in Germany, UK, Italy, Spain, Austria and Saudi Arabia. Numbers in service over 400. and total order book 571. while rafale has 0 export. brazil, qatar, hongkong, sauth korea every one rejected rafale.

作者在支持阵风的交易之前你应该考虑欧洲战机台风。欧洲战机在德国，英国，意大利，西班牙，澳大利亚和沙特阿拉伯服役。服役数量超过400。总共订购了571架。然而阵风一家也没卖出去。巴西，卡特尔，香港（译注：~~~~~），南韩他们每一个都拒绝了阵风。

usebrain  Pranav Pathaka year ago
so before 571 Eurofighter the count 0..let indians be the first to start the count of Rafale..Eruofigher seems to be beggars plate..where as Rafale is just France alone.

所以在卖出571架欧洲战机之前也是0。让印度作为阵风的开始吧。欧洲战机看起来像乞丐争食。阵风就法国一家。

Ashish Singh  Pranav Pathaka year ago
Pranav, please just trust the IAF specialists who I am sure know their jobs and have gone about their evaluation well. Plus, the countries you mention do NOT have an independent foreign policy, but ally themselves completely with the US. France on the other hand, is far more independent, and a trusted defence supplier historically. So, our conditions of finance, foreign policy, as well as the operational requirements are unique. Can't compare.

楼上，请相信IAF的专家，我了解他们的工作，已经完成评估。而且你提到的国家没有独立的外交政策，而是和美国结盟。法国则更加独立，历史上也是值得信任的供货商（译注：阿根廷有话说）。所以，我们的财务和外交政策和性能要求是独一无二的，不能比较。

dev_D  Pranav Pathaka year ago
Imagine India USA at war with one (or both) of its northern neighbours. The year is 2018. We hv a grand fleet of swanky Eurofighters but which need maintenance parts. And since Eurofighters are produced by European consortium, any one nation can derail acquisition of spares etc if it is supportive of either Pak or China in war against India. Then, ur Typhoons wud just sit idle n lay eggs

想象印度与他的北方的一个或两个邻居发生战争。假设是2018年。我们有大量的耀眼的欧洲战机，但是需要维护。因为欧洲战机是欧洲联合生产的，任何一个国家都可以阻碍备件供应，如果她支持中国或者巴基斯坦反对印度。那么，我们的台风就只能傻啦吧唧的在地上孵蛋。

sakthia year ago
Two french rafales with two external fuel tanks each and no weapons ,
needed 5 refuelling for their 10.5 hour long 10000 Km trip from france to reunion islands
Sure they must have had their tanks full at take off.
So it amounts to a total of 6 fuel loads for a 10000 Km flight with no weapon loads and only two external fuel tanks for each plane provided that each plane had five refuellings enroute.Rreport does not states whether the 5 refuellings were for each rafale. But since it is an odd number it is safe to assume that it is five refuellings for each plane . Becuase both planes need exactly the same amount of refuelling . SO an odd number can not denote total refuelling for both the planes.
Then range in tropical climate with two external fuel tanks in optimum altitude conditions(high altitude )comes only to 1500 Km around.

两个法国台风带两个副油箱不带武器，需要五次加油才能飞10.5小时，10000公里从法国到留尼旺岛。
他们当然需要满油起飞。
所以总共需要6个油箱的油才能飞10000公里，不带武器，每架飞机仅有两个副油箱。每个飞机加5次油，报道没有说是否是每个飞机加5次油。但因为是奇数，一个可靠地假设是每个飞机加5次。因为两个飞机应该是家同样次数的油。而两个飞机加油总和不可能是奇数。

Why?
But AVM has claimed that tejas has just one third of rafale range. Even in IOC-2 press information bureau release the farthest tejas can fly without refuelling for tejas was stated to be 1700 Km. ANd its combat radius 500 km, means with weapons it can have close to 1000 Km range with needs for AB thrusts and fuel penalizing lo altitude flight and a few minutes of close combat needs.

为什么？
但是AVM声称光辉只有阵风航程的三分之一。即使是IOC-2（译注：初始作战能力）公布的信息光辉在没有加油最远飞1700公里。而且作战半径是500公里，意味着带着武器可以接近1000公里，还需要加力燃烧冲刺和费油的低空飞行，和几分钟的近距格斗。

Looking at the fact they flew 10K Kms and needed 5 refuels + 1 to begin with i.e a range of 1600 km with no weapons and two fuel tanks quite clearly shows Rafale doesn't have the famed deep legs as claimed since the start. Also such long range distances are covered flying at very high altitude i.e over 30K feet at optimal fuel burning cruise speed to minimize fuel consumption, these claimed long ranges would be much lower when slung with weapons flying in low in deep strike missions.

看看这个事实，他们飞10000公里需要5次加油，1600公里没有武器带两个副油箱，这清晰的表明阵风没有他们所说的大航程。而且这样的长距离是在超过30000英尺的高空，在经济巡航速度以最小化油耗下实现的，在挂载武器并执行低空大纵深突防任务时航程比声明的要小得多。

whatever the optimum flying conditions if you add weapons worth their price, and do a lo lo penetration with reservation for AB thrusts and close combat and take off needs, the result will be the same

无论什么理想的飞行环境，如果增加武器，作低空突防，还要保留加力燃烧和近距格斗还有起飞需要的燃料的余量，结果都一样。

Even if we believe such rafale brochure range of 3600 Km , the hi-lo-hi missions that can use this ,exist in libiya and mali where open skies with no enemy air defence spreads for a vast expanse of 1000s of Km.

即使我们相信阵风宣传的3600公里航程，高低高任务才有用，这在利比亚和马里没有敌人防空威胁的纵横数千公里的空域中才存在。

But on india -pak borders and india-china borders enemy air defence is just a couple of hundreds of KM away.

但是在印巴和印中边境敌人的防空就在几百公里外。

SO practically those much vaunted 3600 Km ranges has no relevance to two front wars or in Tibet deep strikes.

所以实际上那些大肆吹嘘的3600公里航程与这两个前线战争或西藏纵深打击没有关系。

Reality is sobering. As I said before in lo-lo penetration flight the differnece between tejas and rafale combat range will hug a figure closer to their difference fuel fraction ratio.

现实是很清楚的。正如我之前说的，在低空突防任务中光辉和阵风的作战距离之间的差异与燃料比率的不同关系更机密。

Dangling more and more external tanks and stuff will add to immense drag in lo-lo strikes . So the Rafale has thrice the range of tejas like statements made by people is just irrelevant in indian air space where enemy air defences are just next door.

挂越多的副油箱等等将会大幅增加低空突防的航程。所以人们说的阵风的航程是光辉的三倍在印度空域内无用，而敌人的防空就在隔壁。

SO this issue needs to be looked into,

所以这个问题还要观察。

Ashish Singh  sakthia year ago
sakthi, I implore you NOT TO GO BY figures in the public domain. Something that you would have pulled off the net is not something the IAF would base its decision on. I am sure IAF experts have gone about their evaluation VERY THOROUGHLY. The IAF Test Pilots/ Engineers course is reputed to be unbelievably rigorous. We all WANT to believe we can make our own fighters. You do, and so do I. But believing won't do a thing. Reality is different. In this respect we are lagging far behind. HAL frequently puts out articles (Ajai Shukla is a favourite of theirs and vice-versa) about how the IAF simply wants fancy foreign planes. But as this article brings our clearly, the IAF has a mission, and simply wants what is best suited for that mission. A little gap in capabilities between the homemade and the imported can be accepted obviously, but the LCA (even in its Mk II avatar) isn't even in the same room as the Rafale which is matured and combat proven and far superior. Sorry, but we have to smarten up on fighter design. Maybe we can start by either corporatising HAL, or by getting in the private sector. Maybe 20-25 years hence we will have an Indian world clas jet fighter , if fighters are still around by then.

楼上，我请求你不要引用公开的数据。IAF并不是基于你在网上贴的那些数据来决定的。我相信IAF的专家非常彻底的做了评估。IAF的试飞员和工程师的流程是以难以置信的严格出名的。我们都相信我们能自己造飞机。你我都相信。但是相信不等于去做。现实是不同的。在这方面我们落后很多。HAL频繁的发文章说IAF就是喜欢外国飞机（Ajai Shukla是其中的代表）。但是这篇文章说的很清楚，IAF有自己的任务，就是什么才是最适合这一任务的飞机。在国产货和进口货之间有一点性能差距显然是可以接受的，但是LCA（即使是Mk II avatar（译注：竟然叫阿凡达~~~））和阵风根本不是一个档次的，阵风更成熟，经过实战检验，更优秀。很遗憾，但是我们必须在飞机设计上变得更聪明。我们HAL可以合作研发，或者一如私人企业。可能20~25年后，我们可以装备印度造的世界级喷气飞机，如果那时还流行的话。

sakthi  Ashish Singha year ago
many airforces around the world have chosen gripen E which is closer to the tejas mk2 to do the role of rafale and typhoon in the past. You should note that these airforces did not have a heavy fighter like Su-30 MKI.

世界上很多空军选择与光辉相似的鹰狮E去扮演原来阵风和台风过去的角色。你应该注意到这些空军没有像Su-30 MKI这样的重型战机。

IAF is slated to have 272 su-30 mkis mated with brahmos combo, which beats any strike potential offered by raflae or typhoon any day.

IAF有272架Su-30 MKI去挂载布拉莫斯，这超过阵风和台风能提供的打击潜力。

So it is better to produce close to 300 tejas mk1 and mk2s for border defence and closer air support to troops, which cant be done if we put 20 billion dollars for just 6 squadrons of 126 rafales or typhoons.

所以最好生产300架光辉MK I和MK II去保卫边界，近距离支援地面部队。如果我们话200亿美元购买6个中队的126架阵风或台风是做不到的。

take US airforce how many F-16s they have and how many F-15s they have?

看看美军有多少F16和F15？（译注：先拿LCA比阵风，然后比鹰狮，现在又和F16比，后面还会比幻影2000~~~~~）

This entire MMRCA saga was a simple plain 126 mirage-2000 buy proposed by IAF after kargil war after seeing the superior performance of mirage-2000 in nhigh altitude bombing due to low wing loading and its relaxed static stability airframe fly by wire tech which provided agility.

整个MMRCA项目非常简单，就是在卡吉尔战争后看到幻影2000由于低翼载和飞控带来敏捷的放宽静稳定的机身而得来的优秀的高海拔性能后打算购买126架幻影2000。

According to test pilot Suneeth krishna and NTSE chief Riaz khokar tejas mk1 is much better than upgraded mirage-2000 on these counts. SO the original airforce need can be et with tejas mk1 itself.

根据试飞员Suneeth krishna和NTSE的首席Riaz khokar，光辉在这几项上比升级的幻影2000更好。所以光辉 mk I就能满足空军的原始需求。

tejas mk2 will reach close to gripen E. And only way IAF can retire close to 400 obsolete jags and mig platforms and reach their sanctiones strength of 45 squadrons is to set up a 30 plus an year production line for tejas mk1 and mk2 as soon as possible.

光辉mk2将会接近鹰狮E。IAF退役400架老飞机和幻影平台并达到他们需要的45个中队的唯一方法是尽快一年生产30+架光辉mk1 和 mk2。

Money is scarce , last year GOI diverted 7000 crores set aside for IAF fleet modernization to meet the growing fuel and maintenance needs of IAF.

缺钱，去年印度政府拿出700亿卢比给IAF去进行现代化和满足增加的燃料和维护费用。

So politicians can talk tall in ceremonies. When it comes to budget allocation they will sing s different tune. Also IAF has to buy another 20 billion dollar worth of FGFA in 2020. Where will it find thew money?

政治家可以在典礼上吹牛。当讨论预算分配时他们就是另一幅腔调。IAF要在2020年购买200亿美元的FGFA，钱从哪来？

weasel1962a year ago
The Rafale also reached the final 2 in Singapore's fighter selection beating the Su-3X, F-18 and Typhoon in the process i.e. a consistent result with India. The difference was that the AESA radar was not available for the Rafale in 2002 whereas the F-15SG had already an AESA radar developed so Singapore's F-15 selection at that time was not surprising. The Rafale has an AESA radar today.

阵风也进入了新加坡战机竞标的最后一轮，击败了Su-3X, F-18和台风。和印度的结果一样。不同的是阵风2002那时候没有AESA雷达，而F15SG有，所以新加坡那时选择了F15SG。现在阵风也有AESA了。

Dhananjay Keshkambalia year ago
Strange this Bahadur's arguments! First he talks of Tejas' range 
unsuitable for MMRCA, these professionals of IAF should answer that 
then:

作者的奇谈怪论！首先讲光辉航程不满足MMRCA要求，那么IAF的专家应该回答一下问题。

a.)Why the hell was swedish grippen was called for MMRCA then? Does the grippen have 3 times the range of Tejas? Doesn't it point to the double stands of these professionals?

为什么瑞典鹰狮被称作MMRCA？鹰狮有光辉3倍的航程吗？是不是这些专家有双重标准？

b.) First bahadur says "....mmrca to replace Mig 21s...." then later changes his tune to Tejas' unsuitability as it can ONLY replace Migs. Strange professionalism!

首先，作者先说“MMRCA替换米格21。”，后来又说光辉不适合，只能用来替换米格，奇怪！

c.) Can a Fighter a/c be developed every 2-3 years or takes a couple of decades, like we see in ef2k, rafale, grippenetc. So how come when Tejas was being planned for range, dimensions & payload the IAF just remained aloof, ignoring LCA with as much contempt as possible.
Nope sad but true while brave paki AF pilots & cheeni pilots are backing their inferior JF-17s, J-10s ours are coming across as rich man's spoiled brats who want expensive toys.

发展战斗机需要两三年还是几十年？像EF2000、阵风、鹰狮。怎么光辉开始改进IAF关注的航程、尺寸和载弹量时就尽可能的视而不见呢？
当勇敢的巴基佬和中国佬飞行员支持他们自己的劣等的JF-17s, J-10s时，我们给人的印象确像讨要昂贵玩具的宠坏了的富家小孩。

Ashish Singh  Dhananjay Keshkambalia year ago
Dhananjay, you need to understand the procurement process. Gripen wasn't CALLED. It RESPONDED. Read the article again. With an open mind. 6 sent their TECHNICAL and COMMERCIAL bids. Difference. All six were evaluated to see who all meet the requirements specified. It applies to fighters, it applies to bathroom cleaners too. It's standard Govt practice. However, commercial bids (actual offers) were only opened for those who passed. Savvy?
As far as your b) is concerned, that is not the IAF's doing. It's how the Tejas has shaped up thus far. 
c)To say that IAF has neglected that, is ignorance. It is IAF test crew who have supported all testing.
Lastly, the 'brave' paki pilots do not have a choice. Their country does not have the money to buy anything better. When they could, they bought the F-16s (new generation). The rest, they will take whatever cheenis will give. 
One question for you. Are IAF pilots not 'brave'that they are continuing to fly 1960s vintage MiG-21s? I am not aware of any case of any IAF pilot refusing to fly. Or may be you do not know about that?
Excellent article, but only for people whose minds are open.

楼上，你需要了解采购程序。竞标不包括鹰狮，这就是（我的）回答。麻烦你虚心的再读一遍文章。6家都提供了他们的技术和商务标。所有的6家都被评估谁满足所有的要求。这一点适用于战斗机，也适用于厕所清洁剂。这是标准的政府流程。但是商务标仅仅对通过评估的投标方打开。懂了吗？
至于你的b），那不是IAF做的，光辉现在就发展到那一步。
C）说IAF忽视了LCA，这是胡扯。IAF的飞行员支持了所有的测试。
最后，“勇敢”的巴基佬飞行员没有别的选择。他们没有钱买别的更好的。当他们有能力时，他们买了F16（新型号）。其余的，中国佬给什么他们就要接受什么。
问你个问题。IAF飞行员还在飞60年代的米格21难道不勇敢吗？我不知道任何IAF飞行员拒绝飞行的例子。或者你连着一点都不知道？
很好的文章，但是仅限于对思想开放的读者来讲。

dev_D  Dhananjay Keshkambalia year ago
Tejas is a white elephant, just like rest of Indian research products like Arjun MBT n Insas rifle. We spent billions of tax payers rupees to get substandard end products

光辉是只白象，就像印度生产的其他产品比如阿琼坦克，应萨斯步枪一样（译注：印度军队国产四大神器：LCA、阿琼、英萨斯步枪和那个敞篷的自行火炮）我们花费无数纳税人的钱却只得到了不合格额产品。

Sarana year ago
AM Manmohan Bahadur,
You are angry on Karnad, that's fine, but don't evade his crucial questions which are also being raised by many others "experts" (I hope you don't expect only yourself to be the expert on Air Force). The question is only one but being asked through many angles: -
Is it in Indian national interest to pay US$ 25-30 billion for only 126 fourth generation Rafale fighter aircraft ? Will they be enough to face Chinese fifth generation J-20 and J-31 aircrafts? If you pay all this money to fourth generation Rafale, how will you pay for fifth generation FGFA T-50 which is another US$ 35 billion?
National security needs a strong economy and a strong defense force. If you chose an option that breaks the economic backbone, it would be national bankruptcy not national security. I hope you have not forgotten sights of hundreds of Soviet fighters and bombers rusting in hangars when the Soviet Union collapsed.

空军少将Manmohan Bahadur，你可以生Karnad的气，但是不要逃避他提出的重要的问题，其他“专家”也提出过同样的问题（我希望你不要认为空军就你一个专家）。这就是一个问题但是可以有不同解读：
付250到300亿美元仅购买126架阵风战斗机符合印度国家利益吗？他们能够应对中国的五代机J20和J31战斗机吗？如果用这笔钱买了第四代的阵风，南无你打算为FGFA T50再付350亿美元吗？
国家安全需要强大的经济和军事。如果你选择毁掉经济支柱，将是国家破产，而不是国家安全。我希望你不要忘记当苏联崩溃时，令人瞩目的大量苏联战斗机和轰炸机在机库里生锈。

dev_D  Sarana year ago
Do u hv a thinking brain? 5th Gen fighter will only come by 2025, this is 2014. Wat ru gonna do for 10-12 yrs??? Any idea how many fit fighters n multi role jets IAF has now? ? Hey get a life

楼上，你有大脑吗？第五代战机要到2025年才能得到，现在是2014年。这十几年你怎么办？现在IAF有多少适用的多任务战斗机？别再傻了。

Avona year ago
an excellent rebuttal! a highly recommended article.

反驳的好！狂顶此文。