- Joined
- Jul 2, 2024
- Messages
- 298
- Likes
- 849
Really? Which question exactly?Replying to your questions feel like solving a test paper...
OMG, relax, why so angry? Forum is about time pass, info exchange, speculations, opinions. If we don't know something then let's say IDK, simple.It's not accurate if you make shit up! Let "popular" guys label inaccurate bullshit as per their own wish, or add stuff like serrated engine-nozzle on that AMCA.
You wan't only yourself & Kuntal to be apreciated & other artists are making SHIT???
I just asked for labels, what's so tough about it like test paper? Here is my guess on your work after looking at diagrams of various jets:
Now tell us - is this simple speculated labelling to much to ask/discuss?
> Contract employment is nothing new, but this is something new that our DoD is hiring a youngster from outside on contract, just for some CAD rendering???? We have NAL+ADA+DRDO+ARDE+HAL, etc, etc. Is their team so small or busy that they can't advertise their product themselves???We've done fanarts like Tejas with Surya Kiran livery, but for serious models we did not deviate. That's why Kuntal is now getting official contracts from HAL
> And if this is the case under contract with GoI/MoD/DoD, then Kuntal's work should bear logo or watermark of GoI/ADA/IAF, not his own.
Bcoz guys like us are not popular as such, but experienced in our respective industries & the recruiters, trainers, managers for youngsters, taking their interviews. Many IT & other types of firms are in contract with DoD on various products. We could be part of them, working on different aspects.why you more popular guys are not.
+Anyways, difference in Tejas versions are similar to F-18, bigger jet, new intakes & engine, larger wings etc.View attachment 18259
View attachment 18260Comparing for AMCA, this is how much F-16 has changed in 40years by blockwise development.
It's not about how much adavanced they are vis-a-vis each other, but how radical the design changes are.
> F/A-18E/F is not a variant of F/A-18A/B/C/D rather it's a complete different plane that was designed based on the clues form Hornet
> The reason it's was named F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and not something like "F-19 Wasp" was because DoD knew it would be tough to get money from civilian policymakers for a completely new fighter program so they presented it as "just a simple upgrade"
> F-16 block upgrades are more like plug-n-play systems that can be used on any variants with minimal deep modifications. The only serious airframe modification in the whole F-16 family is perhaps those Israeli ones with their "spine"
> He called Tejas Mk-2 radical because it's a complete different plane in comparison to its Mk-1 or Mk-1A variant. It's not an incremental upgrade...it's more like the Super Hornet we discussed earlier.
> AMCA variants (Mk-1, Mk-2) won't be as radical of a change as we're seeing in Tejas (Mk-1, Mk-2). It'll be incremental like may be new radars, engines, CATOBAR capability, auxiliary IWB....
I hope it makes some sense
> I got the analogy what you guys mean & agree that F-18 E/F has improved a lot after A/B/C/D models, that must have required extra R&D & money, & the same thing b/w Tejas Mk1/1A & Mk2,
but that's what i would expect b/w AMCA Mk1 & Mk2 when it is being projected as 5.5gen.
> By "noticeably better" i meant showcasing the already existing 5gen characteristics seen TODAY on F-22, F-35, Su-57, J-20. There's nothing radical about things seen TODAY to be implemented after 5-10yrs on AMCA.
> AMCA Mk2 is being quoted as 5.5gen. But nobody is clearly talking what'll be added to 5gen but not completely to be 6gen.
> We all know about corporate wars. Their naming system sometimes is confusing. YF-16 became F-16, YF-22 became F-22, X-35 became F-35 but YF-17 became F-18. So I don't take sides of foreign firms, but LM guys can also say that McDonnel Douglas-Northrop-Boeing team made such a skinny jet which is not "plug-n-play" & had to be redesigned. F-18 has been used for R&D like HARV but not implemented.
Lockheed Martin could have done the same inflating & change its engine inlet, nozzles, etc with F-16 :- The XL delta-wing model, LOAN nozzle, the MATV nozzle, the DSI intake, other AFTI/VISTA stuff (IRST, targeting pods, extra fins, etc). So LM's rivals can point at them. Only LM can tell us why it didn't implement any of those, perhaps to save money & invest after ATF & JSF.
BTW, the Mitshubishi F-2 is example of enlarged & customized F-16
Lastly, there is nothing to get angry & call other artists' works as bullshit. Everybody has right to showcase their talent & creativity. Everybody expects acceptation & appreciation, including me & you guys.
Inadequate plaint-text reply w/o diagrams & pics makes it difficult to understand.What's so difficult to understand here?