Indian Air Force: News & Discussions

[karn]

I understand that a French intelligence source says otherwise.

Pakistan claims it downed Indian Rafale jets amid deadly cross-border escalation

Pakistan says it shot down three Rafale jets in retaliatory strike, marking what could be first combat loss of French-made aircraft

uk.news.yahoo.com

I am inclined to believe a French source reporting loss of a French aircraft in preference to an Indian source denying loss of an IAF aircraft.

Ah yes anonymous french official is what goes for proof these days.

 

[Anants]

Why will france report a loss
Okay here View attachment 34020View attachment 34019View attachment 34021
This image was circulated back in 2024 also .
Seen this before
A Pakistani named Mohsin khan posted it back than.
Your cnn correspondent fellow deleted his tweet .
And did the French officialy said anything.
Heck did martin baker say anything?
You were swept by propaganda sir , you may continue to believe it but believing in a lie doesn't make it true

Naah let him believe. Brits and pakis are made for each other. They shall consummate their union pretty soon as seen in direction uk is going anyway.

 

[Spitfire IX]

Why will france report a loss
Okay here View attachment 34020View attachment 34019View attachment 34021
This image was circulated back in 2024 also .
Seen this before
A Pakistani named Mohsin khan posted it back than.
Your cnn correspondent fellow deleted his tweet .
And did the French officialy said anything.
Heck did martin baker say anything?
You were swept by propaganda sir , you may continue to believe it but believing in a lie doesn't make it true

Why do you think that someone passing on what was reported by a source uninvolved in the conflict is 'swept by propaganda'?

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

Tell us, Tell us, tell us, Tell us You also tell something.
Every reply you modify your lines little bit to slowly shift focus.
On IAF thread why you diluting the discussion by global aircraft history?

i asked you a simple question, not demonstration of your ignorance of the topic at hand.

> It is clear who's demonstrating ignorance by not giving any fundamental material & asking same questions again & again.
> I'm not here to give you interview, but for prudence i'm still answering you every time whatever an enthusiast can search & comprehend.
> I'm not Doctor, Banker, Lawyer, Musician, Painter, Civil Engineer, Mechanical Engineer, Electronics Engineer, Aeronautical Engineer, Biotech engineer, etc.
I'm IT Engineer + Enthusiast in aviation, military, heavy machines, etc, who tries to explore public material.

Tell us why delta wing is the most common wing design in jet design history

> see - earlier fighter jet design, now jet design. You wanna generalize things now.
> This is IAF thread, IAF has used all wing types, no need to be world historian.
> You wanna support delta LCA blindly, but MWF has moved up to delta-canard design. If we had access to better engine then pure delta LCA would simply not exist & MWF would have been flying already.

Tell us why half the shapes you described are not used in aircraft design despite having same surface area.

Already answered- F-15/16/18/35, Jaguar have Trapeze wings.
F-22, Su-57, Su-75, AMCA, Kaan, KF-21, J-31/25 have cropped-diamond.
Su-3X & MiG-29 have cropped-delta.
EF-2000, Rafale, J-10, J-20 are Delta-Canards.
Just some last remaining Mirage-2000/I/III/IV/V globally are pure-delta.
Now revise your own statement.

Tell us why no reverse swept wings are in production model planes and only in tech demonstrators like S-37 and X29.

Already answered what a general techie can comprehend on time pass forum, with screenshot.

Tell us what relevance is 80s and early 90s era combat is to 2025 air combat, same as what relevance is 60s era combat to 90s era combat.

Then why asking about history of jet design?

Youngsters ? I am older than you most likely as i am 40+.

Then please talk like one Abusing others since 1st reply & forcing others to retaliate is not what even educated 20s youth do. I'm also obviously 40+ millenial. I've spoken to many youth here nicely on threads as well as 1on1 messages.
May be you're not habituated to work with teams, or just an abusive bully supervisor or self-employed not required to speak to public much.

PS : your answer to foward swept wing design is WRONG. Forward swept wing design are subject to incredible torques at low speed turning and are prone to breaking off. THAT is why its only ever been in a tech demonstrator and not in any inducted model: we do not have materials cheap enough to make wings that are forward swept that can witsand the toruqe at low velocity turning.

> That's why i gave example to stick out you hands at high speed, 1st forward & then backward & compare the stress. Torque = tangential force x radius. So Torque will be same in both positions but stress on our shoulder & wing root will more in forward position, bcoz it is like going against the air molecules rather than piercing through them.
> Earlier NASA slides were WRONG
Now, summarized info on Wikipedia with sources mentioned is WRONG.
> 1st you write "tell us, tell us, tell us. tell us, tell us", but don't accept verifiable google search replies with screenshots.
> BTW, being just enthusiast, I can naturally afford to be wrong But a tleast i google & share something verifiable. I even opened new threads on fundamentals. Still people like you bully & abuse.

PPS: you are IT engineer ? cool. I am mathematician who works IT.

> PPPPPPPPPPPSSSSSSSSSSS: Just don't abuse anyone, even casually. Everything will be fine, simple.
> You just search & share your info with screenshots, pics, diagrams, graphs, tables, calculations.

PPPS: no fighter jet is designed today with WVR combat in mind - its an afterthought and WVR specs are only there when it doesnt clash with BVR specs. That is reality.

PPPPPPPPSSSSSSS:
> Sword Vs Shield, Offence Vs defence, Attack Vs Countermeasure, both aspects develop.
> There is no clash b/w BVR & WVR, it is a layered approach just like in multi-range SAMs & BMs.
> AMCA, Kaan, J-31/35, KF-21, Su-75 will have gun & CCMs.
> As i said, with era, the weapons get modified.
> All 5gen jets have CCM & gun.
> Earlier CCMs were LOBL, now LOAL.
> 6gen intends to replace gun by DEW-CIWS. No more manual ballistic aiming of CCIP (Constantly Computed Impact Point) looking through narrow HUD. The jet which will damage the opponent jet's body more faster, will win.

 

[Nutcracker]

Why do you think that someone passing on what was reported by a source uninvolved in the conflict is 'swept by propaganda'?

Why would you believe " trust me bro, a french guy we told me". When the fuckin US president has called CNN as fake news synonym. Do you also believe that BBC did genuine reporting against Paki pedo gangs ?

 

[Spitfire IX]

Ah yes anonymous french official is what goes for proof these days.

I don't know if the source is right or not. I said I was more inclined to believe it. My reasoning? France has nothing to gain from acknowledging a Rafale being lost in action. If a French source reports that, it is more credible to me than an Indian source denying it.

 

[Nutcracker]

France has nothing to gain from acknowledging a Rafale being lost in action.

You are having a brainfart bud. French have more to lose, having hundreds of pending order, probably more deals pending considering it's the best option for those who can't get F35.

 

[karn]

I don't know if the source is right or not. I said I was more inclined to believe it. My reasoning? France has nothing to gain from acknowledging a Rafale being lost in action. If a French source reports that, it is more credible to me than an Indian source denying it.

That's assuming that the source even exists.

 

[Anants]

I don't know if the source is right or not. I said I was more inclined to believe it. My reasoning? France has nothing to gain from acknowledging a Rafale being lost in action. If a French source reports that, it is more credible to me than an Indian source denying it.

Stop pretending. You are believe because thats what you want to believe. There is no official French source other than supposedly unnamed. CNN also quoted unnamed Indian officials attributing same yet CNN itself doubts that assertion as it frantically asked Pakistan Defence Minister for proof - and later pointed to social media...

But then please keep on believing unnamed French sources to massage your confirmation bias.

 

[Spitfire IX]

Why would you believe " trust me bro, a french guy we told me". When the fuckin US president has called CNN as fake news synonym. Do you also believe that BBC did genuine reporting against Paki pedo gangs ?

Do you seriously believe I take Donald Trump seriously?

I am in the UK. IIRC I watched a BBC TV programme about sexual exploitation of girls by men of Pakistani origin a couple of days ago. What is 'not genuine' about reporting the facts and explaining why the victims were abnormally susceptible to such exploitation?

 

[Spitfire IX]

That's assuming that the source even exists.

Of course.

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

I don't know if the source is right or not. I said I was more inclined to believe it. My reasoning? France has nothing to gain from acknowledging a Rafale being lost in action. If a French source reports that, it is more credible to me than an Indian source denying it.

Buddy, whoever reports something - BBC, France24, DW, CNN, SkyNews, CNA, CGTN, Al-Jazeera, etc, etc, the 1st hand info will be out of Pakistan & India only.

I think GoI/IAF will acknowledge losses for simple reason that losses always occur on both sides, 1st gen vs 1st gen, 2G vs 2G, 3G Vs 3G, even in 5G Vs 5G or 6G Vs 6G which we're yet to see, & this is 4gen Vs 4gen. Moreover, spy sats can expose lots of things.

But so far it is reported that stand-off weapons like SCALP-EG/Storm-Shadow & drones were used, so IAF jets didn't have to cross LOC. At max they had to dodge Pak SAMs & AAMs fired from within Pak side.

And entire world knows Pakistan's political & social turmoil & its reporting & propaganda.

 

[Spitfire IX]

Stop pretending. You are believe because thats what you want to believe. There is no official French source other than supposedly unnamed. CNN also quoted unnamed Indian officials attributing same yet CNN itself doubts that assertion as it frantically asked Pakistan Defence Minister for proof - and later pointed to social media...

But then please keep on believing unnamed French sources to massage your confirmation bias.

Please be aware I was a journalist, writing things that got printed on paper. A pukka journalist does not investigate and report on the basis of their their personal views. That is joke journalism to me. If you want to push a view, that you do by use of editorials.

I never said I believed the French source reporting a Rafale loss. I said I was more inclined to believe the source claiming that than the source denying it. Gave my reasons.

PS It does not matter to me if India lost a Rafale or not. What matters to me is whether that is true or not. Having said that, my personal hope is that IAF did not suffer such a loss.

 

[GaudaNaresh]

Tell us, Tell us, tell us, Tell us You also tell something.
Every reply you modify your lines little bit to slowly shift focus.
On IAF thread why you diluting the discussion by global aircraft history?


> It is clear who's demonstrating ignorance by not giving any fundamental material & asking same questions again & again.
> I'm not here to give you interview, but for prudence i'm still answering you every time whatever an enthusiast can search & comprehend.
> I'm not Doctor, Banker, Lawyer, Musician, Painter, Civil Engineer, Mechanical Engineer, Electronics Engineer, Aeronautical Engineer, Biotech engineer, etc.
I'm IT Engineer + Enthusiast in aviation, military, heavy machines, etc, who tries to explore public material.




> see - earlier fighter jet design, now jet design. You wanna generalize things now.
> This is IAF thread, IAF has used all wing types, no need to be world historian.
> You wanna support delta LCA blindly, but MWF has moved up to delta-canard design. If we had access to better engine then pure delta LCA would simply not exist & MWF would have been flying already.



Already answered- F-15/16/18/35, Jaguar have Trapeze wings.
F-22, Su-57, Su-75, AMCA, Kaan, KF-21, J-31/25 have cropped-diamond.
Su-3X & MiG-29 have cropped-delta.
EF-2000, Rafale, J-10, J-20 are Delta-Canards.
Just some last remaining Mirage-2000/I/III/IV/V globally are pure-delta.
Now revise your own statement.



Already answered what a general techie can comprehend on time pass forum, with screenshot.


Then why asking about history of jet design?


Then please talk like one Abusing others since 1st reply & forcing others to retaliate is not what even educated 20s youth do. I'm also obviously 40+ millenial. I've spoken to many youth here nicely on threads as well as 1on1 messages.
May be you're not habituated to work with teams, or just an abusive bully supervisor or self-employed not required to speak to public much.


> That's why i gave example to stick out you hands at high speed, 1st forward & then backward & compare the stress. Torque = tangential force x radius. So Torque will be same in both positions but stress on our shoulder & wing root will more in forward position, bcoz it is like going against the air molecules rather than piercing through them.
> Earlier NASA slides were WRONG
Now, summarized info on Wikipedia with sources mentioned is WRONG.
> 1st you write "tell us, tell us, tell us. tell us, tell us", but don't accept verifiable google search replies with screenshots.
> BTW, being just enthusiast, I can naturally afford to be wrong But a tleast i google & share something verifiable. I even opened new threads on fundamentals. Still people like you bully & abuse.


> PPPPPPPPPPPSSSSSSSSSSS: Just don't abuse anyone, even casually. Everything will be fine, simple.
> You just search & share your info with screenshots, pics, diagrams, graphs, tables, calculations.


PPPPPPPPSSSSSSS:
> Sword Vs Shield, Offence Vs defence, Attack Vs Countermeasure, both aspects develop.
> There is no clash b/w BVR & WVR, it is a layered approach just like in multi-range SAMs & BMs.
> AMCA, Kaan, J-31/35, KF-21, Su-75 will have gun & CCMs.
> As i said, with era, the weapons get modified.
> All 5gen jets have CCM & gun.
> Earlier CCMs were LOBL, now LOAL.
> 6gen intends to replace gun by DEW-CIWS. No more manual ballistic aiming of CCIP (Constantly Computed Impact Point) looking through narrow HUD. The jet which will damage the opponent jet's body more faster, will win.

Listen, import lobby exponent and desi product dismissive idiot, you DO NOT HAVE The technical knowledge to talk of what you speak of.
I clarified your freaking stupid post about dehati 'stick your hands out of the car' nonsense. If you wish to have technical discussion, talk like you know shit, instead of being the idiot who cut-pastes stuff he doesnt even understand from pages.

I asked you simple question. TELL US WHY DELTA WING IS THE MOST COMMON FIGHTER JET DESIGN BY SERIAL NUMBER SINCE JET ENGINES ARE IN APPLICATION.

i am asking question, because i know the matter and i dont need to produce slides that i dont understand to talk like a moron.
If you know your shit, use your own words and logic for it and in scientific terms, not dehati 'stick your hands out of the car window and see for yourself' - which is actually completely WRONG analogy, becuse if you do so, you actually CAN maintain forward swept arms just fine, till your shoulder muscles tire.

THIS has nothing to do with aero-elastic stress failure under a lift generating feedback loop.
In other words, O he who doesnt know what he talks of, you get a stress fracture from feedback loop of increasing lift to aeroestatic shearing and laminar flow splits and only happens when you are continuously generating lift for a while - which your arms never do.
Your arms tiring out more or less from forward/backward swept angle while standing out of sunroof of a car is to do with your shoulder muscle strength. Not a shearing force coming through your arm due to this above phenomena, which i highly doubt you understand.
AND to top it off in terms of modern carbon fibre material, this stress becomes critical failure zone as angular momentum increases, aka you are turning, while climbing. at low speed turning, when you are still generating lift but anglular momentum is the greatest (because sharp tight turns require drop in speed) or thrust vectoring, which effectively STILL ends up in massiv drop in speed in x-axis, this is even worse.

THIS is why forward swept wings are only a tech demonstrator and prone to failure as usage racks up and stress builds up at wings at molecular level.

You forget, those who know what they are talking about, dont have to cite jack shit in science.

In short, NASA isnt wrong. your dumbass understanding of what you are talking of in terms of wing design, wing structing, etc is wrong.
This is something i know very very well, because i am a mathematician who screwed around with the electric car race teams in north america that is a big deal and i was THE aerodynamics guy of the team for a while, along with a couple of physics dudes.

So if you wish to go into nitty gritty of why your statement of 'LCA is stoopid coz it has delta wing', i expect to see serious self generated content and argument from you and not a dehati ad-hoc cut paste of nasa slides that you dont understand very well and clearly picked up wrong info along the way or is a paid troll about wing design.

 

[Spitfire IX]

You are having a brainfart bud. French have more to lose, having hundreds of pending order, probably more deals pending considering it's the best option for those who can't get F35.

Do you think that anyone would pull away from ordering Rafale because a Rafale had been shot down by a SAM? What I would make of that is that 4G aircraft are more vulnerable to detection than 5G aircraft. I believe that has been widely know for a long time now.

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

Being 40+ if you're RECORD BREAKER ABUSER then you're THE DEHATI.

Listen, import lobby exponent and desi product dismissive idiot,

Reflexive fool, I DREAM OF 100% SELF-RELIANCE. But which country has that?
> So 4th time im asking what import did i strongly push for?
> Is LCA 100% DESI?
> DON'T IMPORT GE404, F414 OR ANYHTING, DON'T DO JOINT-VENTURE. MAKE EVEYTHING 100% DESI. Go tell this to GoI/MoD/DoD.
> Indian Navy finally dismissed 4gen TEDBF, go abuse them.
> News coming in that IAF is getting ready for RFI/RFP for domestic 6gen jet.
> Once AMCA is ready, LCA, MWF won't be produced more bcoz they're just gap fillers.
> You wanna be sentimental nostalgic for obsolete tech, that's your choice.

you DO NOT HAVE The technical knowledge to talk of what you speak of.

> For time pass on casual forum i've sufficient knowledge, don't need aero-degree.
> You have tech knowledge then share it, simple.

I clarified your freaking stupid post about dehati 'stick your hands out of the car' nonsense. If you wish to have technical discussion, talk like you know shit, instead of being the idiot who cut-pastes stuff he doesnt even understand from pages.

> Even CEOs are expendable today. Hence nobody cares about people with great knowledge but shit language.
> I copy-paste only what i can understand & hopefully others too.

I asked you simple question. TELL US WHY DELTA WING IS THE MOST COMMON FIGHTER JET DESIGN BY SERIAL NUMBER SINCE JET ENGINES ARE IN APPLICATION.

> That's your psycological tactic to deviate focus, direct others & dilute IAF thread by global history.
> You should present what you beieve in.

i am asking question, because i know the matter and i dont need to produce slides that i dont understand to talk like a moron.

> You ask question but don't accept public answer.
> If you know the matter then simply present it in understandable way you prefer.
> I wonder what was so tough to understand in those NASA slides & Wikipedia page. You can highlight & i can try to explain again.

If you know your shit, use your own words and logic for it and in scientific terms, not dehati'stick your hands out of the car window and see for yourself' - which is actually completely WRONG analogy, becuse if you do so, you actually CAN maintain forward swept arms just fine, till your shoulder muscles tire.
THIS has nothing to do with aero-elastic stress failure under a lift generating feedback loop.
In other words, O he who doesnt know what he talks of, you get a stress fracture from feedback loop of increasing lift to aeroestatic shearing and laminar flow splits and only happens when you are continuously generating lift for a while - which your arms never do.
Your arms tiring out more or less from forward/backward swept angle while standing out of sunroof of a car is to do with your shoulder muscle strength. Not a shearing force coming through your arm due to this above phenomena, which i highly doubt you understand.

> On IAF Thread how does reverse swept wing matter?

> In general, do you really want people to understand you or not, make up your mind.
> Engineer of 1 discipline won't understand any other concept from other disciplines unless some minimum study, what to expect from regular members. Hence pictures, diagrams, graphs, tables, etc are required. But you expect others here to be Aero-experts.
> Your presentation skills for audience have failed while my DEHATI example was for everybody to start correlating just initially, not exactly.
> Apart from my DEHATI example & screenshots, you're NOT ready to accept anything i write in any way.
> You used vocabulary "FEEDBACK LOOP"... Recaling 20+ years back, although Computer Engineering had & has a subject in 3rd year called "Control Systems"
NOTE - A regular member cannot bring up the following diagram & book, unless studied the subject.



If i start bombarding with Computer Engineering Syllabus terms, subjects, then its no use, others will have hard time.
So yeah, honestly, unlike your insincerity, i didn't understand the red-highlighted aeronautical language above completely, bcoz i am low IQ.
But still trying to comprehend it, may be it means that arms don't generate lift while wings do, so forward swept wing facing continious lift & laminar air flow splitting at leading edge leads to mechanical stress.
But it'll be better if you use some diagram, video, article, etc. otherwise forget me, it is useless to discuss with anyone.

AND to top it off in terms of modern carbon fibre material, this stress becomes critical failure zone as angular momentum increases, aka you are turning, while climbing.

at low speed turning, when you are still generating lift but anglular momentum is the greatest (because sharp tight turns require drop in speed) or thrust vectoring, which effectively STILL ends up in massiv drop in speed in x-axis, this is even worse.

THIS is why forward swept wings are only a tech demonstrator and prone to failure as usage racks up and stress builds up at wings at molecular level.

Angular momentum = Mass x Velocity x Radius.
At sharp turn, the velocity decreases as you said & radius is small, mass is same. So how can Angular Momentum be greatest?

You forget, those who know what they are talking about, dont have to cite jack shit in science.

Knowing & presenting are 2 different things which evidently RECORD BREAKING ABUSERS like you don't understand.

In short, NASA isnt wrong. your dumbass understanding of what you are talking of in terms of wing design, wing structing, etc is wrong.

> I said Delta-Canard better than pure Delta. Hence LCA changed to MWF & Mirage changed to Rafale.
> You said delta has highest lift. NASA says Delta is low aspect ratio wing with lower lift than higher AR wing, you disagreed.
> I tried to show how tricky it can be with different shapes with same span & area.
> Then I merely showed you within a rectangle, a trapezium has more area than a triangle, any "dumb ass" like me can understand that but which "smart ass" like you disagree with. Let me put it here again:


Beyond this i didn't conclude which is best wing, just gave examples of different jets with different wing types.
> W/o abuses you can still share your knowledge & understanding about airframe design in the appropriate thread i opened.

This is something i know very very well, because i am a mathematician who screwed around with the electric car race teams in north america that is a big deal and i was THE aerodynamics guy of the team for a while, along with a couple of physics dudes.

Congratulations! But yet till now, except record breaking abuse, you couldn't manage to explain anything properly in casual tech forum of variety of people from school kids to retired guys from various backgrounds. May be that's why you washed out ot they kicked you out.

So if you wish to go into nitty gritty of why your statement of 'LCA is stoopid coz it has delta wing', i expect to see serious self generated content and argument from you and not a dehati ad-hoc cut paste of nasa slides that you dont understand very well and clearly picked up wrong info along the way or is a paid troll about wing design.

> Except serious Abusive Dehati content, we are yet to see any other serious content from you.
> Why would someone pay me to troll about wing design?
> Go check the 1st reply again, how many points i mentioned on poor engine, ATWR, payload, no redundancy, less lectricity, etc. And i said about all 4gen jets Vs 5gen & emerging 6gen.
> But still i suggested to turn it into UCAV, give it geometric treatment, not discard/cancel it completely.
Still "smart ass" people like you're not happy.

Post in thread 'Indian Air Force: News & Discussions'

Tuesday at 6:24 PM

I prefer we put in cavery in Tejas and make 1000 of them.

I told you what my airforce should do - putter around with what they have and spend 10 billion to buy 300 tejas instead of 10 billion to buy 30 rafales. Quantity is a quality of its own as Russians proved by beating the technologically superior nazis.
i would rather have 10 substandard tejas with caveri than 1 Rafale.

> We'll ALWAYS be outnumbered by China.
> Quantity & quality both are required at their place & time. But if used on front-line then losses on both sides will also be like that. More...

• Bhartiya Sainik

•