ADA Tejas Mark-II/Medium Weight Fighter

[cannonfodder]

You are comparing building construction with AC fighter development and developing aerospace capability. IAF generals sees themselves as only end user/ customer like yourself that is one huge problem in itself (calling tejas 3 legged cheetah and what not).

Personal note: We had specific tech feature on modem chip (specified in 3gpp spec) however it did not looked feasible on RF/FW perspective after silicon. Management took pragmatic call; teams worked with NW operators for interoperability & launched chip with known limitation. Such things happen when developing and commercializing new technologies and this is how 3g tech evolved. Anyways some of yours posts are really funny like claiming integration of foreign designed & manufactured components as successful Tot .

Talking about tejas, IAF has changed the goal post several times during the development of Tejas. AESA, IFR requirement is the latest/greatest requirement for Tejas without which it cannot take on substandard porki air force ( and failed nation with 400Km max width). MK2 was really req from IN as posted by several other members. I do not understand why MOD/HAL/ADA and other agencies keep agreeing with changes when development and validation of techs takes hell lot more effort & time. It may be that tech developers take it as more work & good job security for them. Both are responsible for making decisions without any risk assessment. Tejas should have AESA/IFR and what not to start replacing aging Mig 21 (read between the lines: only good replacement is Gripen ).

Going by IAF standards, ISRO is nothing but disappointment as the payload capabilities of latest GSLV has been achieved decades ago by several countries.

The problem is, that only Tejas fans compare it to foreign counterparts, while IAF compares it to the ASR requirements => it's own development goals!

If you hire a construction company to build a house for you, with a specific number of doors and windows, that should be delivered at a specific date, you expect the work to be done according to the plan. You wouldn't accept the house if it hasn't doors or windows, nor would you accept delays in the construction, that are caused by the company either. But that's what you suggested with Tejas!

- Tejas IOC haven't expanded it's already limited flight envelope to operationally needed levels => that's what FOC is for
- Tejas IOC doesn't have a gun, BVR missiles, nor the new WVR missiles => can't replace Mig 21s in the interception role without FOC
- Tejas IOC has limited range and endurance => requires the integration of IFR probe during FOC
- Tejas MK1 in general does not meet the ASR flight performance requirements => that's why a higher thrust engine in the MK2 was required.

These are major issues that remains until IAF can accept the fighter for operational service, while the MK1A upgrade is basically fine tuning (modernising of existing capabilities like radar and EW, because of the development delays, improving maintenance based on customer feedback) like you said.

So FOC is the key for Tejas, while MK1A is just a stop gap fine tuning measure, till MK2 is developed, to finally meet the ASR and make Tejas capable enough, according to it's own goals!

 

[Sancho]

You are comparing building construction with AC fighter development and developing aerospace capability.

Actually, I am pointing to the double standards people have, by accepting any kind of delays and mistakes from the developers of LCA, that they would never accept personally, so why blame IAF for not accepting the same either?

IAF generals sees themselves as only end user/ customer like yourself that is one huge problem in itself

True, that's why I want the forces to be more committed in such projects too, but also with more to say than just being asked to provide baseline requirements and than sit and weight till ADA and Co delivers, or not.

Talking about tejas, IAF has changed the goal post several times during the development of Tejas. AESA, IFR requirement is the latest/greatest requirement for Tejas

Which is the common excuse, that is based on the false impression that IAF change things just like that, rather than to understand, that these are normal modernisations during the service life of a fighter. Jaguar IM just upgraded from the same pulse doppler radar LCA IOC uses, to AESA, because it had the older radar in service for several years now. Mig 29 got IFR capability with the last upgrade as well, which is standard now for all IAF fighters anyway.
So IAF is not asking special things, but capabilities that reflects the current standard and if LCA would not be delayed for years, the same capabilities would be added now as well, during a standard modernisation (Darin 2 to Darin 3).

=> Which brings us back to, why should IAF accept lower standards?

MK2 was really req from IN as posted by several other members.

Not it wasn't, it was based on the fact that MK1 doesn't meet the ASR and IAF insisting on a higher thrust engine:
http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/...-news-and-discussions.1/page-760#post-1388526

IN's requirements were just added by ADA, after it was clear that NLCA MK1 won't meet the requirements either and this mix up was the start for more delays and problems in the LCA programme.

Tejas should have AESA/IFR and what not to start replacing aging Mig 21

A Mig 21 can fly up to Mach 2, LCA IOC up to Mach 1.6
A Mig 21 has a gun for dog fights, LCA IOC hasn't
A Mig 21 has BVR missiles integrated, LCA IOC hasn't

And ou think AESA/IFR are the problem?

FOC is the key for minimum operational capability, below the ASR requirements.
MK1A is a standard modernisation only and a gap filler, till MK2 can be available, to meet the ASR.

More over, that's another common misconception, to see the Mig 21 as the benchmark for LCA, but benchmark for a new fighter is never the capability of the older, but of the enemies it might face and the capabilities that are standard today.

That's also why it always was bogus to compare NLCA with Sea Harriers, while the real issue was, can an NLCA fight J15, does it have the capabilities to fight a enemy CBG, can it deliver credible A2G loads over distance, to enemy shore targets? The answer is no, because a light class fighter is not meant to have large range or payloads and fight heavy class fighters on it's own.

You can't meet the operational requirements of the forces today, by comparing LCA to 3rd or older gen fighters, nor does it help the Tejas programme, when pride takes over and we simply close our eyes on the technical shortcomings.

Acknowledging the issues and fixing them is the only way foward, to make Tejas a success. Not blaming IAF/IN and finding excuses for development problems.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

There are plenty of things in your assertion which are false, Wrong comparison and so on ..

We have debated these topics over and over again, And we are interested in new development and news ..

Actually, I am pointing to the double standards people have, by accepting any kind of delays and mistakes from the developers of LCA, that they would never accept personally, so why blame IAF for not accepting the same either?



True, that's why I want the forces to be more committed in such projects too, but also with more to say than just being asked to provide baseline requirements and than sit and weight till ADA and Co delivers, or not.



Which is the common excuse, that is based on the false impression that IAF change things just like that, rather than to understand, that these are normal modernisations during the service life of a fighter. Jaguar IM just upgraded from the same pulse doppler radar LCA IOC uses, to AESA, because it had the older radar in service for several years now. Mig 29 got IFR capability with the last upgrade as well, which is standard now for all IAF fighters anyway.
So IAF is not asking special things, but capabilities that reflects the current standard and if LCA would not be delayed for years, the same capabilities would be added now as well, during a standard modernisation (Darin 2 to Darin 3).

=> Which brings us back to, why should IAF accept lower standards?



Not it wasn't, it was based on the fact that MK1 doesn't meet the ASR and IAF insisting on a higher thrust engine:
http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/...-news-and-discussions.1/page-760#post-1388526

IN's requirements were just added by ADA, after it was clear that NLCA MK1 won't meet the requirements either and this mix up was the start for more delays and problems in the LCA programme.



A Mig 21 can fly up to Mach 2, LCA IOC up to Mach 1.6
A Mig 21 has a gun for dog fights, LCA IOC hasn't
A Mig 21 has BVR missiles integrated, LCA IOC hasn't

And ou think AESA/IFR are the problem?

FOC is the key for minimum operational capability, below the ASR requirements.
MK1A is a standard modernisation only and a gap filler, till MK2 can be available, to meet the ASR.

More over, that's another common misconception, to see the Mig 21 as the benchmark for LCA, but benchmark for a new fighter is never the capability of the older, but of the enemies it might face and the capabilities that are standard today.

That's also why it always was bogus to compare NLCA with Sea Harriers, while the real issue was, can an NLCA fight J15, does it have the capabilities to fight a enemy CBG, can it deliver credible A2G loads over distance, to enemy shore targets? The answer is no, because a light class fighter is not meant to have large range or payloads and fight heavy class fighters on it's own.

You can't meet the operational requirements of the forces today, by comparing LCA to 3rd or older gen fighters, nor does it help the Tejas programme, when pride takes over and we simply close our eyes on the technical shortcomings.

Acknowledging the issues and fixing them is the only way foward, to make Tejas a success. Not blaming IAF/IN and finding excuses for development problems.

 

[Sancho]

There are plenty of things in your assertion which are false, Wrong comparison and so on ..

Feel free to correct them and not just state things.

We have debated these topics over and over again, And we are interested in new development and news ..

An we will continue to do so, as long as people confuse MK2 with MMRCAs, or as long as FOC and MK1A are not done, because real new news can only come after both these milestones, doesn't meant that we should stop debating till 2027 or?

 

[Kunal Biswas]

These are already debated topics, we don`t want broken record to play again and again ..

You can look back at Tejas thread for your queries, The topics lack quality as no one is interested to read the same debates again & again ..

You can start poking these argument in other thread by calling out specifically..

Feel free to correct them and not just state things.

An we will continue to do so, as long as people confuse MK2 with MMRCAs, or as long as FOC and MK1A are not done, because real new news can only come after both these milestones, doesn't meant that we should stop debating till 2027 or?

 

[Steven Rogers]

An we will continue to do so, as long as people confuse MK2 with MMRCAs, or as long as FOC and MK1A are not done, because real new news can only come after both these milestones, doesn't meant that we should stop debating till 2027 or?

The requirement of mk2 was revised in 2015-2016 and its navy requirement not fans. The want the plane to be multirole and perform all sorts of missions, unlike just an improvement on mk1 which you have been saying around.

Sent from my Aqua Ace II using Tapatalk

 

[Saichand K]

A Mig 21 can fly up to Mach 2, LCA IOC up to Mach 1.6
A Mig 21 has a gun for dog fights, LCA IOC hasn't
A Mig 21 has BVR missiles integrated, LCA IOC hasn't

And ou think AESA/IFR are the problem?

When Mig-21 first came to India, it didnot have any of these u r saying.

 

[Prashant12]

Some GE F-414 INS6 engines have already been delivered to ADA. They are now waiting for the Tejas Mk-2 airframe to be ready.

 

[Babloo Singh]

Some GE F-414 INS6 engines have already been delivered to ADA. They are now waiting for the Tejas Mk-2 airframe to be ready.

Shhhh.............. Same GE F-414 INS6 Engine will be initial test engine on AMCA too

 

[ezsasa]

Some GE F-414 INS6 engines have already been delivered to ADA. They are now waiting for the Tejas Mk-2 airframe to be ready.

Does this mean, we will see MK2 in the next six months?

 

[darshan978]

Does this mean, we will see MK2 in the next six months?

i dont think so....... ..........

 

[Prashant12]

Does this mean, we will see MK2 in the next six months?

Tejas Mark 2 is set to for its first flight in 2019, with production to commence in 2022.
http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/india-the-verge-building-super-jet-fighter-21880

 

[Adioz]

Tejas Mark 2 is set to for its first flight in 2019, with production to commence in 2022.
http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/india-the-verge-building-super-jet-fighter-21880

Nonsense article. He is quoting Parrikar as source for the 2019-2022 timeline.

Plus the article mentions that IAF ordered 83 Tejas Mk-2. First time I've heard about 83 Tejas-Mk2 ordered (unless the writer got confused between Mk1A and Mk2, which he did).

Although, if the timeline is still workable, I would be happy

 

[rone]

When Mig-21 first came to India, it didnot have any of these u r saying.

Sorry there are some correction


Tejas max speed is 1.8 not 1.6 but if it put to max it can go mac 2. Becoz it have better weight to thrust ratio, and to be in safe operation limit it run at max mac 1.8 even rafael limit to 1.9

Tejas have duel Canon 23 mm gun it will be default in Every aircraft in squadron duty


Yes tejas integrated with r77 and derby bvr missiles check on current tests , the first squadron tejas is used as learning platform to fit it in wider air combat strategies,


Check facts first tejas have two ioc marks before foc as per latest info most of foc parameters full filled in flight refueling and advanced short range close combat missile integrations remain's which will done in coming months

 

[rone]

Nonsense article. He is quoting Parrikar as source for the 2019-2022 timeline.

Plus the article mentions that IAF ordered 83 Tejas Mk-2. First time I've heard about 83 Tejas-Mk2 ordered (unless the writer got confused between Mk1A and Mk2, which he did).

Although, if the timeline is still workable, I would be happy

I think it's navy mk2 the iaf mk2 is different , also for iaf now hal in last stages of mk1a development they will start the prototype works soon


Mark my word's we can see mk1a sooner than 2020

 

[G10]

Tejas canon has been only ground tested long time back. Aerially yet to be tested and certified. Lighter the aircraft more tricky to handle gun recoil. Keenly waiting on that front.

 

[Prashant12]

Govt shelves $10-b single-engine fighter jet deal, to push for Tejas


Move will reduce reliance on imports and keep HAL’s order books flying high
NEW DELHI, FEBRUARY 26

After much dithering the government has finally taken a decision to shelve the $10-billion project on procuring only single-engine fighter from foreign vendors even as it plans to push for Tejas Light Combat Aircraft Mark-2 for the Indian Air Force, which is in dire need of modern fighter jets.

In 2016, the plan to procure imported single-engine warplane got a major push when the Air Force had sent letters to foreign vendors seeking their interest in building a single-engine fighter aircraft in India in collaboration with an Indian player. Finally, the choices narrowed down to US aerospace giant Lockheed Martin’s F-16 Block 70 and Swedish Gripen E manufactured by SAAB.

Both these companies also came out with exhaustive plans under ‘Make in India’ with the promise to set up production units here and eventually transforming India into a global export hub. While Lockheed Martin joined hands to Tata Advanced Systems Ltd (TASL), SAAB announced its partnership with Adani Group for the programme.

However, it seems that the Ministry of Defence (MoD) has now decided that it will not specify the number of engines “inviting unnecessary controversy” by restricting itself to number of engines and only in between a couple of players, sources told BusinessLine.

Keeping in mind the requirement of the Indian Air Force (IAF), the government has decided to push for the home-grown Tejas Mark 2, which is much cheaper than F-16 Block 70 or Gripen E, given the paucity of financial resources even as the government continues to face political heat over procuring 36 French Rafale jets off-the-shelf.

Procurement plan

Apart from this, scrapping the single-engine project will also serve the government’s twin objectives of reducing it reliance on imports thereby strengthening the domestic defence industry and keeping the order books of Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. (HAL) steady, sources said.

The plan is to procure at least 120-150 Tejas LCA Mark 2 for the Air Force, according to sources.

Interestingly, the Indian Air Force, which is in dire need of at least 200 fighter planes, rejected the domestically built Tejas last year. In a detailed presentation to the government, the IAF made a case of procuring the jets only from global vendors.

However, Defence Minister Nirmala Sitharaman, along with National Security Adviser Ajit Doval, have decided that either the IAF places an order for Tejas Mark 2 or open up the competition to all, much on the lines of the Medium Multi-role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) deal that was floated by the previous UPA government in 2010 in a bid to buy 126 jets. Finally it was Rafale and Eurofighter that were shortlisted.

When contacted the Indian Air Force declined to comment.

Besides, with the roll-out of the ‘Strategic Partnership’ policy the process of procurement has undergone a major change. Unless the policy is fully implemented no big-ticket programme can take off. Moreover, the negotiations also hit a deadlock over the issue of transfer of technology. “We need to have an India-made plane where the design is ours, the intelligence inside the aeroplane is ours while we can source some of the components globally. But importing a whole plane is regressive. We just cannot end up strengthening the foreign aerospace industry while looking down on your own,” said Bharat Karnad, Research Professor in National Security Studies, Centre for Policy Research.

https://www.thehindubusinessline.co...et-deal-to-push-for-tejas/article22859624.ece

 

[mayfair]

^^ Lots of noises coming out from the GoI and "analysts" in favour of MK2..good to see this. For Tejas to fully succeed as a platform, MK2 is essential.

Now this is a news that warms jingo's heart.

 

[BlackJay]

India’s AWACS is low-cost, better than Pakistan’s, says DRDO chief
DRDO chief Dr S Christopher said the indigenous AEW&C built by DRDO using modified Brazilian Embraer jets is cost effective and better than the Swedish systems owned by Pakistan.
By: Express News Service | Ahmedabad |Published: March 1, 2018 10:25 pm

The indigenous airborne early warning and control system built by Defence Research and Development Organisation uses modified Brazilian Embraer jets. (File Photo)
RELATED NEWS

• Centre clears AWACS project
• Ousted ‘Agni man’ Avinash Chander oversaw many key projects
• India can export fighter planes, missiles: DRDO chief

The indigenous airborne early warning and control system (AEW&C) built by Defence Research and Development Organisation using modified Brazilian Embraer jets is cost effective and better than the Swedish systems owned by Pakistan, said DRDO chairman Dr S Christopher at an event in Gujarat University on Thursday.

Giving an insight into various modern technologies being developed for the military, Christopher, delivering the first i-talk organised by Gujarat Innovation Society (GIS), spoke about how DRDO’s AEW&C platform, christened “Netra”, was close to his heart since he was involved in it right from inception. “In 1985, we thought we should make an AWACS (airborne warning and control system) because at that time the US had brought in their own system,” Christopher said while narrating how the DRDO faced teething problems in the project, which also involved a crash.


The DRDO chief said they had gone for a simpler and smaller platform by using the Brazilian Embraer-145 jets when the project was restarted. “It started with a simpler and smaller platform that is the Embraer,” Christopher said, adding how the five-hour endurance of the system was expanded by adding a complex air-to-air refueling facility.

Claiming that the DRDO’s AWACS was cheaper than its Pakistani counterpart, Christopher said except for the aircraft, the electronics was indigenously made. “Except for the aircraft, all the electronics is ours. So when you compare the cost, it is less than what Pakistanis are having; the Swedish system. In addition to that, their aircraft itself is not as good as ours. It is because our is a jet and that is a turboprop,” the DRDO chief said. Pakistan has Saab 2000 Erieye AEW&C from Sweden.


Tejas Mark-II to fly by 2022

Speaking of Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) Tejas, Christopher said HAL had already got an order to manufacture 123 LCAs. “In addition to that, the air force has given in writing another 201 aircraft, which is the next version, that we call as Mark-II. We are working on it and by 2022 it will be flying,” he said

Link-
India’s AWACS is low-cost, better than Pakistan’s, says DRDO chief

 

[Pandeyji]

Speaking of Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) Tejas, Christopher said HAL had already got an order to manufacture 123 LCAs. “In addition to that, the air force has given in writing another 201 aircraft, which is the next version, that we call as Mark-II. We are working on it and by 2022 it will be flying,” he said

Just logged in again to share the same. Party boys, party