ADA Tejas Mark-II/Medium Weight Fighter

[pankaj nema]

Not even required. Against whom are you going to pit LCA tejas? Are they some fifth generation plane with some ultra long range BVR? Tejas will face AIM at the most integrated with some old F 16 radars. ELTA 2052 and integrated I derby with 100 km + range is more than a match against anything China or Pakistan can come up with in next decade after tejas starts using it. Even Astra shall be more than enough for any Chinese Pakistani plane.

How good is the Elta Aesa radar

 

[Enquirer]

How good is the Elta Aesa radar

As regards Elta's 2052 AESA radar, India is the ONLY user - integrated on Jaguar, and soon to integrate on Tejas.
But Elta's experience in AESA radars is extensive. Other AESA radars (ground based, aerostat based etc) developed by Elta are used in extensively by Israel itself.
2052's range is supposedly around 150km-180km.

 

[lcafanboy]

How good is the Elta Aesa radar

ELTA2052 radar is one of the best radar in the world......

 

[Enquirer]

Meteor integration was only considered for Su-30MKI; and Thales refused to integrate it with a Russian radar!!

Just a minor correction: MBDA refused to integrate Meteor with Russian radar (not Thales)

 

[Rahul Singh]

Tejas MK 2

CFD pictures with canards & inlets move forward


A stunner in the works this #Tejas_LCA mk2!!!!

From BharathRakshak

Baby from womb out for public finally.

So all the calculations I put forth about Tejas MK-2 some 8 months ago are getting vindicated one after other.

Worth the wait @ersakthivel.

 

[Rahul Singh]

In 14-day high-intensity combat Air Exercise, LCA performed remarkably well and emerged with best range scores in terms of best weapon delivery by any aircraft fielded in the Gagan Shakti 2018 disclosed Air Marshal Raghunath Nambiar.

http://idrw.org/gagan-shakti-2018-did-lca-tejas-mk1-outshine-jaguar-strike-aircraft-in-its-own-game/ .

--------------------------------------------

"Any aircraft fielded".............WoW!!!!! In very first operational deployment! Nothing gets better.

 

[Rahul Singh]

@Kunal Biswas What happened to Tejas MK-1 thread?

 

[HariPrasad-1]

How good is the Elta Aesa radar

ELTA is a top class AESA radar. French one was exceptionally good but ELTA is very decent. It has a very long scanning range and Integration of our missile shall be very easy as we have already used it in Jaguar. I derby Ex can be easily integrated with ELTA 2052. Iderby EX said to have 80% of Meteor's performance. One should not try to put everything best in every aircraft. When I derby or Astra is more than enough, why should we pay double the price for METEOR. Tejas Mk1 with Astra, I derby is more than enough for anything Pakistan or china can come up with. MK1 will be able to carry 4000 KG warhead, it has very low RCS, It will have top of the line EW and BVR Integrated with ELTA. What more can you ask from a small lightweight fighter?

 

[HariPrasad-1]

In 14-day high-intensity combat Air Exercise, LCA performed remarkably well and emerged with best range scores in terms of best weapon delivery by any aircraft fielded in the Gagan Shakti 2018 disclosed Air Marshal Raghunath Nambiar.

http://idrw.org/gagan-shakti-2018-did-lca-tejas-mk1-outshine-jaguar-strike-aircraft-in-its-own-game/ .

--------------------------------------------

"Any aircraft fielded".............WoW!!!!! In very first operational deployment! Nothing gets better.

Yes, He told that LCA has its own problem but TEJAS exceeded any other aircraft in this area i.e ground attack.

 

[Chinmoy]

Not even required. Against whom are you going to pit LCA tejas? Are they some fifth generation plane with some ultra long range BVR? Tejas will face AIM at the most integrated with some old F 16 radars. ELTA 2052 and integrated I derby with 100 km + range is more than a match against anything China or Pakistan can come up with in next decade after tejas starts using it. Even Astra shall be more than enough for any Chinese Pakistani plane.

It would not be correct to compare two different platform. Each one does have one or other pros and cons.

My only question is what is the doctrine of IAF regarding Tejas? If it has shown exceptional ability in ground attack role, then why stick with Multi Role capability? We have Jaguar and Mig-27 in thos role as of now with Mirage playing the role of Multi Role fighter. We are upgrading Jaguar with latest avionics and we are the only current user of this fighter in any role. Mig 27 and Jaguar anre anyhow reaching EOL. So instead of going for this upgrade why not order the envisaged 123 Tejas in current form for ground attack role. Let the MKIs role out at current pace and evaluate foreign fighters for MMRCA. But give numbers to HAL to work upon. That way they could force HAL to increase production and output too.

 

[HariPrasad-1]

It would not be correct to compare two different platform. Each one does have one or other pros and cons.

My only question is what is the doctrine of IAF regarding Tejas? If it has shown exceptional ability in ground attack role, then why stick with Multi Role capability? We have Jaguar and Mig-27 in thos role as of now with Mirage playing the role of Multi Role fighter. We are upgrading Jaguar with latest avionics and we are the only current user of this fighter in any role. Mig 27 and Jaguar anre anyhow reaching EOL. So instead of going for this upgrade why not order the envisaged 123 Tejas in current form for ground attack role. Let the MKIs role out at current pace and evaluate foreign fighters for MMRCA. But give numbers to HAL to work upon. That way they could force HAL to increase production and output too.

Tejas need to evolve a bit as platform which includes aerodynamic improvement, reduction in weight and all EW and Radar upgrade. As it keeps evolving, we can use it more and more as the substituent. e.g it has currently displayed excellent ground attack capability. now if improves in speed and improves g limit and AOA, it can be very effective as interceptor as well. If we can put couple of hundred kg of petrol, we can improve its utility great deal. All depends on how much it evolves. It can replace MMRCA in many roles and that is a big advantage.

 

[Rahul Singh]

Yes, He told that LCA has its own problem but TEJAS exceeded any other aircraft in this area i.e ground attack.

For an aircraft which has been bestowed with derogatory references such as "Point Defence only Fighter" or a "just a Mig-21 replacement" or a "3-legged Cheetah" etc. beating specialists like Jaguar and Mig-27MLs not to mention other Mulitiroles like Mirage-2000H(if not 5s also) and Mig-29UPGs and even SU-30MKIs is no less a commendable feat especially when grappling with expected teething troubles usual with any newly inducted fighter.

The remark of AM only proves what has been spoken so often that Tejas is an excellent airframe with equally good FCS making it a true multirole platform giving it exceptional stability in A2G mode and superb manoeuvrability in A2A (soon everyone will hear about this also in detail).

 

[Chinmoy]

Tejas need to evolve a bit as platform which includes aerodynamic improvement, reduction in weight and all EW and Radar upgrade. As it keeps evolving, we can use it more and more as the substituent. e.g it has currently displayed excellent ground attack capability. now if improves in speed and improves g limit and AOA, it can be very effective as interceptor as well. If we can put couple of hundred kg of petrol, we can improve its utility great deal. All depends on how much it evolves. It can replace MMRCA in many roles and that is a big advantage.

I agree and that is what envisioned. But to work on that one need fund. For fund flow one need numbers. A mere 40 is not going to make funds flow.

 

[Advaidhya Tiwari]

I agree and that is what envisioned. But to work on that one need fund. For fund flow one need numbers. A mere 40 is not going to make funds flow.

Why does development need orders? Development needs government grant not orders. R&D is done before order is placed. Also, strategic R&D is not done for profits. Everytime you bring your own theories without trying to understand anything or without any intent to get result

 

[Chinmoy]

Why does development need orders? Development needs government grant not orders. R&D is done before order is placed. Also, strategic R&D is not done for profits. Everytime you bring your own theories without trying to understand anything or without any intent to get result

HAL is a PSU. In case of PSU's the whole investment in projects are not done by Government. Government allocate funds for project realization. After that is done the finance had to be provided or obtained by the body itself. It comes in the form of capital investment by investors. In case of HAL it have to do financial management project wise. Every project undertaken by HAL has a fixed financial allotment. If it doesn't get order, it would have to divert fund from other projects into a particular project like Tejas.

Now for investors to invest(in this case government), they would have show sale or atleast numbers in hand. Moreover when you release IPO, government investment comes further down and its the market who invests on you. So unless you show promise in numbers, your R&D doesn't hold ground. Government can't go on and keep on investing on a project endlessly no matter how strategic it is. Till project realization, its fine. But after that for any further development, HAL would have to show numbers for any more fund from investors/ government.

 

[Advaidhya Tiwari]

HAL is a PSU. In case of PSU's the whole investment in projects are not done by Government. Government allocate funds for project realization. After that is done the finance had to be provided or obtained by the body itself. It comes in the form of capital investment by investors. In case of HAL it have to do financial management project wise. Every project undertaken by HAL has a fixed financial allotment. If it doesn't get order, it would have to divert fund from other projects into a particular project like Tejas.

Now for investors to invest(in this case government), they would have show sale or atleast numbers in hand. Moreover when you release IPO, government investment comes further down and its the market who invests on you. So unless you show promise in numbers, your R&D doesn't hold ground. Government can't go on and keep on investing on a project endlessly no matter how strategic it is. Till project realization, its fine. But after that for any further development, HAL would have to show numbers for any more fund from investors/ government.

Who told you all this? No project is fixed financial allotment. Funds keep being sanctioned according to requirements. The investment is not in the form of shares but as grant. Govt is investing in the technology, not the sales. So, the return of technology itself is the return of such investment. As long as better technology is returned, it keeps getting investments. IPO or not has no relevance. The technology of HAL is highly classified and belongs to government exclusively regardless of any private investment or shareholders and hence the money for such projects also comes from govt itself

 

[Chinmoy]

Who told you all this? No project is fixed financial allotment. Funds keep being sanctioned according to requirements. The investment is not in the form of shares but as grant. Govt is investing in the technology, not the sales. So, the return of technology itself is the return of such investment. As long as better technology is returned, it keeps getting investments. IPO or not has no relevance. The technology of HAL is highly classified and belongs to government exclusively regardless of any private investment or shareholders and hence the money for such projects also comes from govt itself

I wonder then why cost has been discussed at the very first general body meeting.....

At the first General Body meeting of the ADA in 1984, the then Finance Minister desired to know the anticipated cost of the LCA programme. He was informed that after taking into consideration inflation within the country and abroad, and providing 8 years for the first flight and three to four years for flight testing, the cost of development was estimated to be Rs.1250 crores, with about Rs.150 crores to be added for every year of delay. Series production was expected to start around 1995.

I wonder what kind of support Dr Raja Ramanna asked from IAF back in 1978 even before starting the project? Support in form of pilots to fly the test aircrafts?

Dr.Raja Ramanna took over as the S.A. around 1978. He felt that achieving some manner of self reliance was still not a lost cause and that it could perhaps be achieved through a tangible fighter aircraft development programme - if the Indian Air Force would support it. It was indicated to the then Air Chief that if the Air Force did not want an indigenously developed aircraft, the relevant research laboratories might as well diversify and take up other (non-aviation) activities. However if the Air Force believed in a measure of self reliance, then that was the time to support an indigenous fighter aircraft development programme.

Moreover what if IAF don't want an indigenous fighter. Government could still pour in funds for technology development right?
Why ask for customer support for that?
Why say that if customer don't want it, then relevant infra would be diverted to another activities?

https://web.archive.org/web/2009030...elected_articles/Vayu special/remembrance.htm

Anyway......... Whom I am arguing with.

Maaf kar do, tumhe sab pata hain.

 

[Immanuel]

ELTA is a top class AESA radar. French one was exceptionally good but ELTA is very decent. It has a very long scanning range and Integration of our missile shall be very easy as we have already used it in Jaguar. I derby Ex can be easily integrated with ELTA 2052. Iderby EX said to have 80% of Meteor's performance. One should not try to put everything best in every aircraft. When I derby or Astra is more than enough, why should we pay double the price for METEOR. Tejas Mk1 with Astra, I derby is more than enough for anything Pakistan or china can come up with. MK1 will be able to carry 4000 KG warhead, it has very low RCS, It will have top of the line EW and BVR Integrated with ELTA. What more can you ask from a small lightweight fighter?

The ELTA is better than the RBE2 in terms of range, resolution and number of targets tracked which is a whopping 64 targets. However LCA's version will be a bit smaller with lower number of T/R modules. That said, it should be able to easily track 1m2 targets at over 120km away.

 

[Advaidhya Tiwari]

I wonder then why cost has been discussed at the very first general body meeting

I don't know when was this first meeting and what kind of cost was discussed- whether money or time or natural resourse or technology transfer?

I wonder what kind of support Dr Raja Ramanna asked from IAF back in 1978 even before starting the project? Support in form of pilots to fly the test aircrafts?

That is because IAF is what decides the fitness of a design or an aircraft for Indian condition. IAF support is needed as IAF tactics and strategy must be matched by the aircraft being developed.

Moreover what if IAF don't want an indigenous fighter. Government could still pour in funds for technology development right?
Why ask for customer support for that?
Why say that if customer don't want it, then relevant infra would be diverted to another activities?

Who is IAF to decide whether it needs indigenous aircraft or not? IAF can only state the specifications of aircraft required and can't decide who the vendor will be. Government decides to pour in money wherever indigenous technology has to be developed when it is lacking. Customer can only say that it does not need a certain type or design of aircraft and if govt sees it to be valid argument, then it won't fund that design. For example, Indian Navy sees no reason to fund the development of nuclear aircraft carrier but seeks to have conventional carrier.

 

[Chinmoy]

I don't know when was this first meeting and what kind of cost was discussed- whether money or time or natural resourse or technology transfer?


That is because IAF is what decides the fitness of a design or an aircraft for Indian condition. IAF support is needed as IAF tactics and strategy must be matched by the aircraft being developed.


Who is IAF to decide whether it needs indigenous aircraft or not? IAF can only state the specifications of aircraft required and can't decide who the vendor will be. Government decides to pour in money wherever indigenous technology has to be developed when it is lacking. Customer can only say that it does not need a certain type or design of aircraft and if govt sees it to be valid argument, then it won't fund that design. For example, Indian Navy sees no reason to fund the development of nuclear aircraft carrier but seeks to have conventional carrier.

That's why I always say.... STUDY.

Why you think there is always talk of cost overrun if cost is not an issue in R&D? India don't have a separate budget for R&D. Even if we would have, then too for any project, government would talk about its cost and return at very first place.

Whatever you are saying is just theory and doesn't hold ground in practical. From time to time government could increase amount sanctioned to a project, but without numbers, they are not going to do it infinitely.

Moreover I provided link. Read it for its history.