Would IAF have worked to induct 80-120 Tejas mk-1 if no MRCA alias MMRCA program

[SpArK]

U contry's and your airfoce's best interests may not be mutually exclusive. But they are not Sub set of one another either.

In other words, IAF inducting Tejas is in best interests of country. But inductin Tejas will put large strain on IAF work load, which could be eased if MMRCA is cancelled with IAF calendar being free for Tejas from 2010-2020 till PAKFA/FGFA induction starts

Induction of Tejas was never IAF's work load.. The work load has always been on HAL and others who has to satisfy the need of IAF. For IAF LCA is just another fighter , but of a homegrown vendor. They will get further orders from them if the fighter gets more lethal in the course of time. The initial 20 which is to based in sulur has been forced upon them. IAF needed a more thrusty , more powerful one.

 

[A.V.]

the MKI is an evolving programa nd independent of the MRCA , even with the mrca the MKI will still be the frontline fighters, come 213 a new advanced configured MKI will be flying irrespective of the numbers of LCA or the MRCA the MKI is still being developed to meet higher capabilities as we speak so i dont think MRCA has got anythign to do with mki numbers the mki numbers will finally tough to levels above 350 if all goes well

just this year we had ordered fresh batch wont be surprised if we order 60 more next year or so and su35BM have been offered and rejected by IAF in facour of more MKI all talks of su35BM and SU33 are fantasy no such prospects ever.

 

[icecoolben]

Induction of Tejas was never IAF's work load.. The work load has always been on HAL and others who has to satisfy the need of IAF. For IAF LCA is just another fighter , but of a homegrown vendor. They will get further orders from them if the fighter gets more lethal in the course of time. The initial 20 which is to based in sulur has been forced upon them. IAF needed a more thrusty , more powerful one.

Completely wrong. LCA Tejas is as much IAF's work load as JAS 39 Gripen is Sweedish Air Force's, Rafale is French Air Force's and Navy's.

Your attitude and IAF's attitudes seem to coincide with one another. May be you should apply for IAF chief's post to continue from Mr. Naik. I'm sure He'll adore u.

 

[icecoolben]

the MKI is an evolving programa nd independent of the MRCA , even with the mrca the MKI will still be the frontline fighters, come 213 a new advanced configured MKI will be flying irrespective of the numbers of LCA or the MRCA the MKI is still being developed to meet higher capabilities as we speak so i dont think MRCA has got anythign to do with mki numbers the mki numbers will finally tough to levels above 350 if all goes well

just this year we had ordered fresh batch wont be surprised if we order 60 more next year or so and su35BM have been offered and rejected by IAF in facour of more MKI all talks of su35BM and SU33 are fantasy no such prospects ever.

No procurement policies are not as rigid as you have made it out to be, consider the latest case of US navy, due to delay of F-35C version, 124 lower tech F-18 E/F SH are making up numbers with increased orders, F-16 are in consideration since F-35 A unit costs are not under acceptable levels. The Super Hornet got life due to two factors A-12 got cancelled, F-14 was too costly to operate.
Even in the Indian Scenario in case of Su-30 MKI program only 40+ 10 from Russia and 140 from HAL were ordered. As squardron numbers continued to fall 40 more were ordered from HAL.

In case of special program we have right here in India, For carrying Brahmos 40 more were ordered; In case MMRCA is dropped, we may not get a default cruise missle from manufacture, so we can go for 40-80 more brahmos carrying MKI. As such atleast the unit price now at $ 108 million for the current order can drop to acceptable levels like $ 60- 70 million. the Brahmos too would become cheaper standing now at $ 2.73 million a piece compared to $ 1.35 mil for strom shaddow.

 

[icecoolben]

why depend on single platform. if one problem arise whole fleet goes down. and also it will be easier for enemy to have full doctrine of single fighter. diversity is important.

although higly unlikly but if fiction is the base of this thread then - we should go for decent number of - tejas , good addition of mk1 and also high upgrade of mirage.

But still what about navy we need some naval version of medium fighters. and they a big need after all india plan to have at least 2 new A/C in near future.

U seem to forget the meaning of Multi-role combat aircraft. Depending on single patform lowers difficuilt of logistics, training and makes the forces very mobile, without caring to ask for specific fighters to carry out specific tasks. Setting up bases which can operate only one type no other.

Fiction is not the base, the base is a scenario thats is good in the context of national interest. If Tejas Mk-1 continues to be just a air defence platform no harm done, there is till time for Jaguar, Mirage and Mig-29 to retire. By them Tejas Mk-2 would have come to be a fully multi-role , swing role, Indian Fighter.

As far as Navy is concerned, yes Naval aircraft do need large strike capability. But I hope Tejas naval version makes it quickly, at 4 tons of ordnance really large for a fleet defence fighter, but too small for a strike fighter. I hope navy can use Mig-29 K 30 nos as strike version armed with Kh-59 k cruise missile and 30 tejas mk-1 with F414 engine as fleet defence fighter on 60,000 ton Vikrant class IAC-2 due to be laid shortly. I wouldn't mind if the just contracted 30 mig-29k are transferred to IAC-2 for strike role repaced by Tejas mk-1 with F414 on Vikrant class IAC-1 themselves. Indian Navy has shown such flexibility afterall at present only operates sea harriers with 3650 kg of ordnance.

General characteristics

* Crew: 1
* Length: 46 ft 6 in (14.2 m)
* Wingspan: 25 ft 3 in (7.6 m)
* Height: 12 ft 2 in (3.71 m)
* Wing area: 201.1 ft² (18.68 m²)
* Empty weight: 14,052 lb (6,374 kg)
* Max takeoff weight: 26,200 lb (11,900 kg)
* Powerplant: 1× Rolls-Royce Pegasus turbofan, 21,500 lbf (95.64 kN)

Performance

* Maximum speed: 635 knots (735 mph, 1,182 km/h)
* Combat radius: 540 nmi (620 mi, 1,000 km)
* Ferry range: 1,740 nmi (2,000 mi, 3,600 km)
* Service ceiling: 51,000 ft (16,000 m)
* Rate of climb: 50,000 ft/min (250 m/s)

Armament

* Guns: 2× 30 mm (1.18 in) ADEN cannon pods under the fuselage, with 130 rounds each
* Hardpoints: 4× under-wing pylon stations, and 1 fuselage pylon on centerline plus 2 attach points for gun pods with a total capability of 8,000 lb (3,630 kg) of payload.
* Rockets: 4× Matra rocket pods with 18 SNEB 68 mm rockets each
* Missiles: **Air-to-air missiles:
o
+ AIM-9 Sidewinder
+ AIM-120 AMRAAM
+ R550 Magic (Sea Harrier FRS51)
o Air-to-surface missile:
+ ALARM Anti-radiation missile (ARM)
+ Martel missile ARM
o Anti-ship missiles:
+ Sea Eagle
* Bombs: A variety of unguided iron bombs (including 3 kg and 14 kg practice bombs) or WE.177 nuclear bomb (until 1992 on RN Sea Harriers[89])
* Others:
o reconnaissance pods or
o 2× auxiliary drop tanks for ferry flight or extended range/loitering time

Avionics

* Blue Vixen radar

Rafale would be great, but we are actally binding ourselves to french systems in this case, I'm not sure if french would allow us to integrate Astra or Sudharsan LGB on them. Too much duplication would take place as IN already has python-4 better than magic-2 missiles, but we cannot integrate Israeli weapons on french plane. Indian navy may show interest in F-35, rafale to paper planes like Naval typhoon and sea Gripen. But it doesn't need to comit at all even after evaluating tham.

 

[Achilles]

LCA is a step towards indiginisation and making nation self reliable for its arms needs. It can be used as a platform to develop its own AMCA. But said that it would not change the past when, HAL Marut and HAL Ajit were only technology demonstrators:emot154:. The primory role of Tejas is to replace aging MIG 21s. Its role is as interceptor and not an frontline aircraft. Need of a medium combat aircraft like Rafel, EF or F16 is imense since its has low RCS and can carry out various offencive tasks in enemy territory where LCA is not designed for that. Hence MRCA is ntended for totaly different need. Also not to forget about the Geopolitical reasons behind the deal.
Never to forget that HAL's experience in composites which was obtained in LCA program was utilized in PAK FA joint development. So the tachnological mark achieved cant be utilized elsewhere in other programs as well. People might argue that why not 126 MKI, but MKI has a huge RCS and a heavy class fighter AC. Hence we need a small medium combat aircraft with distinctive features and as I mentioned previously, it has various purposes to include MRCA in IAF inventry.
I hope in my 1st ever post cleared some daughts.
Regards
:emot112:

 

[icecoolben]

LCA is a step towards indiginisation and making nation self reliable for its arms needs. It can be used as a platform to develop its own AMCA. But said that it would not change the past when, HAL Marut and HAL Ajit were only technology demonstrators:emot154:. The primory role of Tejas is to replace aging MIG 21s. Its role is as interceptor and not an frontline aircraft. Need of a medium combat aircraft like Rafel, EF or F16 is imense since its has low RCS and can carry out various offencive tasks in enemy territory where LCA is not designed for that. Hence MRCA is ntended for totaly different need. Also not to forget about the Geopolitical reasons behind the deal.
Never to forget that HAL's experience in composites which was obtained in LCA program was utilized in PAK FA joint development. So the tachnological mark achieved cant be utilized elsewhere in other programs as well. People might argue that why not 126 MKI, but MKI has a huge RCS and a heavy class fighter AC. Hence we need a small medium combat aircraft with distinctive features and as I mentioned previously, it has various purposes to include MRCA in IAF inventry.
I hope in my 1st ever post cleared some daughts.
Regards
:emot112:

I appreciate that you understand, LCA Tejas is a step the path towards indigenisation. But why did it require us to wait till 1983 to walk that path? the need, Market, requirement to justify development costs, nationalism is not a factor among these

Will post later got to go

 

[duhastmish]

U seem to forget the meaning of Multi-role combat aircraft. Depending on single patform lowers difficuilt of logistics, training and makes the forces very mobile, without caring to ask for specific fighters to carry out specific tasks. Setting up bases which can operate only one type no other.

Fiction is not the base, the base is a scenario thats is good in the context of national interest. If Tejas Mk-1 continues to be just a air defence platform no harm done, there is till time for Jaguar, Mirage and Mig-29 to retire. By them Tejas Mk-2 would have come to be a fully multi-role , swing role, Indian Fighter.

As far as Navy is concerned, yes Naval aircraft do need large strike capability. But I hope Tejas naval version makes it quickly, at 4 tons of ordnance really large for a fleet defence fighter, but too small for a strike fighter. I hope navy can use Mig-29 K 30 nos as strike version armed with Kh-59 k cruise missile and 30 tejas mk-1 with F414 engine as fleet defence fighter on 60,000 ton Vikrant class IAC-2 due to be laid shortly. I wouldn't mind if the just contracted 30 mig-29k are transferred to IAC-2 for strike role repaced by Tejas mk-1 with F414 on Vikrant class IAC-1 themselves. Indian Navy has shown such flexibility afterall at present only operates sea harriers with 3650 kg of ordnance.

General characteristics

* Crew: 1
* Length: 46 ft 6 in (14.2 m)
* Wingspan: 25 ft 3 in (7.6 m)
* Height: 12 ft 2 in (3.71 m)
* Wing area: 201.1 ft² (18.68 m²)
* Empty weight: 14,052 lb (6,374 kg)
* Max takeoff weight: 26,200 lb (11,900 kg)
* Powerplant: 1× Rolls-Royce Pegasus turbofan, 21,500 lbf (95.64 kN)

Performance

* Maximum speed: 635 knots (735 mph, 1,182 km/h)
* Combat radius: 540 nmi (620 mi, 1,000 km)
* Ferry range: 1,740 nmi (2,000 mi, 3,600 km)
* Service ceiling: 51,000 ft (16,000 m)
* Rate of climb: 50,000 ft/min (250 m/s)

Armament

* Guns: 2× 30 mm (1.18 in) ADEN cannon pods under the fuselage, with 130 rounds each
* Hardpoints: 4× under-wing pylon stations, and 1 fuselage pylon on centerline plus 2 attach points for gun pods with a total capability of 8,000 lb (3,630 kg) of payload.
* Rockets: 4× Matra rocket pods with 18 SNEB 68 mm rockets each
* Missiles: **Air-to-air missiles:
o
+ AIM-9 Sidewinder
+ AIM-120 AMRAAM
+ R550 Magic (Sea Harrier FRS51)
o Air-to-surface missile:
+ ALARM Anti-radiation missile (ARM)
+ Martel missile ARM
o Anti-ship missiles:
+ Sea Eagle
* Bombs: A variety of unguided iron bombs (including 3 kg and 14 kg practice bombs) or WE.177 nuclear bomb (until 1992 on RN Sea Harriers[89])
* Others:
o reconnaissance pods or
o 2× auxiliary drop tanks for ferry flight or extended range/loitering time

Avionics

* Blue Vixen radar

Rafale would be great, but we are actally binding ourselves to french systems in this case, I'm not sure if french would allow us to integrate Astra or Sudharsan LGB on them. Too much duplication would take place as IN already has python-4 better than magic-2 missiles, but we cannot integrate Israeli weapons on french plane. Indian navy may show interest in F-35, rafale to paper planes like Naval typhoon and sea Gripen. But it doesn't need to comit at all even after evaluating tham.

dear a country can not run on your - "i HOPE " I THINK , MIGHT BE ,should be , and that will, chances are ,
Tejas took too much time to come -- and still its not there what it was expected to be, the incompetence level of babus can not govern the future of this country, mrca and other will and should come in picture there is enough space for both MRCA and At least 300 tejas if tejas becomes fully functional to its epitome .

 

[icecoolben]

MMRCA - a completely unnecessary purchase, whose costs outweighs its tactical utility

dear a country can not run on your - "i HOPE " I THINK , MIGHT BE ,should be , and that will, chances are ,
Tejas took too much time to come -- and still its not there what it was expected to be, the incompetence level of babus can not govern the future of this country, mrca and other will and should come in picture there is enough space for both MRCA and At least 300 tejas if tejas becomes fully functional to its epitome .

Tejas was never conceived with Indian Navy in mind, thats why I spoke of in a concillatory tone. Don't club the two services together, as well as my attitude towards one of them.

On the other hand, it is the IAF that framed the Air Staff Qualitative Requirements(ASQR). When an aircraft with the same engine, designed and developed by a foreign manufacturer yields to 6570 kgs in empty weight and gets accepted by more than one professional air force other othan the country of origin. I'm talking about JAS-39 gripen. U can't expect a newly formed ADA to develop an aircraft with 5000 kgs emty weight still having Multi-mode radar, internal fuel for a combat radius of 800 kms in hi hi hi configuration with combat load greater than the fighter u r replacing.

Babus are incompetant al rite. So are the rest of us for not challenging their decisions. They are making a decision to throw away $ 10 billion under pressure from IAF without completing the ground analysis. The MMRCA is no strategic investment, it is just an ad hoc move on the chess board to stave off Hard, Real circumstances that will come to haunt us in the future.

People talk of strategic value of deal, can anyone put down their feet and say which country would come out guns blazing with fighter replacements due to attriction to help India if a war broke out on two fronts with China and pakistan? No Europeon country or Russia would dare hold even a candle to china, no other country other than US has the might to stand against China? But the interest of USA lay in preseving the balance of power thereby enthuing peace than escalate the conflict. In short words, US congress would sue for peace, taking us to UN while chinese forces conquer more territory.

Compared to us pakistan is better in terms of home grown technology eg Raad missiles, Babur. Even if we cut off Karkoram, pakistan can produce JF-17, Al Khalid and lots and lots even in face of tremendous attriction. Western arms manufacturers shunning pakistan and its begging bowls have become a boon for indigenisation of its industry. We are probably better off on anti-ballistics technology to pakistan. But thats no cause for comfort.

Is India so far off compared to pakistan's begging bowl state?

NO, India plans to spend $ 112 billion through 2017. We have external debts of $ 237.69 billion, our trade deficit is $ 135 billion. Our reseves are at $ 283.5 billion and forign direct ivestment are $ 50 billion for current fiscal year. Suming inflow -outflow = -39.19. If FDI does not catch up to outflow due to trade deficit, external debt will widen which affects our ratings reflecting in higher lending rates on foreign banks lending to us for arms procurement. This leads to increased procurement costs, added to the 15% arms inflation faced every year. Your deal is not going to be capped to $ 10.54 determined in 2007, just the outright purchases will cost when signing by 2012 10.54*(1+0.15)^5 = $ 21.1997 billion. Along with interest from the bank at just 5% per annum if v r lucky, will cost $ 27.056 billion cumulative till 2017., which is 24% of the procurement budget.This does not even take into account the spare parts cost and is certainly not the total life cycle cost which when calculated in line with other programs leads to 77.1096 over 30 years. If one of the external factors like FDI drops to 0, Indian credit ratings will drop which leads to higher interest rates not just on weapons imports but also palm oil, rice, sugar and every other essential commodity we would be required to buy from abroad that involves foreign exchange, which necessiates increase in taxes. And guess who pays taxes yourself, my father and the very poor that u see struggling to make their ends meet. if you are thinking of buying that fancy house on ECR that u always wanted when u r 30, guess what u need to wait till retirement. This might seem overboard but this is the summation of all the worse that may happen in this world thats essentially unstable due to the weakness of its reserve currency the Dollar. After all, every military motto and planning imply "Hope for the best; prepare for the worst"


http://www.indianexpress.com/news/india-trade-deficit-seen-at-alltime-high/682324/

Why should we need to add too many platforms that only seve to duplicate the capabilities afforded by Tejas and Su-30 mki? Wastage of resources is a serious crime IAF will never be punished for (abandoning Tejas Mk-1 conceived from its own requirements just becos its late and new alternatives are mouth watering).Cancelling this one deal cut down the imports to indegenous product ratio to 6:4 from current 6.5:3.5 ,

Now tell me who is itching to buy that fancy new plane for IAF?:angry_10:

Here are comparisons of Aircraft LCA tejas was conceived to replace

Specifications (Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-21-93)

Data from [1]

General characteristics

* Crew: 1
* Length: 14.5 (with pitot) m (47 ft 6.86 in)
* Wingspan: 7.154 m (23 ft 5.66 in)
* Height: 4.125 m (13 ft 6.41 in)
* Wing area: 23.0 m² (247.3 ft²)
* Gross weight: 8,825 kg (19,425 lb)
* Powerplant: 1 × Tumanskiy R25-300, 40.21 kN (9,040 lbf) thrust dry, 69.62 kN (15,650 lbf) with afterburner each

Performance

* Maximum speed: 2,350 km/h (1,468 mph)
* Maximum speed: Mach 1.9
* Range: (internal fuel) 1,210 km (751 miles)
* Service ceiling: 17,800 m (58,400 ft)
* Rate of climb: 225 m/s (44,280 ft/min)

Armament

* 1x internal 23 mm GSh-23 cannon, plus
* 2x R-27R1 or R-27T or 4x Vympel R-77 or 4x R-60M or R-73E AAM or
* 2x 500 kg (1,102 lbs) bombs

Specifications (MiG-27K)

General characteristics

* Crew: 1 Pilot only
* Length: 1,708 cm (56 ft 0 in) [2] ()
* Wingspan:
o Spread: 1,397 cm (45 ft 10 in) [2]
o Swept: 778 cm (25 ft 6 in) [2] ()
* Height: 500 cm (16 ft 5 in) [2] ()
* Wing area:
o Spread: 37.35 m2 (402.0 sq ft) [2]
o Swept: 34.16 m2 (367.7 sq ft) [2] ()
* Empty weight: 11,908 kg (26,253 lb) (equipped) [2] ()
* Loaded weight: 20,300 kg (44,800 lb) [2] ()
* Max takeoff weight: 20,670 kg (45,570 lb) ()
* Powerplant: 1× Khatchaturov R-29B-300 afterburning turbojet [2]
o Dry thrust: 78.5 kN (17,650 lbf) [2] ()
o Thrust with afterburner: 112.8 kN (25,360 lbf) [2] ()

Performance

* Maximum speed:
o at sea level: Mach 1.10 (1,350 km/h, 839 mph) [2]
o at 8,000-metre altitude (26,250 ft): Mach 1.77 (1,885 km/h, 1,171 mph) [2]
* Combat radius: 780 km (480 mi) ()
o 540 km (290 nmi; 340 mi) (with two Kh-29 ASMs and three drop tanks lo-lo-lo) [2]
o 225 km (120 nmi; 140 mi) (with two Kh-29 ASMs and no external fuel) [2]
* Ferry range: 2,500 km (1,550 mi) ()
* Service ceiling: 14,000 m (46,000 ft) [2] ()
* Rate of climb: 200 m/s (39,400 ft/min) [2] ()
* Wing loading: 605 kg/m² (123.4 lb/ft²) ()
* Thrust/weight: 0.62

Armament

* Guns:
o 1 × GSh-6-30 30 mm cannon with 260-300 rounds [2]
o installed gun pods for (optional) SPPU-22 and SPPU-6
* Hardpoints: One centerline, four fuselage, and two wing glove pylons with a capacity of 4,000 kg (8,800 lb) [2]
* Missiles: preinstalled rocket pods for various (optional) laser, TV and electro-optically guided ASMs and PGMs [2]
* Bombs: general-purpose bombs (optional) [2]

Specifications (Jaguar A)
Orthographically projected diagram of the SEPECAT Jaguar.
The Rolls-Royce Turbomeca Adour Mk 102 turbofan engine.

Data from[citation needed]

General characteristics

* Crew: One
* Length: 16.83 m (55 ft 3 in)
* Wingspan: 8.69 m (28 ft 6 in)
* Height: 4.92 m (16 ft 1 in)
* Wing area: 24 m² (258 ft²)
* Empty weight: 7,000 kg (15,400 lb)
* Loaded weight: 11,000 kg (24,250 lb)
* Max takeoff weight: 15,700 kg (34,600 lb)
* Powerplant: 2× Rolls-Royce/Turbomeca Adour Mk 102 turbofans, 32.5 kN (7,305 lbf) each

Performance

* Maximum speed: 1,593 km/h, 1055 mph (Mach 1.6)
* Range: 535 km (335 mi)
* Ferry range: 3,525 km (2,190 mi)
* Service ceiling: 14,000 m (46,000 ft)
* Thrust/weight: 0.60

Armament

* Guns: 2× 30 mm (1.18 in) ADEN cannons or DEFA cannons, 150 rounds/gun
* Hardpoints: 5 total: 4× under-wing and 1× center-line pylon stations with a capacity of 10,000 lb (4,500 kg) and provisions to carry combinations of:
o Rockets: 8× Matra rocket pods with 18× SNEB 68 mm rockets each
o Missiles: Anglo-French AS-37 Martel missiles
o Bombs: various
o Other: AN/ALQ-101 ECM protection pod (found only on RAF's Jaguar GR.3/3A),[15] Joint Reconnaissance Pod, external drop tanks for extended range/loitering time
* Missiles: 2× AIM-9 Sidewinders or Matra R550 Magics on overwing pylons (Jaguar International and RAF Jaguars only)

Specifications (HAL Tejas)
Three view of the Tejas

Data from lca-tejas.org,[69] indian-military.org[70][verification needed]

General characteristics

* Crew: 1
* Length: 13.20 m (43 ft 4 in)
* Wingspan: 8.20 m (26 ft 11 in)
* Height: 4.40 m (14 ft 9 in)
* Wing area: 38.4 m² (413 ft²)
* Empty weight: 5,680kg (12,522 lb)
* Loaded weight: 9,500 kg (20,945 lb)
* Max takeoff weight: 13,500 kg (31,967 lb)
* Powerplant: 1× General Electric F404-GE-IN20 turbofan
o Dry thrust: 53.9 kN (11,250 lbf)
o Thrust with afterburner: 85 kN (19,000 lbf)
* Internal fuel capacity: 3000 liters
* External fuel capacity: 5×800 liter tanks or 3×1,200 liter tanks, totaling 4,000/3,600 liters

Performance

* Maximum speed: Mach 1.8 (2,376+ km/h at high altitude) at 15,000 m
* Range: 3000 km (1,840 mi (without refueling))
* Service ceiling: 16,500 m (54,000 ft (engine re-igniter safely capable))
* Wing loading: 221.4 kg/m² (45.35 lb/ft²)
* Thrust/weight: .91

Armament

* Guns: 1× mounted 23 mm twin-barrel GSh-23 cannon with 220 rounds of ammunition.
* Hardpoints: 8 total: 1× beneath the port-side intake trunk, 6× under-wing, and 1× under-fuselage with a capacity of >4000 kg external fuel and ordnance
* Missiles:

HAL Tejas carrying R-73 missile and Drop Tank.

* Air-to-air missiles:
o Python 5
o Derby
o Astra BVRAAM
o Vympel R-77 (NATO reporting name: AA-12 Adder)
o Vympel R-73 (NATO reporting name: AA-11 Archer)
* Air-to-surface missiles:
o Kh-59ME TV guided standoff Missile
o Kh-59MK Laser guided standoff Missile
o Anti-ship missile
o Kh-35
o Kh-31
* Bombs:
* KAB-1500L laser guided bombs
* FAB-500T dumb bombs
* OFAB-250-270 dumb bombs
* OFAB-100-120 dumb bombs
* RBK-500 cluster bombs
* Others:
* Drop tanks for ferry flight/extended range/loitering time.
* LITENING targeting pod [71][72][73]

Avionics
Hybrid MMR radar (Israeli EL/M-2032 back end processor with Indian inputs)

Tell me can't Tejas mk-1 be a better replacement for 125 Mig-21 in service which are waiting for MMRCA to replace them, Can't the Tejas mk-2 replace Mig-27 and Jaguar which are schelluled to retire from 2017 onwards. Su-30 planes replaced mig-23 in IAF service which is essentially a ground attack plane, I don't see anyone complaining about it, Isn't increased orders for Su-30 mki enough to hold fort and complement till Tejas can mature into a frontline plane in its own right?

 

[civfanatic]

What I don't like is how the IAF operates so many different types of fighters, while most other air forces operate far less types of frontline combat aircraft.

Currently, we operate six different types of combat aircraft, including four types of fighters/fighter-bombers (MiG-21s, MiG-29s, Mirage 2000s, and Su-30MKIs) and two types of strike aircraft (MiG-27s and Jaguars).

By 2025, let's assume all types except Su-30MKIs are retired, and the LCA, MMRCA, FGFA, and AMCA are inducted. That still leaves five types of combat aircraft in the IAF inventory; in other words, a logistical nightmare.

Why do we need a light, medium, and heavy fighter? Does Russia, US, or any other major air force have a light, medium, and heavy fighter? No, they try to streamline their fighters to fulfill as many roles as possible, thus cutting down on the total number of types in service. So why don't we do the same?

 

[icecoolben]

LCA to be inducted next month- article from deccan herald, the inference

LCA to be inducted next month
New Delhi, Dec 22, DHNS:

After three decades of development, the first squadron of indigenous light combat aircraft (LCA) Tejas is all set to be inducted into the Indian Air Force(IAF) next month.

The first Tejas squadron will receive its initial operational clearance at a function on January 10, catapulting India to a select club of nations that built a fighter plane from scratch. The historic first squadron will be stationed at Sulur near Coimbatore, sources said. Defence Minister A Kantony will be present at the function.

Even though the development began in 1983, the first LCA technology demonstrator flew only in 2001. Four years later, the IAF placed the first order of 20 Tejas at a cost of Rs 2,700 crore. Subsequently, it placed an order for another squadron.

The second LCA squadron will be stationed at Kayathir near Tuticorin, where the IAF is developing a new fighter base. The small World War II base will be converted into a major aviation hub in a few years.

After receiving the initial operational clearance, Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) will manufacture the first 20 Tejas aircraft in two batches of 10 planes each.

So far, HAL has manufactured two technology demonstrators, five prototypes and 28 limited series production aircraft with imported engine. However, HAL will continue to upgrade the indigenous fighter as the IAF plans to induct close to 200 LCAs and 20 twin seater trainer versions in the long run.

Along with the 126 medium multi-role combat aircraft and fifth generation fighter aircraft LCA will be one of the mainstay planes of the IAF in the coming decades. The mark I planes will be inducted by 2014.

The mark II version of the LCA with a more powerful engine, better aerodynamics and advanced avionics is also under development. The naval version of the LCA, to be used in aircraft carriers, are also under development. Most of the delay in the LCA programme was due to the technical difficulties and resource crunch faced by the research team under defence research and development organisation.

The problem was compounded by the sanctioned imposed by the US in 1998 following Pokhran II. All of a sudden, scientists found that the door was shut on them and many key components and equipment needed for producing a fighter plane was simply not available. Subsequently, they had to develop those sub-systems as well.

The booming IT industry in Bangalore and Hyderabad also contributed to the woes of the LCA team with many young and mid-career engineers and technical hands leaving the LCA industry in search of greener pastures.

Only after placing the order in 2005 that the IAF stationed a 14-member LCA induction team, headed by an Air Vice Marshal in Bangalore to steer the indigenous fighter to its destination.

http://www.deccanherald.com/content/122938/lca-inducted-next-month.html

The writer has given less impotance to history.
1.The project may have been conceived in 1983, but u can only design a fighter only after u know which engine it is fabricated around. Rajiv Gandi was instrumental in our improving relationship with US and the offer of engine.

2.Add to that the fighter had to switch over to new Kaveri engine in the production stage so it needed to cater to that demand too, Kaveri's Kabini core Ran only in 1995, so the design had to be kept fluid till then.

But, he seems to have gotten his contemperory facts right though.The writer has given several subtule messages.

1. After the 1998 pokran blasts, development came to a standstill.

2.Due to govt not pay rolling ADA designers in adscence of any work being done, they left taking away experience and thus the dis-continuity to resume immediatly once sanctions were lifted.

The two factors sanctions for 3 years and the discontinuity probably 2 years contributed alleast 5 years of delay.

Last The air force never lifted a finger about mk-2 till 2005. It was only looking for foreign tejas alternatives aka original MRCA, only when it realised Tejas would be rammed down its throat in hefty numbers, it decided to engage in the development so that it can influence and in effect prolong the development cycle. Such a futuristic force, I admire them on that count.

Some may argue Mk-2 orders are going to go through the roof, but Mk-2 is a completely new aircraft and its airframe would require 100 hours of testing atleast, thus resulting in delays. If IAF implies AESA radar is necessary, very high aerodynamics with the heavier load is rquired, the project too won't last more than 40 number orders.


http://www.hindu.com/2008/12/05/stories/2008120561301400.htm

In 2005, the IAF placed an order with Hindustan Aeronautics Limited for 16 fighters and four trainers. The then Defence Minister Pranab Mukherjee said a decision on an additional 20 aircraft was under consideration. But that plan has come a cropper since the overweight, under-powered Tejas does not meet the IAF's minimum air staff requirements (ASR).

The IAF decision though is not the end of the road for the Rs. 6,000-crore LCA programme. It will consider acquiring 125 more Tejas when an improved — Mark 2 (Mk2) — variant is developed. As indicated by an IAF committee in 2004, any further order will be subject to the Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA), the designer and developer of the LCA programme, showing "firm visibility that the aircraft will meet the ASR."

Recently, the IAF even made a few suggestions on improvements in Tejas Mk2, including a more powerful engine, optimisation of the aerodynamic qualities and weight of the aircraft and "dropping and replacing" certain parts to take care of obsolescence.

Tejas Mk2 will take a few years to fructify, the biggest challenge being choosing a new powerful engine. In December, the ADA is expected to issue a request for proposal to General Electric for its GE F414 and to the European consortium Eurojet for EJ200, in a bid to procure 99 engines (with an option to buy another 49).

All the above assumptions made above were made in 2005, when Tejas was powered by F404 F2J3 producing 75 kn of thrust, the present Engine F404 IN20 produces 85 kn of thrust, I don't understand why IAF cannot be satisfied by an engineering solution like upgrading F404 IN20 with components developed for F414 Enhanced Performance/Durability programmes to produce 90+ kn thrust and induct Tejas mk-1 as it is and impove it in batches of 40 giving total of 120 orders to replace mig-21 bison then work on building new plane Tejas mk-2 with new engine to repace mig-27 and Jaguar in perhaps 200 numbers.

 

[icecoolben]

Indian press needs to cultivate specialised journalists with technical background

HereS another example of Indian crappy amateurish journalism at its analytical best

Since it involves Tejas programme I'm pasting it here, with patriots like these who needs enemies from accross the border.:emot100:

Can LCA Tejas Do the Job?
The LCA Tejas has been lauded a lot by the media and government. But will it be formidable in skies if a war breaks out in near future?
Can LCA Tejas Do the Job?
Enlarge Image
Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) Tejas is the most talked about indigenous aircraft being developed in India by the HAL. It's a 4.5 generation aircraft and also has an element of stealth as its radar signature is very small because of its size and shape. If the design is to be considered, it's absolutely brilliant. But, the question is, 'can it perform the tough job of protecting the Indian skies?'

Well, seems not in the current scenario. There are several reasons behind this; the first being its speed. Though the HAL says that it can reach Mach 2; the top speed of Tejas recorded till date is only Mach 1.3. It sounds nice, but is dead slow to dodge an incoming missile flying at speed of nearly Mach 4. The average speeds of other 4.5 generation aircraft are above Mach 2.2. So, if the aircraft runs out of ammunition during a combat, it has no way to escape.

Speed of an aircraft plays a crucial role in a dogfight too. From the very beginning of aerial warfare, continuous efforts are being made to produce a faster and more maneuverable aircraft. And history says faster aircraft have always won. So, in the era of fifth generation fighters that can reach supersonic speeds even without using their afterburners, can Tejas survive?

If we talk about advanced avionics, they surely increase performance in fighting, but in desperate situations, the pilots have to go back to the basics. Slow speed affects the performance of Tejas in many areas. Tejas is a light category aircraft. This means it cannot carry much armament for beyond visual range (BVR) combat. The pilot will have to switch to its 23 mm twin-barreled GSh cannon in an intense fight. Here speed and maneuverability play their part.

Initially, the Tejas was to be fitted with indigenously built GTRE GTX-35VS Kaveri engine, but the Kaveri program has been marred by many technical and financial difficulties. Very less has been revealed to public regarding actual difficulties in development of Kaveri, but it is known that the engine has a tendency to throw turbine blades. Because of this, blades and digital engine control systems had to be procured from French manufacturer SNECMA. After Kaveri failed high altitude test in Russia in mid-2004, Tejas was fitted with General Electric F404-GE-IN20 engine, but the HAL said that all production aircraft will be fitted with Kaveri engines and the technical faults in the engine will be corrected very soon.

As technical flaws continued to occur, in 2008, it was formally announced that Kaveri engine will not be ready for Tejas in time and an in-production powerplant will have to be purchased from foreign companies. The contenders are likely to be the Eurojet EJ200 and the General Electric F414 engines. But the selection process will take its time and till then the first operational squadron of Tejas will be fitted with the GE F404 engine. The F404 engine cannot provide enough thrust to Tejas for combat maneuvers, thus restricting speed and ability to fight.

Another weakness of Tejas is lack of thrust vectoring. It's not that the Tejas is not agile, but here we are talking about 'super maneuverability' which is essential now-a-days. Super maneuverability is achieved by directing the thrust developed by engine in required direction (thrust vectoring). With the help of it, an aircraft can perform almost impossible maneuvers.

The Sukhoi Su-30 MKI currently serving in the Indian Air Force has the most perfect thrust vectoring system ever built. The aircraft remains highly maneuverable even at very high angles of attack and near-zero speeds without stalling. It is feared as well as respected all over the world for this quality. But, with no sufficient speed and lack of super maneuverability, Tejas will be a sitting duck for enemy fighters.

It's not the first time when a brilliant design by HAL is lagging behind just because of lack of a powerful engine. The same thing had happened with HAL HF-24 Marut, the first supersonic aircraft built in India. Designed by legendary designer Kurt Tank, the Marut could never be used to its complete potential just because of lack of thrust. HAL should have had taken a lesson from it in the development of Kaveri engine, which was powerful enough to give Tejas supercruise ability. However, it also lacked thrust vectoring.

Third and the most important factor is time being taken to complete the project. The LCA project is already delayed a lot because of the snags in Kaveri engine. It is still undergoing trials and may take several more years to enter full production. The absence of a perfectly suitable engine is contributing in making the things even worse. Even if it is inducted in the air force within two or three years, it will be equipped with the inefficient GE F404 engine. So, it is possible that it may not be able to deliver its best when it is needed the most.

The LCA project shows a clear picture of government's casual approach towards defense research and development. After independence, India has built only two indigenous fighter aircraft and only one tank. India is currently facing a tough challenge of curbing the ever increasing cross-border terrorism and the Naxal menace within. Apart from this, there's always a threat from our hostile neighbor. In these circumstances, the government should have paid more attention towards defense projects. Let's hope that they take a lesson from the LCA project and don't repeat the same mistakes in the development of new fifth generation fighter. Amen.

By Shreyas Holay
Published: 7/8/2010

And a good comment

Only Tejas PV-1 can accept Kaveri engine. Whether u can understand or not, F404 IN20 is the engine of Tejas, it now delivers 85 kn of thrust. With a firm commitment of 80 Tejas mk-1 orders if GE is given orders for 80 engines they can make an improved 90 kn variant with technlogy and components developed for F414 engine.

First any knowledgeble aviation specialist can tell u that BVR missiles are essentially for air defence or fighter escort, a fighter aircraft in such configuration never carries more than 2000 kgs of payload, while Tejas mk-1 has capacity to carry 4000+ kg of weapons load. LCA has payload capacity better than mig-21 (2 tons) it replaces, these mig-21 themselves carry R-77 BVR missiles. Just because U haven't seen a report of Tejas testing BVR doesn't mean, it cannnot. BVR tests with Derby missiles will be done shortly pls wait till then. R-77 integratin will take time due to rewriting souce codes to ensure compatibility between R-77 and El-2032 processor.

When Chobam designs and fits refueller on Tejas mk-1, it can defeinitely be postioned in airbases that stand hugging front lines with pakistan. A low wingloading means , higher lift for given thrust compared to other aircraft in its class, which gives a short field capability. As far as the 1.3 is concerned, LSP-6 will be equipped to open the flight profile of airframe to the design specifications like mach 2 and 28deg angle of attack.
Do u even know what mach number stands for?
Difference between velocity, speed, reynolds number and mach number?

Get your articles evaluated by an aeronautical engineer before getting into technical aspects of an aircraft. U amateur journalists are a sham produced by this hyper active media.

http://www.buzzle.com/articles/can-lca-tejas-do-the-job.html

 

[Illusive]

No way MRCA is going to be dropped, even if dropped India would had to make a far more superior LCA than it is now. India can gain a lot in MRCA programme not only by getting state of the art fighters but with it the tech to develop superior platforms than LCA. For a comprehensive air force we need fighters of all class like LCA, MRCA and air superiority planes like MKI and in future FGFA.

Current scenario doesn't allow us to make compromises in our defence deals. Our hostile neighbours are developing their armed forces rapidly and our govt. is doing the right thing by going for MRCA than just LCA. We need not go indigenous completely because its a step for India to have stronger international ties to achieve far greater objectives.

 

[icecoolben]

No way MRCA is going to be dropped, even if dropped India would had to make a far more superior LCA than it is now. India can gain a lot in MRCA programme not only by getting state of the art fighters but with it the tech to develop superior platforms than LCA. For a comprehensive air force we need fighters of all class like LCA, MRCA and air superiority planes like MKI and in future FGFA.

Current scenario doesn't allow us to make compromises in our defence deals. Our hostile neighbours are developing their armed forces rapidly and our govt. is doing the right thing by going for MRCA than just LCA. We need not go indigenous completely because its a step for India to have stronger international ties to achieve far greater objectives.

you have said mmrca is required to face threats posed by neighbours, what is exactly the threat our neighbours jf-17 of pakistan, j-10 of china and su-27,30. Our su-30 mki are widely acknowledged to be the best flanker variant.. The chinese have 400 flankers but they are dispersed far and wide, taiwan is their primary threat, then there is Japan, we had ranked pretty low on chinese radar till we were gazed upon by USA. The need of the moment in Indo-tibet border are quick reaction anti-aircraft missiles, so that our fighters can be freed for tactical strikes. Our air bases on the western front are 300 km from border mostly, here the need for range is non-existent for an air defence fighter aircraft. The air force is trying to cap this procurement at 126, HAL is seeking maximum technology which OEM say Indian industry is not capable of absorbing, the vendors are trying to get their own stuff into LCA tejas, 50% offsets which manufacturers are unwilling to part of and most aircraft are still yet to fulfil all of IAF wishlist regarding AESA radar and engines same as Tejas. Infact Eurofighter and Rafale are war fighting philosophy of older generation to counter su-27 cloaked with new generation engine and avionics, buying them would be akin to excepting we have no faith in flanker H, you have to understand rafale and eurofighter do not complement the su-30 in fact they compete with it for resources. I don't need to tell u how outdated the airframe of F-16 and F-18 are. Add to that the USAF is replacing F-16 and F-18 is a trainwreck of problems, their life in service is hanging by a thread due to delay in F-35. The mig-35 would be the worse choice, financial stability and viability of platform is essential to ensure economy of scale, with no Russian orders running into 100s, no country will buy them. The gripen ng is as much a paper plane as Tejas mk-2 is if no order comes from brazil or India, until Sweden orders them post 2017.
the only platform that would be complementary to Su30 mki and can be progressively upgraded with our own technology developed as part of present and future programs is the Lca Tejas.

 

[warriorextreme]

India's MMRCA battle enters the final rounds
By Greg Waldron

A shortlist for India's medium multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA) competition is to be drawn up in April or May.

Valued at around $10 billion, the requirement is for 126 aircraft, of which 18 will be sold as flyaways. The remaining 108 will be co-manufactured with India's Hindustan Aeronautics. Six aircraft types are involved in the fighter contest.

"All the technical evaluations are done," says an industry source. "The next stage will be a downselect, likely in April or May after the Aero India show [9-13 February]. This will determine which aircraft go into contract negotiations."

Another source, however, indicates that there is no fixed number of aircraft for the shortlist, and that all six aircraft types could, in theory at least, advance to the contract stage.

The six contenders are the Boeing F/A-18 E/F Super Hornet, Dassault Rafale, Eurofighter Typhoon, Lockheed Martin F-16 Block 60, Saab Gripen, and RSK MiG-35.

The evaluation process has been long and arduous. An initial tender stipulated 660 requirements, and the initial proposals issued by the airframers ran to 5,000-6,000 pages each. Comprehensive field tests of the individual aircraft were then undertaken.

The field tests included flying the aircraft - borrowed from various air forces - to India at the expense of the manufacturers. There they were subjected to batteries of tests that reflect India's varied geography of tropical, desert, and mountainous regions.

Tests took place at Bangalore (a tropical region), Jaisalmer (desert), and the Himalayan air base of Leh, said to be the highest operational air base in the world.

"We spent quite a lot on the tests with no guarantee of a sale," says an executive involved in the race. "That said, the air force got a very good impression of all the aircraft."

Typically, India seeks offsets of 30% for defence programmes, but the requirement has been raised to 50% for the MMRCA as the nation targets job creation and technology transfer.

Hindustan Aeronautics chairman Ashok Nayak says that development of the production capacity required to produce the eventual MMRCA winner is already under way.

"We will have to set up new infrastructure for this," says Nayak. "It won't happen in one of our existing factories, but hopefully will still be in Bangalore."

He estimates that Hindustan Aeronautics alone will employ 3,500 to produce the MMRCA, and that it will take about three years to set up the facility.


http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NEWS/newsrf.php?newsid=14040

 

[icecoolben]

India's MMRCA battle enters the final rounds
By Greg Waldron


Hindustan Aeronautics chairman Ashok Nayak says that development of the production capacity required to produce the eventual MMRCA winner is already under way.

"We will have to set up new infrastructure for this," says Nayak. "It won't happen in one of our existing factories, but hopefully will still be in Bangalore."

He estimates that Hindustan Aeronautics alone will employ 3,500 to produce the MMRCA, and that it will take about three years to set up the facility.


http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NEWS/newsrf.php?newsid=14040

He has to keep hid job doesn't he, further he will go down in history as the legend on whose leadership HAL xxx division was opened to manufacture western yyy aircraft and has survived the onslaught of Tejas and AMCA to manufacture F-35 and American Sixth Generation Fighter Aircraft to emerge as a sucessful enterprise in 2050.

 

[Achilles]

Dear Icecoolben,
LCA was not the first FAC program undertook by HAL. As I said in my previous post HAL Marut and HAL Ajit were also build indegenously by india. But Building a good fighter jet needs experience, facilities and lot of funds. US is bulding AC's from last 110yrs. and rest of the giants in this buisness as well. We Indians have a habit of digging well when we get thirsty, and not in advanced. Thats y we suffered in LCA program. Though have to mention that India build indegenously many defence euipments that we cant even think of. I have read one such article, when I wondered whether ours solders gets all these stuff as well. So thats the other point, but my point is we are making process but very slowly. We need to catch up these race of arms generations. that y we cant rely on LCA.

 

[ashicjose]

What do u suggest, we foster mig-35, gripen ng or the others? Aircfaft building, Security are professional work, emotional attachments have no revelance. Support arguements with data and analysis.

sorry for being late for the reply,no one become super power in just one day its a process of decades be patient our day will come.otherwise we will be dependent on others.

 

[icecoolben]

On the contrary LCA Tejas is india's chance to catch up

One of the reasons we could not bring HF marut follow on and HAL ajeet upto production was they became obsolent on face of relentless pursuit of new programs by USA, Europe And USSR. The reason was the pace of investment in new program in western countries and the erstwhile USSR outstripped our own by a large margin, they were essentialy subsidising their arms manufacturing industries in the name of national security, many programs were just closed at the drop of a hat, and new programs commenced immediately, at one point of time the percentage of military expenditure reached 11 % in USA, 10 % in Europe and 24 % in USSR which necessarily provided them endless resources in R&D a previlage which India with its never increase 3 % couldn't match. Their expenditure was justified too because then Europe was ground Zero, we were necessarly buying arms only to balance out pakistan from reaching conventional superiority due to western benevelence. The USSR was our strategic guarenteer against both the chinese and lesser extent American threat. We were buying weapons from europe only to balance the excessive soviet clout with 75% of our arsenal full of their weapons. Right now, the tables are turned with Chinese rise and soviet demise, Asia is the new ground zero. We are chest thumping as an emerging power, one of the poles of a multi-polar world, all these will remain only on paper unless we are supported by a pillar of hard power that comes with strategic autonomy afforded by designing, developmi and manufacturing for our own weapons for military utility.
The Europeons do not necessarily have a threat to build up their conventional or nuclear forces, during cold war their average aircraft programme lasted only 10 years max, but now with funding being stripped programmes like Eurofighter and Rafale have stretched 20 years,, in other words no upgrades will be obsolent in no time compared to even chinese products. this is India's moment to catch up with the hasbeens of world powers and overtake them on global stage. In the former nations that supplied us with weapons, programmes are being rationalised, other than the USA every other country values economics more than security threat which by all means for them is non-existent, further the consolidation of Europe's arms industry means most programmes would be supra national requiring consensus, hence compromising on our specific needs and we will be forced to play par with others, this would be the classic case if we went to partner the Eurofighter consortium . the asians have entered the race korean f/a 50, KFX, japanese F-2, ATD-X, Chinese J-10, pakistan jf-17 and turkey national fighter whether westerners like it or not with their limited resources, they can move no faster than a snail, their corporates will partner domestic firms in asian countries to develop weapons systems, if business goes well they will establish a presence that could well be larger than even in their home country, EADS is looking at such a prospect in India. You can see these visibly in Europeon forces deploying Israeli drones in afghanistan, while their own programmes are on going. One reason though not the overwhelming, Israel spends as much as 20% of gdp on defence, while Europe's biggest spender is France which has a cap of 2%, Israel used to buy french fighters in the 60s, now the tables are turned. Why can't India be next in line?
U seem to be of the belief that MMRCA are required to defend our air space, but modern air warfare has progressed beyond a phase where point defence has been taken over by a three tiered system of AWACS, long range SAMs and quick reaction SAMs. MMRCA can only be deployed as tactical and deep strike air-craft, a job Su-30 has performed commendably in the last decade, Rafale and Eurofighter were conceived to directly compete against Su30 in warfare and against F-15 in sales. If one of such aircraft is selected, the aircraft and Su30 would compete for the IAF's manpower resources, money and time which are by all means finite within a given budget, I hope u read the first page where I quoted why soviet PFI program got split into TPFI and LPFI, inducting mmrca would be a folly that would come out only when a CAG report is tabled in 2020. U seem to believe Mmrca have partial stealth capability, the RCS of su30 is 20 sqm with 14 stations loaded with 8 tons of weapons, while mmrca rcs range from 0.5 for super hornet to 1.2 for F-16 (sorry can't provide source)in clean configuration, no drag. When weapons are hung especially A To G munitions in the range of 6 to 8 tons, the rcs would baloon to 10 to 15 sqm. A stealthy version of rafale was proposed but it was too cost prohibitive to develop for dassalt. Consequently Tejas is small, even after loading its RCS may not exceed 5 sqm, with an inherent degree of visual stealth is a better compliment for su-30. U talked of NATO Exercises in most exercises the Smaller gripen trumped F-16, F-15 and even Eurofigters. In an exercise, though outnumbered by blue forces comprising of Typhoons and F-16, red forces comprised of gripens made it through destroyed the target and got back with a overwhelming kill ratio that included a typhoon. Small aircraft doesn't necessarily mean less capabilities, the only limitation of small aircraft is range on internal fuel which is already provide by su-30 for IAF, in case of LCA tejas drop tanks are present and chobam has just been engaged to build refuelles pods for the Indian plane. Talking of stealth, Any stealth capability we can get soon would be of the order of 0.5 sqm advertised for the FGFA which is very low by American standards. But as good against our neighbours.
this is a completely useless purchase that serves for political diplomacy through an extension of weapons sales than serve any tactical utility to IAF.

 

[ashicjose]

our leaders may be corrupted but i dont think they are going to put our country in danger and with this deal we got some liverage on west.