ADA Tejas (LCA) News and Discussions

[nitesh]

When people are blindly running around claiming LCA inducted with "severe deficiencies" and trying to show it as waste of money and all that are conveniently forgetting/not aware how other fighters got inducted in other countries for ex. when EF was inducted it was called as treancahe 1 which was not able to field any BVR weapons or ground attack weapons, even now Tranache 2 is not certified to do ground attack. But it was inducted to get experience with the machine. When F 16 was inducted it was termed as "widow maker" but US air force stuck with that and improved over it despite having severe deficiencies persisted with it even in gulf war time. And now it is the one of the most successful fighter around the world. If only there forces could have acted as hard nosed customers and kept delaying the induction these machines could not have been called as successful project.

And coming to the point of buying from outside what is best. The EF project was conceived in 1971. Why? They could always buy from US which is one of the closes allies for Europe and provides most of the fire power to NATO. Reason is strategic independence, we have seen US rejecting source codes to Britain for F 35. So basically if European nations keep buying US weapons there foreign policies will always needs to be aligned to US or there forces will suffer. This is the only reason for them to consistently back up the EF project even after not reaching to the "best" available in the market. So are they just wasting there national resources? And so they must be tagged as fools or what?

The best example is France, even after being in NATO they always develop there own product, the reason is simple to have strategic independence.

Coming to MKI, was it the same plane when it was conceived in 1996 with the basic SU 30 frame already available? No we bought 18 Su 30 K with us and paid for all the development funds and till now not all the planes are in the same level as we are inducting the series 3 of that aircraft, and by the time deliveries will be complete they have to be upgraded as there engine is under powered. So if IAF could have waited for all the developments to complete and not invested on the bases and planes to gain the experience, could we have seen such a fine machine with us? The best part is that by using those K's IAF was able to learn the spares management and able to train the technicians to carry out the daily maintenance job. Well now Russia is planning to sell the Su 35 which carry forward the development of Su 30 to China which is our enemy. Ironic isn't it


So we should think beyond the DDM's half baked reports. Some examples:

LCA was supposed to carry R 60 missiles but mid way the ASR changed that it should carry the R 73 which is double the weight of R 60 so the wing has been strengthened and now it fires the R 73 which MiG29 does not do as of now. Even Mirage does not carry such capable missile as of now.
Well Russia had refused to share the source code for integration purpose (ref: retd. air marshal rajkumar's book), but DRDO folks have done it, obviously it has taken time.

When we calculate the endurance time of LCA we conveniently forget that it has option of in flight refueling which increases it's range and loiter time .

When we criticize LCA we forget that MKI uses the same mission computer developed for LCA. So money spent on LCA has already started providing the returns.

We forget that LCA was using proprietary hardware like any other machines are using but due to IAF's request DRDO changed the LCA architecture to open standards as it helps in reducing the upgrade cost and most importantly time. But guess what it also needed some time.

The avionics developed for LCA have been used to upgrade the Mig 27.

The pilot support system developed for LCA has been tested now for MKI.

These are some of the examples where this development program has helped us.


Guys everything is not black and white in harsh world of geo politics, if our forces are dependent on foreign weapons, then we will be hostage to there whims and fancies. And there is no easy way out of this, most of the weapons systems we are developing is for the first time, we have to improve upon them. there is no other way out. If we keep ridiculing our own products, then our (tax payer's) hard earned money will be used to fill coffers of the foreign companies and it was/is/will be used to arm twist us.

Well it is not to say that what ever has happened/happening by our agencies is perfect. And yes they also have realised the mistakes and moved on. Things are changing, and changing in the right direction.

 

[RAM]

When people are blindly running around claiming LCA inducted with "severe deficiencies" and trying to show it as waste of money and all that are conveniently forgetting/not aware how other fighters got inducted in other countries for ex. when EF was inducted it was called as treancahe 1 which was not able to field any BVR weapons or ground attack weapons, even now Tranache 2 is not certified to do ground attack. But it was inducted to get experience with the machine. When F 16 was inducted it was termed as "widow maker" but US air force stuck with that and improved over it despite having severe deficiencies persisted with it even in gulf war time. And now it is the one of the most successful fighter around the world. If only there forces could have acted as hard nosed customers and kept delaying the induction these machines could not have been called as successful project.

And coming to the point of buying from outside what is best. The EF project was conceived in 1971. Why? They could always buy from US which is one of the closes allies for Europe and provides most of the fire power to NATO. Reason is strategic independence, we have seen US rejecting source codes to Britain for F 35. So basically if European nations keep buying US weapons there foreign policies will always needs to be aligned to US or there forces will suffer. This is the only reason for them to consistently back up the EF project even after not reaching to the "best" available in the market. So are they just wasting there national resources? And so they must be tagged as fools or what?

The best example is France, even after being in NATO they always develop there own product, the reason is simple to have strategic independence.

Coming to MKI, was it the same plane when it was conceived in 1996 with the basic SU 30 frame already available? No we bought 18 Su 30 K with us and paid for all the development funds and till now not all the planes are in the same level as we are inducting the series 3 of that aircraft, and by the time deliveries will be complete they have to be upgraded as there engine is under powered. So if IAF could have waited for all the developments to complete and not invested on the bases and planes to gain the experience, could we have seen such a fine machine with us? The best part is that by using those K's IAF was able to learn the spares management and able to train the technicians to carry out the daily maintenance job. Well now Russia is planning to sell the Su 35 which carry forward the development of Su 30 to China which is our enemy. Ironic isn't it


So we should think beyond the DDM's half baked reports. Some examples:

LCA was supposed to carry R 60 missiles but mid way the ASR changed that it should carry the R 73 which is double the weight of R 60 so the wing has been strengthened and now it fires the R 73 which MiG29 does not do as of now. Even Mirage does not carry such capable missile as of now.
Well Russia had refused to share the source code for integration purpose (ref: retd. air marshal rajkumar's book), but DRDO folks have done it, obviously it has taken time.

When we calculate the endurance time of LCA we conveniently forget that it has option of in flight refueling which increases it's range and loiter time .

When we criticize LCA we forget that MKI uses the same mission computer developed for LCA. So money spent on LCA has already started providing the returns.

We forget that LCA was using proprietary hardware like any other machines are using but due to IAF's request DRDO changed the LCA architecture to open standards as it helps in reducing the upgrade cost and most importantly time. But guess what it also needed some time.

The avionics developed for LCA have been used to upgrade the Mig 27.

The pilot support system developed for LCA has been tested now for MKI.

These are some of the examples where this development program has helped us.


Guys everything is not black and white in harsh world of geo politics, if our forces are dependent on foreign weapons, then we will be hostage to there whims and fancies. And there is no easy way out of this, most of the weapons systems we are developing is for the first time, we have to improve upon them. there is no other way out. If we keep ridiculing our own products, then our (tax payer's) hard earned money will be used to fill coffers of the foreign companies and it was/is/will be used to arm twist us.

Well it is not to say that what ever has happened/happening by our agencies is perfect. And yes they also have realised the mistakes and moved on. Things are changing, and changing in the right direction.

Good points Nitesh.Thats why I always support for strategic independence through indigenisation though its has limitations and time consuming.And to achieve futursitic Avionic platforms and technological maturity of latest generation,its mandatory that we should support LCA like projects in future.

 

[civfanatic]

When people are blindly running around claiming LCA inducted with "severe deficiencies" and trying to show it as waste of money and all that are conveniently forgetting/not aware how other fighters got inducted in other countries for ex. when EF was inducted it was called as treancahe 1 which was not able to field any BVR weapons or ground attack weapons, even now Tranache 2 is not certified to do ground attack. But it was inducted to get experience with the machine. When F 16 was inducted it was termed as "widow maker" but US air force stuck with that and improved over it despite having severe deficiencies persisted with it even in gulf war time. And now it is the one of the most successful fighter around the world. If only there forces could have acted as hard nosed customers and kept delaying the induction these machines could not have been called as successful project.

And coming to the point of buying from outside what is best. The EF project was conceived in 1971. Why? They could always buy from US which is one of the closes allies for Europe and provides most of the fire power to NATO. Reason is strategic independence, we have seen US rejecting source codes to Britain for F 35. So basically if European nations keep buying US weapons there foreign policies will always needs to be aligned to US or there forces will suffer. This is the only reason for them to consistently back up the EF project even after not reaching to the "best" available in the market. So are they just wasting there national resources? And so they must be tagged as fools or what?

The best example is France, even after being in NATO they always develop there own product, the reason is simple to have strategic independence.

Coming to MKI, was it the same plane when it was conceived in 1996 with the basic SU 30 frame already available? No we bought 18 Su 30 K with us and paid for all the development funds and till now not all the planes are in the same level as we are inducting the series 3 of that aircraft, and by the time deliveries will be complete they have to be upgraded as there engine is under powered. So if IAF could have waited for all the developments to complete and not invested on the bases and planes to gain the experience, could we have seen such a fine machine with us? The best part is that by using those K's IAF was able to learn the spares management and able to train the technicians to carry out the daily maintenance job. Well now Russia is planning to sell the Su 35 which carry forward the development of Su 30 to China which is our enemy. Ironic isn't it


So we should think beyond the DDM's half baked reports. Some examples:

LCA was supposed to carry R 60 missiles but mid way the ASR changed that it should carry the R 73 which is double the weight of R 60 so the wing has been strengthened and now it fires the R 73 which MiG29 does not do as of now. Even Mirage does not carry such capable missile as of now.
Well Russia had refused to share the source code for integration purpose (ref: retd. air marshal rajkumar's book), but DRDO folks have done it, obviously it has taken time.

When we calculate the endurance time of LCA we conveniently forget that it has option of in flight refueling which increases it's range and loiter time .

When we criticize LCA we forget that MKI uses the same mission computer developed for LCA. So money spent on LCA has already started providing the returns.

We forget that LCA was using proprietary hardware like any other machines are using but due to IAF's request DRDO changed the LCA architecture to open standards as it helps in reducing the upgrade cost and most importantly time. But guess what it also needed some time.

The avionics developed for LCA have been used to upgrade the Mig 27.

The pilot support system developed for LCA has been tested now for MKI.

These are some of the examples where this development program has helped us.


Guys everything is not black and white in harsh world of geo politics, if our forces are dependent on foreign weapons, then we will be hostage to there whims and fancies. And there is no easy way out of this, most of the weapons systems we are developing is for the first time, we have to improve upon them. there is no other way out. If we keep ridiculing our own products, then our (tax payer's) hard earned money will be used to fill coffers of the foreign companies and it was/is/will be used to arm twist us.

Well it is not to say that what ever has happened/happening by our agencies is perfect. And yes they also have realised the mistakes and moved on. Things are changing, and changing in the right direction.

Great post with great points. If there were a thank you button you would have my thanks.

 

[Anshu Attri]

When people are blindly running around claiming LCA inducted with "severe deficiencies" and trying to show it as waste of money and all that are conveniently forgetting/not aware how other fighters got inducted in other countries for ex. when EF was inducted it was called as treancahe 1 which was not able to field any BVR weapons or ground attack weapons, even now Tranache 2 is not certified to do ground attack. But it was inducted to get experience with the machine. When F 16 was inducted it was termed as "widow maker" but US air force stuck with that and improved over it despite having severe deficiencies persisted with it even in gulf war time. And now it is the one of the most successful fighter around the world. If only there forces could have acted as hard nosed customers and kept delaying the induction these machines could not have been called as successful project.

And coming to the point of buying from outside what is best. The EF project was conceived in 1971. Why? They could always buy from US which is one of the closes allies for Europe and provides most of the fire power to NATO. Reason is strategic independence, we have seen US rejecting source codes to Britain for F 35. So basically if European nations keep buying US weapons there foreign policies will always needs to be aligned to US or there forces will suffer. This is the only reason for them to consistently back up the EF project even after not reaching to the "best" available in the market. So are they just wasting there national resources? And so they must be tagged as fools or what?

The best example is France, even after being in NATO they always develop there own product, the reason is simple to have strategic independence.

Coming to MKI, was it the same plane when it was conceived in 1996 with the basic SU 30 frame already available? No we bought 18 Su 30 K with us and paid for all the development funds and till now not all the planes are in the same level as we are inducting the series 3 of that aircraft, and by the time deliveries will be complete they have to be upgraded as there engine is under powered. So if IAF could have waited for all the developments to complete and not invested on the bases and planes to gain the experience, could we have seen such a fine machine with us? The best part is that by using those K's IAF was able to learn the spares management and able to train the technicians to carry out the daily maintenance job. Well now Russia is planning to sell the Su 35 which carry forward the development of Su 30 to China which is our enemy. Ironic isn't it


So we should think beyond the DDM's half baked reports. Some examples:

LCA was supposed to carry R 60 missiles but mid way the ASR changed that it should carry the R 73 which is double the weight of R 60 so the wing has been strengthened and now it fires the R 73 which MiG29 does not do as of now. Even Mirage does not carry such capable missile as of now.
Well Russia had refused to share the source code for integration purpose (ref: retd. air marshal rajkumar's book), but DRDO folks have done it, obviously it has taken time.

When we calculate the endurance time of LCA we conveniently forget that it has option of in flight refueling which increases it's range and loiter time .

When we criticize LCA we forget that MKI uses the same mission computer developed for LCA. So money spent on LCA has already started providing the returns.

We forget that LCA was using proprietary hardware like any other machines are using but due to IAF's request DRDO changed the LCA architecture to open standards as it helps in reducing the upgrade cost and most importantly time. But guess what it also needed some time.

The avionics developed for LCA have been used to upgrade the Mig 27.

The pilot support system developed for LCA has been tested now for MKI.

These are some of the examples where this development program has helped us.


Guys everything is not black and white in harsh world of geo politics, if our forces are dependent on foreign weapons, then we will be hostage to there whims and fancies. And there is no easy way out of this, most of the weapons systems we are developing is for the first time, we have to improve upon them. there is no other way out. If we keep ridiculing our own products, then our (tax payer's) hard earned money will be used to fill coffers of the foreign companies and it was/is/will be used to arm twist us.

Well it is not to say that what ever has happened/happening by our agencies is perfect. And yes they also have realised the mistakes and moved on. Things are changing, and changing in the right direction.

you are right sir....things are changing ....n in right direction....

 

[SHASH2K2]

cannot agree more . This is something I have been saying from many months. We need to attain self reliance in all major field and defence is one of most critical as it involves most cutting edge technologies. recent incident of Isreal denying access to AESA technology is a living example of us having no friend in international arena. In such a scenario only option left is to achieve self reliance .

 

[vijay jagannathan]

Good points Nitesh.Thats why I always support for strategic independence through indigenisation though its has limitations and time consuming.And to achieve futursitic Avionic platforms and technological maturity of latest generation,its mandatory that we should support LCA like projects in future.

support does not mean induction

 

[vijay jagannathan]

cannot agree more . This is something I have been saying from many months. We need to attain self reliance in all major field and defence is one of most critical as it involves most cutting edge technologies. recent incident of Isreal denying access to AESA technology is a living example of us having no friend in international arena. In such a scenario only option left is to achieve self reliance .

Self reliance does not mean inducting a 3++ plane into an unwilling airforce

 

[SHASH2K2]

Respected Vijay Sir
first of all my post was not in reply to any of your comments or statements. I got my first infraction because of you and I dont want to get 2nd in consecutive day . You are bound to have your opinion and I am for mine. I will try my level best not to cross you way and please try not to cross mine. Hope you understand what I am trying to say. If you want I will not post in this thread again. Its all yours and use to to fullest to voice your opinion.
Regards
Shashank Kumar

 

[smartindian]

support does not mean induction

tell me in your terms induction means what, if we dont support our creation then who will , lca will be one of the finest fighter , we should be proud off , show me a match for lca in south asia

 

[vijay jagannathan]

tell me in your terms induction means what, if we dont support our creation then who will , lca will be one of the finest fighter , we should be proud off , show me a match for lca in south asia

Induction most definitely does not mean support and support does not mean induction. End user(read IAF) Supporting a program in R and D does not mean end user accepting the end product. iaf SUPPORTED lca BY SETTING UP A COMMITTEE, giving pilots and feedback for development. You said it your self-"will be one of the finest fighters"" - let that day come then IAF will decide. Don't thrust it down on an unwilling IAF now! IAF does not care who is proud of it. Iaf is not proud of it in its present form.

 

[Tshering22]

When people are blindly running around claiming LCA inducted with "severe deficiencies" and trying to show it as waste of money and all that are conveniently forgetting/not aware how other fighters got inducted in other countries for ex. when EF was inducted it was called as treancahe 1 which was not able to field any BVR weapons or ground attack weapons, even now Tranache 2 is not certified to do ground attack. But it was inducted to get experience with the machine. When F 16 was inducted it was termed as "widow maker" but US air force stuck with that and improved over it despite having severe deficiencies persisted with it even in gulf war time. And now it is the one of the most successful fighter around the world. If only there forces could have acted as hard nosed customers and kept delaying the induction these machines could not have been called as successful project.

And coming to the point of buying from outside what is best. The EF project was conceived in 1971. Why? They could always buy from US which is one of the closes allies for Europe and provides most of the fire power to NATO. Reason is strategic independence, we have seen US rejecting source codes to Britain for F 35. So basically if European nations keep buying US weapons there foreign policies will always needs to be aligned to US or there forces will suffer. This is the only reason for them to consistently back up the EF project even after not reaching to the "best" available in the market. So are they just wasting there national resources? And so they must be tagged as fools or what?

The best example is France, even after being in NATO they always develop there own product, the reason is simple to have strategic independence.

Coming to MKI, was it the same plane when it was conceived in 1996 with the basic SU 30 frame already available? No we bought 18 Su 30 K with us and paid for all the development funds and till now not all the planes are in the same level as we are inducting the series 3 of that aircraft, and by the time deliveries will be complete they have to be upgraded as there engine is under powered. So if IAF could have waited for all the developments to complete and not invested on the bases and planes to gain the experience, could we have seen such a fine machine with us? The best part is that by using those K's IAF was able to learn the spares management and able to train the technicians to carry out the daily maintenance job. Well now Russia is planning to sell the Su 35 which carry forward the development of Su 30 to China which is our enemy. Ironic isn't it


So we should think beyond the DDM's half baked reports. Some examples:

LCA was supposed to carry R 60 missiles but mid way the ASR changed that it should carry the R 73 which is double the weight of R 60 so the wing has been strengthened and now it fires the R 73 which MiG29 does not do as of now. Even Mirage does not carry such capable missile as of now.
Well Russia had refused to share the source code for integration purpose (ref: retd. air marshal rajkumar's book), but DRDO folks have done it, obviously it has taken time.

When we calculate the endurance time of LCA we conveniently forget that it has option of in flight refueling which increases it's range and loiter time .

When we criticize LCA we forget that MKI uses the same mission computer developed for LCA. So money spent on LCA has already started providing the returns.

We forget that LCA was using proprietary hardware like any other machines are using but due to IAF's request DRDO changed the LCA architecture to open standards as it helps in reducing the upgrade cost and most importantly time. But guess what it also needed some time.

The avionics developed for LCA have been used to upgrade the Mig 27.

The pilot support system developed for LCA has been tested now for MKI.

These are some of the examples where this development program has helped us.


Guys everything is not black and white in harsh world of geo politics, if our forces are dependent on foreign weapons, then we will be hostage to there whims and fancies. And there is no easy way out of this, most of the weapons systems we are developing is for the first time, we have to improve upon them. there is no other way out. If we keep ridiculing our own products, then our (tax payer's) hard earned money will be used to fill coffers of the foreign companies and it was/is/will be used to arm twist us.

Well it is not to say that what ever has happened/happening by our agencies is perfect. And yes they also have realised the mistakes and moved on. Things are changing, and changing in the right direction.

Excellent points dude. If only IAF had the maturity to understand this earlier than this late, even then ADA would have been successful in getting the Tejas faster. Also, we need an overhaul on defence journalists. Seriously most cannot event tell the difference between MiG-29 and Su-30 series. I bet most of the forum folks here could give a thousand times better report than any existing defence journalist.

And Times of India should altogether stop posting serious news and stick to Bollywood and Page 3.

 

[smartindian]

Induction most definitely does not mean support and support does not mean induction. End user(read IAF) Supporting a program in R and D does not mean end user accepting the end product. iaf SUPPORTED lca BY SETTING UP A COMMITTEE, giving pilots and feedback for development. You said it your self-"will be one of the finest fighters"" - let that day come then IAF will decide. Don't thrust it down on an unwilling IAF now! IAF does not care who is proud of it. Iaf is not proud of it in its present form.

they already excepted two plane, tell me first when did IAF said it wont except lca, (give me a credible link for that if you can ) please dont troll , yes lca is not best fighter in the world , but it a good one ,and it is good enough to defend our country .

 

[thecoolone]

Self reliance does not mean inducting a 3++ plane into an unwilling airforce

I don't mean start new argument with you but I have been reading your posts and I seriously think you are not happy being Indian. You find faults and belittle the LCA program left n right, you are just not happy with what we have achieved and won't let it go? Criticizing is one way to look for making improvements but constant berating about the program says very less of you. When or if you ever did a science project in school/college for the first time was it of top quality to compete world wide?

 

[blade]

Induction most definitely does not mean support and support does not mean induction. End user(read IAF) Supporting a program in R and D does not mean end user accepting the end product. iaf SUPPORTED lca BY SETTING UP A COMMITTEE, giving pilots and feedback for development. You said it your self-"will be one of the finest fighters"" - let that day come then IAF will decide. Don't thrust it down on an unwilling IAF now! IAF does not care who is proud of it. Iaf is not proud of it in its present form.

Mr.Vijay u r absolutely right by saying all these. Support basically means keeping the indigenous efforts moving on while top defence officials of armed forces can nicely wack off our money under different phoren purchase. IS'NT IT? Now as u seem to be an authority of aerodynamics, have the big responsibility on your shoulder to enlighten us on how come tejas mk I is a 3++ jet and prove that u r not trolling here. Well if u want the DFI members to take it on the face value then i will sadly inform u that its no longer possible my dear. Especially after checking the way indian defence forces are functioning these days. Endless poor purchases like helicopter,cruise missile , SAM,horrible initial batches of T-90,crippled night vision equipments, terrible russian jet engines , dud grenades , fizzled shells & bombs , malfunctioning radar ,AJT have given our armed forces such an immaculate reputation of being penny wise pound foolish that the less we talk about their verbal credibility the better it is. Golf cart scam , land scam , adarsh scam ( case of MBT ARJUN is no less than a scam if not the biggest of all )like beautiful acts together with NO 1 IDIOT LIKE COMMENT SUCH AS " MISSING A FILE IS NO BIG DEAL" given them they status to sit on the laps of poiticians of india. So we are not fools Mr vijay to take anything that pops out from thy holy hole as
a gospel. Now coming back to technicals let me ask u a simple thing. What are the minimum requirements that has to be fulfilled before a fighter jet could be referred to be of 4th gen? and how many types of indian fighters currently fulfill those criterion in their present form ( without up gradation ? } except Su 30mki? If u can find the answer by yrself then a respite for us all, otherwise i will have to remind u that NONE of them have a standard BVR capability which is an essential component of 4th gen air battle. Currently many of them are undergoing upgradation with different accessories of our poor filthy tejas. Bloody no sense of gratitude,just like the spokes persons of rotten politicians. The actual thing is the fact that LCA lacks in some of the attributes of 3rd gen fighter such as WBR characteristics which are completely aerodynamic in nature while in 4th gen category it beats almost anything that India currently has barring sukhoies.

By the way in both 65 & 71 pakistan war IAF had aerodynamically superior platforms that too in much bigger nos then how the hell PAF received international kudos for a relatively MORE EFFICIENT PERFORMANCE? High time that we talk less, take no bribe and learn how to fight with what ever we can produce indigenously. I completely agree to an infamous statement of an ex DRDO chief who said "indian forces should accept indigenous products even iff its 10% less efficient compared to what is readily available in the foreign market because all gr8 powers do the same to gain perfection in long term.

 

[black eagle]

Days after initial operational clearance, radar shock for India's LCA fighter

Barely three days after India's Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) "Tejus" received its "release to service certificate", which means a go-ahead for air force induction, an international report claimed that Israel has barred the export of the Airborne Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) version of the EL/M-2052 radar presumably under U.S. pressure.

Production versions of the LCA MKI (the current version) are to be equipped with the mechanically scanned EL/M-2052 MMR radar. The more powerful and advanced LCA MKII version is expected to receive the EL/M-2052 AESA radar. The radar is manufactured by the Israeli company Elta.

With India's LCA program as the key customer for the radar, in fact, the test prototypes of the LCA have been fitted with the EL/M-2052 MMR radar since 2008, the Israeli ban could not have been aimed at any other export possibility. The only other likely export is Singapore which wants to retrofit its older F-16s with this radar. The international report, first appearing in Flightglobal, has said that the ban applied to "a number of countries", without specifying what countries were included in the ban.

P.S. Subramaniam, Programme Director, Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA), the defence laboratory that is designing the LCA has been quoted in a 2008 Indian newspaper report that Elta EL/M-2052 MMR will be an interim option since India is developing an indigenous MMR radar for the LCA. Subsequent weapons tests of the LCA have been conducted with the EL/M-2052 radar on board.

India's Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) has a co-development agreement with Elta, to develop an Indian version of the EL/M-2052 MMR. The fire-control radar is said to be deployed in the demonstration flights of the fully developed and armed prototypes of the LCA which have been going on from mid-2010 onwards.

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NEWS/newsrf.php?newsid=14180

 

[nitesh]

^^

I love this news, although not confirmed, for the people to see how the LCA program has been put through several road blocks, because this program is on the path to shackle India out of the bid for weapon platforms and brining India close to the world of weapon diplomacy. Well, we have our own AEW platform getting ready, so we are not new bie it terms of T/R modules which are essential component of AESA. Wait for the time when our products are coming close to fruition, and then let them try to sell it, biggest example is patriot systems.

 

[hitenray09]

Self reliance does not mean inducting a 3++ plane into an unwilling airforce

sorry for interrupting u sir , i have been following u for a time now and im hurt by your attitude towards lca
let alone 4+ 0r 3++ im saying that lca is a 2+ plane are u happy now.
what it matters the most is india made its ac.
so lets be happy for it, instead of supporting the clause u r crying about taxpayers money ,delays etc, even for a child to be born it takes time and for to get matured it requires time u can't push it to grow into a adult at one shot.
and plz stop wailing about taxpayers money they are not thinking about that and the money invested in the whole lca project is far less than the money engulfed by our corrupt politicians and system.
so lets rejoice for the lca and wait for it to get matured.:india1:
sorry if it hurts u.

 

[vijay jagannathan]

I don't mean start new argument with you but I have been reading your posts and I seriously think you are not happy being Indian. You find faults and belittle the LCA program left n right, you are just not happy with what we have achieved and won't let it go? Criticizing is one way to look for making improvements but constant berating about the program says very less of you. When or if you ever did a science project in school/college for the first time was it of top quality to compete world wide?

I am sorry that you may have had done enough projects in science but you had a very poor English teacher. Show me one post where I have said the program's R and D must not continue on the side lines? All I am asking is for Mark 1 not be inducted. If you don't want IAF to say this you will decide on its behalf? They want mark 2 and ADA says wait for 5 year's for mark 2 to be ready with IOC. Since you are a science freak why 5 years. Even 25 will make you happy I guess.

 

[vijay jagannathan]

sorry for interrupting u sir , i have been following u for a time now and im hurt by your attitude towards lca
let alone 4+ 0r 3++ im saying that lca is a 2+ plane are u happy now.
what it matters the most is india made its ac.
so lets be happy for it, instead of supporting the clause u r crying about taxpayers money ,delays etc, even for a child to be born it takes time and for to get matured it requires time u can't push it to grow into a adult at one shot.
and plz stop wailing about taxpayers money they are not thinking about that and the money invested in the whole lca project is far less than the money engulfed by our corrupt politicians and system.
so lets rejoice for the lca and wait for it to get matured.:india1:
sorry if it hurts u.

Read post 1360. Growth into a matured platform in testing not in service. NEVER. you induct mature platforms into service. You don't induct planes into service and mait for them to mature. What is it with you guys??? I mean are you all "AYE" sayers trying to derail the IAF??

 

[vijay jagannathan]

they already excepted two plane, tell me first when did IAF said it wont except lca, (give me a credible link for that if you can ) please dont troll , yes lca is not best fighter in the world , but it a good one ,and it is good enough to defend our country .

Please Don't jump out of nowhere and keep asking for proof. Follow all the posts carefully where the deficiencies of mark 1 has been debated. If you are not aware that Mark 1 does not fulfill and falls short of airs taff requirements in all major areas you shouldn't be asking any questions at all. Oh so you will decide on behalf of IAF that it is good enough to defend the country?