ADA Tejas (LCA) News and Discussions

[aerokan]

Nice idea. That way, we would even leave BR forum far behind where all posters are on same side during scenario-building exercises.

Yup.. We have our very own Captain Kirk of the Star Fleet in the ranks who doesn't believe in No-lose scenarios. Am I right?@Decklander

 

[Twinblade]

A couple of important pieces of trivia released with IOC 2 press release.
1) Combat radius and ferry range of 500 and 1700 km respectively (internal fuel)
2) Production facility has jigs with laser trackers to ensure tolerance of less than 80 microns. That's not as good as JSF's production facility which has jigs with <50 micron tolerances, but it's a good start anyway.

With such loads at 300 Km distance, LCA will barely have 10 minutes before having to come back.

Considering the figures released at IOC, I think the on station time at 300 Km without external fuel tanks in a bomb truck role, loaded as much as the take off weight would permit, should be close to half an hour. My tukka was closer than your tukka

 

[Lions Of Punjab]

I have made a summary of my posts in this thread and tejas mk-2 thread and posted it on

bharath Karnard'snews article on "Stop wasteful military deals " in The indian express news servcice,

Stop wasteful military deals - The New Indian Express

he in turn posted my comments on a separate blog entry,


Technically proficient value-add to 'Stop wasteful military deals' | Security Wise






You can read it in the above link, a portion of it I am quoting below,
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mirage 2000s with the IAF have a clean config RCS of 1.2 meters or more,

So even after launching all BVRs IAF Mirage-2000 (or any other fighter presently in service with IAF including SU-30 MKI) with it's 1.2 sq meter RCS will present a big enough target for the powerful PLAF SU-30 radars to track and launch.

But after the lunch of all long range BVRs Tejas will have a much smaller 0.2 meter RCS .

So it will not be visible to the PLAF flanker 's radars from from even medium BVR range forget about long range BVR s.

SO While PLAF flanker with a 5 meter clean config RCS will be visible to the Tejas fire control radars even in clean config, tejas won't be be visible to the PLAF flanker fire control radars even in clean config,

SO the BVRs fired by PLAF flankers won't be given mid course update by PLAF fire control radars,

And if PLAF flanker tries to jam tejas mk-1s radar using ESM this jamming alone would be used by tejas to guide the BVR on PLAF flanker without even using it's radars.

So PLAF flanker vs IAF Mirage-2000 and PAF F-16 blk 52 Vs Mirage 2000

will be very different cup of tea compared to

PLAF flanker vs IAF tejas
and
PAF F-16 blk 52 VsTejas

Even Tejas mk-1 has 10 percent more TWR than the Mirage-2000 and a more powerful MMR radar with 150 km tracking range,

But Tejas mk-2 will have a difficult to locate and jam ASEA radar along with 20 percent more TWR than the Tejas mk-1, So it will be unbeatable by any legacy fighter on PLAF and PAF fleet , if we strictly use the specs as guidance.

So the following analogy applies ,

1.A clean config RCS of 0.3 (not really known , but lets take the statement that it will have a third of Mirage -2000 RCS at face value),

2. Six air to air missiles with 0.5 X 6 = 3 sq meters will give an RCS of 3.5 meter max to LCA mk-1 in lightly loaded quick response air to air interception role .

If you do the same calculation for PLAF flanker then it's clean config RCS of 5 sq meters + 3 sq meters(same 6 X 0.5 sq meter load out) will give a cumulative RCS of minimum 8 sq meters for PLAF flanker.

So even if PLAF flanker has 30 percent more radome dia giving it a more powerful radar it will present 2.5 times more RCS to the 30 percent smaller dia radar of the LCA Tejas, So in practical terms the big radome dia of PLAF flanker will hold no significant advantage over much smaller RCS of tejas.

So tracking by both the radars may happen simultaneously in real time with no significant advantage for either one of them,

But what happens after tracking is very interesting,

Say a squadron of 20 tejas fighters fire all their 0.5 sq meter BVRs on a squadron of 20 PLAF flanker, and both start evading maneuvers ,

What happens after that?

The RCS for tejas will reduce ten fold to just 0.3 sq meter , but for PLAF flanker it will reduce by just 40 percent to 5 sq meters,

So in theory 20 tejas fighters will vanish from the big powerful radar of PLAF flanker because no PLAF flanker radar can pick up a sub 0.3 meter(clean config RCS) Tejas target from any distance greater than say 50 Km.

So how will the PLAF flanker give mid course guidance to it's BVRs to home in on Tejas ?

The 120 KM range BVrs have their own active seekers , but they can detect tejas only from a closer distance of say 18 Km.

Simply there is no way PLAF flanker can guide it's 120 Km or 240 Km BVR on tejas in this circumstances.

But still all the 20 tejas will see the big 5 sq meter clean config PLAF flanker on their radar screen as big as foot ball. So with their discreet ASEA radars(in MK-2 , and will definitely come in as MLU in MK-1 as well) they will continue to guide them on the much bigger RCS PLAF flanker.

So there is no guarantee that the bigger PLAF flanker radar will look first, fire first, fill first at all times when it comes to air to air BVR combat?

That is the reason 4.5th gen fighters are designed with lower RCS , to minimize tracking by opposing fighter fleet's X band fire control radars.

If you use lifecycle costing and MLU costing along with maintanenace cost we can field two or three tejas mk-2 for every single PLAF flanker. SO on the first day fleet vs fleet battles each PLAF flanker will have an unenviable job of jamming all the difficult to jam ASEA radars while continuing to be visible to Tejas ASEA radars as targets,

But Tejas mk-2 in clean config can not be tracked and targeted by PLAF flanker X band fire control radars from any distance greater than 50 Km, But tejas mk-2 will detect any PLAF flanker in clean config from distances in excess of 150 Km.

it is an undeniable physical fact.

If stealth external weapon bays are introduced on Tejas mk-2(it is being done in Hornets and F-15 and it can be done on all other fighters) then any PLAF flanker X band fire control radar won't see Tejas mk-2 from any distance greater than 50 Km
For more of the same discussion , visit,

For more of the same discussion , visit,
http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/indian-air-force/43717-ada-lca-tejas-iv-94.html

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

I don't have much knowledge but would like to ask a few questions ..

1)zhuk -ms radar has a range of 190kms for 5ms rcs !! that is better than ELTA-EL-2032 radar .
2)pakis also demand that our MKI (rcs- 10/15 sqm) is a easy target of F-16 in a same manner Tejas will pick Pla Su 30 .
3) wat abt heat signatures? IRST can track d trget at sufficient range, and that is where heat seekers comes in.. and if tejas fires a bvr, then it needs to lock d plaaf su30, since active homing missile seeker gets activated after firing only . So su30's RWR wud mke su30 pilot aware of tejas.i m nt aware of jammers of plaaf au 30.but i m sure tht su30 will use jmmer 2 jamm d incoming active homer
Since it hav enough time to jam d missile before it enters burn through range, and if tejas fires semi active homer, thn su 30 may pinpoint tejas usingRWR. Its nt diffcult to fool a semi active homer. Heat seekers isnt an opt. 4 tejas to fire at 150 kms. ?
4) RCS of lca isn't going to be less then 0.4 sqm in frontal aspect with x-band radar in any conditions . Mayavi or Tarang can't guide missiles like spectra.& what about Zhuk-ms installed in new mkks ?

 

[ersakthivel]

I don't have much knowledge but would like to ask a few questions ..

1)zhuk -ms radar has a range of 190kms for 5ms rcs !! that is better than ELTA-EL-2032 radar .
2)pakis also demand that our MKI (rcs- 10/15 sqm) is a easy target of F-16 in a same manner Tejas will pick Pla Su 30 .
3) wat abt heat signatures? IRST can track d trget at sufficient range, and that is where heat seekers comes in.. and if tejas fires a bvr, then it needs to lock d plaaf su30, since active homing missile seeker gets activated after firing only . So su30's RWR wud mke su30 pilot aware of tejas.i m nt aware of jammers of plaaf au 30.but i m sure tht su30 will use jmmer 2 jamm d incoming active homer
Since it hav enough time to jam d missile before it enters burn through range, and if tejas fires semi active homer, thn su 30 may pinpoint tejas usingRWR. Its nt diffcult to fool a semi active homer. Heat seekers isnt an opt. 4 tejas to fire at 150 kms. ?
4) RCS of lca isn't going to be less then 0.4 sqm in frontal aspect with x-band radar in any conditions . Mayavi or Tarang can't guide missiles like spectra.& what about Zhuk-ms installed in new mkks ?

lets discuss a scenario of a combined fleet of tejas at the front and SU-30 MKi flying 50 km behind tejas meets an all F-16 or all PLAF flankers fighting group,

with four long range BVrs and two WVRs with no oteher external stores tejas may have an RCS of 3 sq meter combined(clean config-0.3 sq meter+(4x0.3 sq meter for four long range bvrs, 2x0.3 sq meter for two WVRs give it---two sq meter RCS only) lets say 3 sq meter giving some extra margin,

Now at somewhere around a 100 km distance f-16 (RCS of 5 sq meter if similarly loaded like tejas ) and above 8 sq meter RCs PLAF flankers sees the tejas

but tejas will always see F-16 or PLAF flanker before being seen by them and will be the first to fire BVRs, because a combination of low RCS and powerful radar will make it first to detect the opposing fleet,

Once BVRs are fired tejas RCs drops to 0.3 sq meter and it can not be tracked by any F-16 or PLAF flanker radar from any distance higher than 50 Km or so,

(even if the enemy fighter groups too detect teajs and fires their BVrs on tejas , they can not give mid course guidance to their BVRs , because with a clean config frontal RCs of around 3 sq meters tejas can not be detected by them at any distance higher than say 50 Km )

SO it is entirely possible that even before F-16 or PLAF flanker tracks Tejas tejas will fire its missile and disappear from the opposing fleet's fire control radar,

Then tejas pilot can switch off his radar to evade being tracked by F-16 or PLAF SU-30 RWRs , but will still be able to guide his BVRs with a link from SU-30 mKI fire control radar which flies 60 or so Km behind Tejas and will be tracking the opposing fighter fleet with better radars,


But eventhough the opposing fleet to can track the large say 10 or 15 sq meter RCS IAF su-30 MKI from a larger distance of about 200 Km or so ther is nothing they can do with it, because they have no long range BVRS to track and target SU-30 MKI from that range,

Even if they get a long range BVrs in future and fires them at Su-30 MKI chances are the BVrs fired by tejas flying in front will be very close to the opposing fleet of fighters and they have to shed their bomb loads and take evasive maneuver , so the BVRs fired by the opposing fleet can not be guided to the IAF SU-30 MKI,

That is the advantage of tejas in the present scenario, if stealth UCAVs with asea radar comes into play everything will be the same for both the side, but the problems is the stealth UCVs that switch on their radar to track the opposing fleet themselves be a target from homing missiles of the opposing fleet,

So the low below 0.3 sq meter clean config RCS of tejas confers an advantage on tejas in any scenario through out its service life, because all fleets will be a combination of 4th , 4.5th and 5th gens for the next two decades at least,

And if we add external weapon bays for tejas its usefulness increases many folds,

,

 

[mehrotraprince]

Why are we comparing tejas with F-35 or any other 5th generation production facility?

Tejas: Tolerance 80 microns

Production facility has jigs with laser trackers to ensure tolerance of less than 80 microns

Eurofighter: Tolerance 70 microns

The levels of production accuracy required are astounding, panels and fittings have tolerances equal to 70 microns

Eurofighter Production

Now people can decide themself how bad we are?

 

[Twinblade]

Why are we comparing tejas with F-35 or any other 5th generation production facility?

Tejas: Tolerance 80 microns


Eurofighter: Tolerance 70 microns

Eurofighter Production

Now people can decide themself how bad we are?

Because even a tolerance of 80 microns is a huge deal and in a few years we should be able to equal the best in the world.

 

[mehrotraprince]

Because even a tolerance of 80 microns is a huge deal and in a few years we should be able to equal the best in the world.

That's the point, in aircraft design and production we jumped straight away from 2nd gen to 4th gen, it took almost 30 years to bridge that gap of technological denial and our own shortcomings. Now we are very close to even the best nations as far as designing and production technique of 4 or 4+ gen aircraft is concerned. Soon we will match them toe to toe.

 

[Kyubi]

That's the point, in aircraft design and production we jumped straight away from 2nd gen to 4th gen, it took almost 30 years to bridge that gap of technological denial and our own shortcomings. Now we are very close to even the best nations as far as designing and production technique of 4 or 4+ gen aircraft is concerned. Soon we will match them toe to toe.

I like the optimism in you.

 

[The Fox]

a very good analysis in theory but is it feasible in practical sceniario

lets discuss a scenario of a combined fleet of tejas at the front and SU-30 MKi flying 50 km behind tejas meets an all F-16 or all PLAF flankers fighting group,

with four long range BVrs and two WVRs with no oteher external stores tejas may have an RCS of 3 sq meter combined(clean config-0.3 sq meter+(4x0.3 sq meter for four long range bvrs, 2x0.3 sq meter for two WVRs give it---two sq meter RCS only) lets say 3 sq meter giving some extra margin,

Now at somewhere around a 100 km distance f-16 (RCS of 5 sq meter if similarly loaded like tejas ) and above 8 sq meter RCs PLAF flankers sees the tejas

but tejas will always see F-16 or PLAF flanker before being seen by them and will be the first to fire BVRs, because a combination of low RCS and powerful radar will make it first to detect the opposing fleet,

Once BVRs are fired tejas RCs drops to 0.3 sq meter and it can not be tracked by any F-16 or PLAF flanker radar from any distance higher than 50 Km or so,

(even if the enemy fighter groups too detect teajs and fires their BVrs on tejas , they can not give mid course guidance to their BVRs , because with a clean config frontal RCs of around 3 sq meters tejas can not be detected by them at any distance higher than say 50 Km )

SO it is entirely possible that even before F-16 or PLAF flanker tracks Tejas tejas will fire its missile and disappear from the opposing fleet's fire control radar,

Then tejas pilot can switch off his radar to evade being tracked by F-16 or PLAF SU-30 RWRs , but will still be able to guide his BVRs with a link from SU-30 mKI fire control radar which flies 60 or so Km behind Tejas and will be tracking the opposing fighter fleet with better radars,


But eventhough the opposing fleet to can track the large say 10 or 15 sq meter RCS IAF su-30 MKI from a larger distance of about 200 Km or so ther is nothing they can do with it, because they have no long range BVRS to track and target SU-30 MKI from that range,

Even if they get a long range BVrs in future and fires them at Su-30 MKI chances are the BVrs fired by tejas flying in front will be very close to the opposing fleet of fighters and they have to shed their bomb loads and take evasive maneuver , so the BVRs fired by the opposing fleet can not be guided to the IAF SU-30 MKI,

That is the advantage of tejas in the present scenario, if stealth UCAVs with asea radar comes into play everything will be the same for both the side, but the problems is the stealth UCVs that switch on their radar to track the opposing fleet themselves be a target from homing missiles of the opposing fleet,

So the low below 0.3 sq meter clean config RCS of tejas confers an advantage on tejas in any scenario through out its service life, because all fleets will be a combination of 4th , 4.5th and 5th gens for the next two decades at least,

And if we add external weapon bays for tejas its usefulness increases many folds,

,

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Every other scenario are also theory, Not put in practice either ..

 

[ersakthivel]

a very good analysis in theory but is it feasible in practical sceniario

All well laid plans come unstuck once they meet with combat on the ground is a sound advice by a former general ,

but there is a need to have some plan at least in the start in the name of strategy after all.

what I wanted to stress was that tejas is no light weight just Mig-21 replacement. And it can play a very effective role in combat,

SInce many people are routinely doing cavity search on tejas in this thread and many other threads all over the forums and in many news articles I wanted to make a point of how effective it is in combat,

But despite everything the strategy above will always work in a very effective manner in the few crucial seconds when two large fleets of opposing fighters meet on the first few days of war.

it is towards this end low RCS fighters are being pursued, to reamain undetected as late as possible,

 

[makmohan]

TEJAS RECORDS 500 FLIGHTS IN ONE CALENDER YEAR ( Source : Tarmak007)

(Press Release | Unedited)

TEJAS attained another significant milestone on 27th Dec 2013, by flying the 500th sortie this year, the highest achieved in a calendar year thus far. The achievement is significant, given that the highest number of sorties attained earlier in a calendar year was less than 300 sorties This feat follows close on the heels of attaining IOC on 20 Dec 13. The pace of the programme continues with greater enthusiasm towards achieving newer milestones.

Congratulating the Tejas team Shri Avinash Chander, SA to RM and Secretary Deptt of Defence R&D said "the single most important factor behind the achievements is the synergy of teamed efforts of ADA, DRDO, CEMILAC, HAL and IAF"

Year 2013 has been exceptionally successful year for Tejas in achieving key milestones while participating in seven detachments all over country, an excellent achievement in itself. Noteworthy accomplishments are In- flight relight (shutting off and then reigniting the single engine), high energy brake testing, flight envelope expansion, R73E missile firing with radar guidance, Air to ground weapon tests, Emergency jettisoning of entire store, Aircraft in wake tests , Wet Runway trials , demonstration of Swing Role capability during exercise IRON FIST. All these led to a big leap towards achieving IOC 2.

 

[arnabmit]

[SCRIBD]78345390[/SCRIBD]

The document...

Approach to High Angle of Attack Testing of Light Combat Aircraft [LCA] Tejas

,

 

[WMD]

The Tejas fighter's role in war​

On December 20, the Tejas light combat aircraft (LCA) obtained Initial Operational Clearance (IOC), entering the Indian Air Force (IAF) fleet where regular air force pilots will fly it. After 28 years of development, the Tejas is on course to obtain its Final Operational Clearance (FOC) by end-2014, clearing it for full combat. Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL) is building forty Tejas fighters for two IAF squadrons.

Questions are rightly raised about what combat role the Tejas could play, given that its specifications were framed decades ago. Sceptics argue that a fighter so light, with such a short operating range, would have little role in an aerial battlefield where bigger, heavily armed fighters call the shots.

Tejas' capabilities
An evaluation of the Tejas' combat capability must consider its flying performance, its avionics and the weapon load it carries. At IOC, it already flies at Mach 1.6 (2,000 kmph); operates up to 15,000 metres (50,000 feet); and carries 3,500 kg of mission payload, including weapons and sensors. Its combat radius is 300-350 km, which would be extended next year through in-flight refuelling. By FOC next year, this performance would be enhanced.

The Tejas has been designed as a multi-role fighter. It can engage enemy aircraft with the R-73 short-range air-to-air missile (SRAAM); by FOC next year, more potent air-to-air missiles, probably the Israeli Derby and Python, would be integrated. Against ground targets, the Tejas carries conventional and laser-guided bombs. Next year, it will have an integral 23 millimetre Gasha cannon.

The Tejas' avionics - radar, laser and inertial navigation system - enhances the accuracy of these weapons. Its highly rated Elta EL/M-2032 multi-mode radar provides multi-role capability, allowing the pilot to fire air-to-air missiles at enemy aircraft; and also bomb ground targets with a highly accurate navigation-attack system. The pilot operates his weapons through a head-up display (HUD), or through a helmet-mounted sighting system (HMSS) by merely looking at a target. Experienced fighter pilots say the Tejas is the IAF's most "pilot friendly" fighter.

Although it is one of the world's lightest fighters, the Tejas' weapons load of 3,500 kg compares well with most IAF fighters, including the Mirage-2000, Jaguar, upgraded MiG-27 and the MiG-21. Depending on the mission - strike, photoreconnaissance, or air defence - its eight hard points can carry missiles, bombs, fuel drop tanks or a targeting pod. It can bomb targets and fire missiles as accurately as the Sukhoi-30MKI. The latter scores mainly in its longer range and bigger weapons load, both stemming from its much larger size.

The Tejas' capability is best known to the air force and navy test pilots in the National Flight Test Centre, who have tested it in 2,400 flights. They claim it may be more versatile than the MiG-29 (primarily built for air-to-air combat); the MiG-27 and the Jaguar (both oriented to ground strike); and all variants of the MiG-21, including the multi-role BISON.

The Tejas' likely adversary, the Pakistan Air Force's F-16 fighter, has a slightly larger flight envelope, but the Tejas' superior avionics give it a combat edge over the PAF's older F-16A/Bs (currently being upgraded in Turkey); and superior to their new JF-17 Thunder light fighter, co-developed with China. Only the PAF's 18 new F-16C/D Block 52 fighters, flying since 2010-11 from Jacobabad, may be a match for the Tejas.

Said an NFTC test pilot during the IOC ceremony on December 20: "As a multi-role fighter, the Tejas is at least the equal of the IAF's upgraded Mirage-2000. It can more than hold its own in our operational scenario."

Battlefield employment
The IAF's operational plans earlier had strike aircraft like Jaguars or MiG-27s attacking ground targets, while air defence fighters like the MiG-29 covered them from enemy aircraft. Now mission-specific aircraft are giving way to multi-role fighters, which can do both jobs. This doctrinal shift stemmed from the Mirage-2000, the IAF's first multi-role fighter, which was inducted in the mid-1980s. The Mirage-2000 inspired the Tejas in both role and design.

Today, the IAF controls the aerial battle from airborne early warning and command (AEW&C) aircraft like the Phalcon, a giant radar mounted on a transport aircraft. Flying over the battle space and scanning 400 kilometres on all sides, the AEW&C identifies enemy aircraft and, over a secure datalink, allocates fighters from nearby bases to tackle the intruders. The AEW&C also orders up fighters to strike ground targets in the land battle.

"Tejas light fighters, located at forward airbases like Pathankot, Ambala, Sirsa or Jodhpur are ideal for missions in the vicinity of the border. They are close at hand and react quickly. Being far cheaper, they can be bought and used in larger numbers, saturating the enemy's radar picture and complicating his decision-making," says a senior former IAF planner.

"With an AEW&C guiding the Tejas directly to the target, it does not need a long operating range; and its combination of Elta-2032 radar and air-to-air missiles, are lethal against most contemporary fighters."

Employing the Tejas for the tactical battle would allow the IAF's heavy, multi-role fighters like the Su-30MKI and Rafale to be focused on targets deep inside enemy territory, which are beyond the range of the Tejas - such as major air bases, military headquarters and strategic infrastructure. These fighters, which carry far more fuel and weapons, can take off from bases deep inside India, bomb targets deep inside enemy territory, and also shoot down enemy fighters.

Yet, heavy fighters have their downsides. Maintenance is complex, with half the Su-30MKI fleet usually unavailable for operations. Enemy radar picks up the heavy fighters more easily; the Tejas is smaller, and also stealthier, being largely fabricated from composite materials. Moreover, the loss of a Sukhoi-30 is a Rs 400 crore blow; a Tejas will probably costs one-third of that.

Many IAF planners advocate a balanced air force, with a mix of light and heavy fighters. Light fighters like the Tejas would respond to the tactical battle, while heavier fighters, with their longer range and greater strike power, could tackle more strategic targets.

The light fighter has a long tradition in the IAF. On December 17, Defence Minister A K Antony told parliament that 254 MiG-21s - or 12 squadrons worth -still remain in service. The Tejas provides an effective replacement for those obsolescent machines. HAL's new assembly line in HAL Bangalore plans to build 8 Tejas Mark I fighters annually, stepping up capacity to 16 fighters per year. If the IAF absorbs HAL's entire production capacity, it would have 3-4 squadrons of Mark I fighters; after which the Mark II would start rolling off the line. Creating 12 Tejas squadrons to replace the MiG-21 would retain a balanced air force, and also galvanise the aerospace production eco-system needed for developing the IAF's future fighters.

Tejas' record-breaking performance
On December 27, the Tejas flew its 500th test-flight this year, a record-breaking performance. Flying from seven IAF bases spread around the country, the testing included shutting off and restarting the Tejas' engine mid-flight, firing missiles, dropping bombs and validating emergency procedures. The flight-test programme will continue until the Tejas gets its Final Operational Clearance (FOC), which is targeted for end-2014.

The Tejas fighter's role in war | Business Standard

 

[ersakthivel]

The Tejas fighter's role in war​

The Tejas fighter's role in war | Business Standard

This is what I call proper defence reporting with some technical understanding of the issues at hand,

A spot on 100 percent accurate analysis,

People like RAjat pandit of TOI and many senile retired service personnel calling tejas a three legged cheetah should read stuff like this and update themselves ,

about what tejas brings to IAF in large numbers with all cutting edge 4.5th gen tech,

like powerful MMR for its size ,with nap of the earth terrain hugging mode to avoid enemy ground radars,

Fly by wire RSS all composite air frame with low frontal clean config RCS,

the chance to mate indigenous long range BVRs like Astra ,

or any other missile of choice like derby or meteor,

along with world's deadliest HMD enabled R-73 or Python WVR missiles

and with the ability to deploy long range stand off precision guided munition for pin point accuracy on enemy ground targets,

all with its unmatched survival ability after releasing its weapon load(because its clean config RCS is the lowest in Asian skies)

at a very low cost to IAF,

Mudheads spreading lies and sob stories about tejas should read this article to update themselves about what Tejas will do to IAF's capability if deployed in the 12 squadrons which were filled with various Migs.

All this for tejas mk-1 capability,

tejas mk-2 wil be a peerless fighter with no present fighter in IAF including Su-30 MKI to match its ability in close WVR combat

And with the successful completion of this program india would have arrived as military aviation major with all the ingredient techs needed to embark upon the 5th gen stealth age, as the only two things that remain out of bounds now is engine and asea radar which can be done in time for the AMCA in a decade, and a world class military aviation industry will evolve as a by product of this single program.

And with all the design calculations in our hand evolving mk-2 to stealth mk-3 is the easiest way to gatecrash into the elite 5th stealth club, wonder our higher defence planners recognize this or not, because even at IOC-2 many people still view tejas nothing but a Mig -21 replacement!!!!

 

[SajeevJino]

From the Article

"As a multi-role fighter, the Tejas is at least the equal of the IAF's upgraded Mirage-2000. It can more than hold its own in our operational scenario."

may be after FOC .

who have tested it in 2,400 flights. They claim it may be more versatile than the MiG-29 (primarily built for air-to-air combat); the MiG-27 and the Jaguar (both oriented to ground strike); and all variants of the MiG-21, including the multi-role BISON.

I don't think so ..then LCA become Second Line of interceptor/Air Superiority fighter after FOC

Yet, heavy fighters have their downsides. Maintenance is complex, with half the Su-30MKI fleet usually unavailable for operations.

sometimes ago ACM told Fighters are Combat read ..Above claims only half of them Battle Ready so only 80 of them .

 

[Kyubi]

And with the successful completion of this program india would have arrived as military aviation major with all the ingredient techs needed to embark upon the 5th gen stealth age, as the only two things that remain out of bounds now is engine and asea radar which can be done in time for the AMCA in a decade, and a world class military aviation industry will evolve as a by product of this single program.

Sir I would like to ask you as to whether engine and AESA radar are the only things that are out of bounds to our aviation industry?
What about the RAM coatings have we achieved enough expertise in this area to justify a Fifth Gen Tech.


F-22's success more than 'skin deep'

How do we rate our maintenance capability of Tejas, DRDO chief Dr Avinash Chander says that since its a homegrown tech, stockpiling of parts will not be problem.

Advantage India: Why DRDO claims that LCA Tejas is the 'best in its class' - Page 2 - Economic Times

Given that there was no developed aviation industry in India back then, the Tejas is an excellent achievement," Chander told Economictimes.com. Not only that, Chander also said that the lifecycle cost of the LCA will be around 50% lower than any acquired aircraft. "Once an aircraft is acquired, the maintenance costs tend to spiral. In case of Tejas, we now have the capability of stocking up the parts and being ready in advance, in case the need arises," Chander substantiated.

If we go by this article then maintenance of Tejas will not be a huge burden but IMHO maintaining a 5th gen aircraft will be a whole new ball game. Cost per flight hour for a fifth gen aircraft will be much higher than what it is for Tejas.

Costly Flight Hours of US Military aircrafts
Costly Flight Hours | TIME.com

Apart from this there are maintenance plans required for few hundred flight hours to maintain and refurbish stealth systems and RAM coatings etc. How are we going to address these issues?

F-22 raptors Maintenance plans
USAF performs first long-term F-22 Raptor maintenance :: Strategic Defence Intelligence

I have used info available on F-22 raptor as a source for comparing its production and maintenance costs to our intended 5th gen fighter. If we go by this info then operating a 5th gen tech will be a expensive affair, this view is in reference to AMCA, regarding FGFA we may have to shell out more money, until it is combat ready, also its maintainability will be a burden on the exchequer.

My concern is that the time required for having a battle ready 5th gen aircraft is too high now that we are still lagging behind china in terms of a 5th gen prototype. Will we able to match toe to toe with the chinese, russians and the US cause they would have had a fully operational fighter with hundred's of flight hours logged in ?

 

[Kunal Biswas]

There are nothing second and first line, Its always the first line with mix of fighters, Let me elaborate some positive points compare to other fighters ..

1. Unlike MIG-29, Tejas have larger bore sight engagement capability they are also low observable compare to all metal built MIGS, Has latest Internal EW suit and full glass cockpit compare to MIG-29, Not to mention Tejas have lower operational costs so does maintenance ..

2. It can carry A2G munition same or more than MIG-27 may not be JAG though and has better flying preform-ace ..

3. Better in almost all aspect compare to MIG-21 bision ..

I don't think so ..then LCA become Second Line of interceptor/Air Superiority fighter after FOC

 

[Kunal Biswas]

During IOC-2

 

[Kunal Biswas]