ADA Tejas (LCA) News and Discussions

[mehrotraprince]

Attended my first Aero India this Saturday. I won't describe the difficulties in getting into the show, but once I did, it was quite alright. The highlight for me was the conversations I had with Cmde Jaydeep Maolankar, Test Pilot of the Tejas program and Cmdr Sukesh Nagaraj (Deputy Project Director, NLCA). I was lucky to spot Mao sir alone and walked up to him, introduced myself and spoke of my association with BRF and then we had a conversation on the Tejas program for half an hour..he was incredibly frank, friendly, didn't hold back any facts and only left when he got a call from someone..here are the salient points of our conversation, some of which we already know but am listing it anyway.

- Tejas LSP6 is the platform on which the spin chute will be integrated but it's not here as yet. Will get done before FOC.
- Tejas Mk1 has achieved the IOC AoA limit of 22 deg and they will go a couple of degrees further in tests, when the spin chutes are integrated on LSP6. This is to ensure that they know that the airplane is safe even at higher alpha although the FBW will restrict it to the AoA limit for FOC for service pilots (which is higher than 22 deg, but he didn't say how much)
- Mao Sir scoffed at the suggestion that the engine was choking at higher alpha. He said there is no such thing, but rather because it was designed initially for the Kaveri's airflow and had to redesign it for the F-404. They have already tried various intakes on the LCA, with/without spring mounted doors on the intakes.
- Tejas MK2 will get an approx 10mm increase in diameter for the increased air flow requirement of the F-414 (Cmdr Sukesh Nagaraj confirmed this as well). Too small a difference to be visible to the naked eye for us jingos. The spring mounted doors may also be bigger if needed
- When asked about the STR and ITR rates of the Tejas, he simply smiled and said "it's enough, let me put it that way". When I queried him further, asking about the ASR that the IAF had set based on the Mirage-2000 and MiG-29's STR and ITR, his smile vanished and he got serious. He said that when people look at 10 different brochures and come up with requirements, without looking at whether meeting all those requirements is even possible for ANY one fighter, they set themselves and the program up for failure. He was very frank about this, stating that even those brochure specs were just that- brochure specs that even those famed fighters sometimes don't meet. But they were taken as benchmarks anyway and then, without even bothering to look at the technological base in India, the ASR was prepared.
- He was full of praise for the handling of the Tejas. It's a true delight to fly and both he and Grp Cpt Suneet Krishna have tremendous confidence in the aircraft itself. He said that they both push the aircraft to its current limits without any worry since the FCS is very good. He did mention that they didn't push the Tejas Mk1 to its limits at the airshow but just wanted to display that it is maneuverable enough.
- When I asked him whether the Navy fully backs the NLCA program, he laughed and said "I'm here, aren't I?". So all in all, it appears that the IN is backing the program fully
- NP1 hasn't flown more than 4 flights because they're re-designing some of the structures on board. This is the additional strengthening required for handling the thumping that is a carrier landing. The landing gear is being re-designed since its overweight and NP2 is going to fly soon.
- I brought up the point he made at AI-2011 about how the Tejas should've started as a carrier variant and then gone on to the IAF variant. He seemed genuinely happy that someone had remembered that point of his and described the main issue with the NLCA NP1. The issue as he described it was that the LCA didn't have a central keel to pass the structural loads to, something he said that the AMCA won't face since it's a twin engine fighter. This meant that they had to put new attachment points which aren't the ideal solution and result in the bulky appearance of the current landing gear.
- I was going to ask him about the AMCA naval variant and he said that currently there is no plan for it.

At this point he had to leave and I was disappointed since I hadn't gotten to discussing anything about the Elta 2032/MMR, Litening LDP and the weapons on the Mk1 such as the Derby/Python V/R-77/Astra and Sudarshan..

another interview.....

Next, I went to the ADA stall and just asked aloud if anyone could talk to me about the Mk2. A gentleman in a suit stepped up and said "Yes, what do you want to know about it? Which one, the IAF Mk2 or the Navy Mk2?" and I said "IAF Mk2" and he laughed and said "oh, you disappointed me, I was hoping you'd say Navy Mk2"..["‹IMG] Turned out, it was Cmdr Sukesh Nagaraj, Deputy Project Director of the N-LCA program..I was blown away by this gentleman. Here was one of the top decision makers of the Tejas program and he was warm, friendly, forthcoming and genuinely interested in talking about the program without even asking me what my background was (till much later in my conversation). He was an engineer on the Sea Harrier, having served on the Viraat. Said he was rookie when Cmde Maolankar commanded the squadron. The salient points of the conversation with him were:

- The Tejas Mk2 is being lengthened by 0.5m only and not 1m as that big gasbag Prasun Sengupta was fibbing about. We really ought to never take him seriously at all. The reason cited were CG change primarily.
- F-414 was primarily an IN requirement. It turns out that the IAF was fine with the F-404IN20 engine on the Mk1. They jumped on the IN's requirement for a higher thrust engine and requested the IAF Mk2 variant.
- The fuselage on the Mk2 will be slightly wider as well due to the larger diameter of the F-414 engine. This will be used to put onboard additional fuel
- The widening of the fuselage will push out the wings a bit, thus increasing wing span. Otherwise no increase in wing span as such. It doesn't need it, since the wing area is massive already
- Additional fuel will be required primarily to offset the additional weight (he said approx. 200 kg additional) and higher SFC of the F-414 engine. So, it appears that the Tejas Mk2's range may not go up significantly over that of the Mk1.
- He confirmed that the intake size will go up by approx. 10 mm for the Mk2.
- There is a LOT of work that is required to be done due to engine change. This is something jingos must keep in mind since jingos keep asking if this or that engine can be used or not on a platform..pumps, motors, fuel supply lines, nearly everything associated with the engine requires re-design due to an engine change due to higher fuel flow rates for a larger engine and the different specs of the power generation on board. Plus, the higher weight means localized structural strengthening as well, all of which takes time
- N-LCA will be an out and out 9G fighter. He was categorical about this.
- NP1 trainer doesn't have a radar- the radome is used for carrying avionics. He said he was more interested in the NP2 since it was the first fighter and was going to carry the same radar as that on the Sea Harrier. I tried to quiz him on this because the Elta 2032 on the Sea Harrier is not the same as the Elta 2032/MMR on the Tejas Mk1, but he didn't stop what he was saying.
- NP2 is basically similar to the NP1, but with the rear seater's canopy painted over (he said that! I asked if it was faired over and he said no, just painted over). The rear seater's space will carry avionics (that were put into the radome on the NP1) and additional fuel tank.
- NP1's LEVCONS will be initially having 3 positions- 10 deg, 20 deg and 30 deg, just like flap settings. I tried to ask him if the LEVCONS would be just lift generating surfaces or that they could be used as additional control surfaces by the FBW FCS to increase turn rates but he said that they were primarily required for higher lift when landing and taking off
- They're working on the hands-free take-off for the N-LCA. He said that it was no big deal and they'll do it for sure
- Mk2 is to get bigger MFD displays, but he said that even the ones on the Mk1 are actually good and possibly adequate
- One piece of news that will get some jingos happy- he said that he has asked CSIO Chandigarh to develop a frameless HUD instead of the current one. It'll feature higher FoV and its easier to view through since there is no frame obstructing the pilot's view.
- DASH HMDS from Elbit for the N-LCA as well. I had initially thought they'd go with the Thales Top Owl-F as on the MiG-29K
- Just as I suspected, I asked him if the current drop tank is transonic- he confirmed that it is. A supersonic tank is being developed to carry about 200 gal. (~750 ltrs)
- Also confirmed that there is nothing wrong with the centerline fuel tank – since we almost never see Tejas Mk1 carry a centerline fuel tank in place of the innermost wing pylon drop tanks. If required, Mk1s can carry drop tank on the centerline station also
- Regarding IFR, it is Cobham that is going to work on it. Asked if it's a fixed probe, retractable or semi-retractable, it was confirmed to be semi-retractable, like that on the MiG-29UPG. I asked about the lack of internal volume on such a small fighter for even a semi-retractable probe and he said that its going to be a small probe, and they'll manage to find the space for it
- No OBOGS on Tejas Mk1 or NP1. It'll be there from Mk2 onwards. Designed by DEBEL and certified by CEMILAC
- Regarding the landing gear, he said it was 1600 kgs over the Tejas Mk1's landing gear weight initially!! They designed it per MilSpec which was too conservative. Also, in addition to the general Factor of Safety that is needed for Ultimate Loads, they added another Factor of Safety of 1, for a total of 2.5 because it was being done for the first time in India and they were concerned about the design..and used maraging steel which was heavy.
- He clearly said that before the NP1 first flight, none of the OEMs even believed that this program had any future and no one cooperated with them when asked for help. Then, when NP1 flew, they were interested in helping out.
- US Navy is now consulting with them on where to reduce weight, what other materials to use. All the leg work is done here itself though, and no work is being done by foreign OEMs. They are confident of shaving off 1000 kgs and bringing it to 600 kgs over the LCA AF version's landing gear weight for the N-LCA
- On the N-LCA Mk2 they will change the position of the landing gear and bring it more towards the wing/fuselage joint. The landing gear will then retract into a fairing for that. That will also free up space in the fuselage for additional fuel
- Regarding radar, he said that they are pretty confident about it. The reason is that they're using the same Elta 2032 as on the Sea Harrier! Since they've already qualified that radar for the Derby, he was pretty confident about the Derby on the N-LCA. Asked about the Python-V he said that it's the R-73 that'll be the WVR weapon..when I asked him how come the Python V was shown on the mockup outside, he said it's just a mockup. Wasn't very clear about this
- Shockingly about the radar, when I asked about what increased range one might get with the Elta 2032 since the diameter of the antenna on the N-LCA will be bigger than that on the LUSH SHar, he replied that there is no increase in range, its more than sufficient..I asked him specifically again that "really same detection range?" and he said yes. Again not very clear about this
- When quizzed about AESA for the N-LCA Mk2, he said that for now it's the same Elta 2032 and Cmde Mao had recently even gone to Israel to test the radar that will be used on the N-LCA Mk2. Here, he mentioned that "if you get anything from Israel, just take it. Their equipment is very good". Then went on to mention how the Barak was tested on the Viraat and was successful on its very first trial with 2 missiles fired. The first hit the target and the second hit its debris!
- He confirmed that the anti-ship missile for the N-LCA is going to be the Kh-35E, similar to the MiG-29K. Laughed when recollecting how poor the Sea Eagle was as an AShM.
- Primary role envisaged for the N-LCA is that of CAP and Fleet Defence, replacing the Sea Harrier. He was quite dismissive about the P-3C Orion threat (jokingly saying that to shoot that down, a gun is enough!), but was primarily concerned about the cruise missile and anti-ship missile threat to the Carrier. But he mentioned that a Carrier Battle Group consists of several rings of protection for the carrier, and that the carrier will get warned about any possible airborne threat several hundred kms before it even approached it. With that much warning, a N-LCA could dash to the edge of the fleet and take on the threat.
- When I asked him if shooting down sub-sonic anti-ship missiles with on-board missiles was a possible scenario for the N-LCA, he replied in the affirmative
- When he mentioned this, I asked him how good the Elta 2032 was with regards to dealing with sea clutter and he said that its very good.
- NP2 is currently already going through integration tests. Will likely fly in June or July if no issues are found.
- NP1 has given them a lot of data for how the platform behaves in 4 flights itself
- Said how the LCA is designed as per the Test Pilot's recommendations- whatever they want, ADA/HAL give it to them. He said let the IAF get the Rafale and then ask for these small changes and then they'll figure out just how hard it is to get anything they want. On the N-LCA, we can integrate whatever we want, and for the entire lifetime of the fighter. Easier upgrades will be available since everything is known about the aircraft to the designers

I had to leave at this point since my friend who I'd met after 6 years was in a hurry to leave so we could escape the impending traffic snarl. Thanked the Cmdr profusely and got his card as well. I asked for some other brochures on the Mk2 and he said that he could give me a soft copy of it. To date, I've never had so much come from a single conversation at any airshow or business show. Very competent fellows are working on these programs. They need our support and encouragement. Those who are constantly piling it on them, with negative reports are basically doing this nation a great dis-service. Criticize the organization perhaps for its failings, but those who are working on these programs are to be commended and encouraged.

Source: BR Forum

 

[ninja85]

============= Don't feed the troll ===============

 

[Pandora]

Tarmak007 on FB page is arranging a talk with
Suneet Krishna(Test pilot) on 25th Jan, 4-6 PM IST.
We should collate the questions which we want to ask
about Tejas. please help me for this activity......

 

[vram]

Tarmak007 on FB page is arranging a talk with
Suneet Krishna(Test pilot) on 25th Jan, 4-6 PM IST.
We should collate the questions which we want to ask
about Tejas. please help me for this activity......

Is there any possiblity of wheather he will give a reply to us about the radar? There are all kinds of information floating around about it being the ELTA2032 and then another info pops up saying its the Indian Hybrid MMR. any kind of confirmation on this will be great

 

[ersakthivel]

Live chat with Capt Suneet krishna going on in tarmak007 face book page
great day guys, Got four answers from the great man himself,

They are planning multi ejector racks on tejas for FOC

,So some technocrat bluffing here forever that tejas won't have multi ejector rake is going to eat crow!!!!!:taunt1:

So tejas can carry 4 BVRs 2 WVRs and one central fuel tank like any other fighter.

About the final STR and ITR question Sunet krishna simply answered,

Difficult to answer, It will be the best we can achieve from this platform,:thumb:

And some one asked the total paylad --the ans is 3.5 tons till date,

Unfortunately there are no plans yet for tejas mk-3 stealth.

Note the words--Not yet. May be it will change some day,

 

[ersakthivel]

Lot of guys are wasting time by generic questions is the problem,

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Thanks for Sharing ..

 

[rvjpheonix]

The chat was more disappointment than anything else. Absolutely stupid questions are being asked and he is answering them!! He does not give any specifics as if it will compromise the entire program. I know sensitive information must be withheld but I guess you can answer some of them. And th kind of questions asked are just plain stupid like "SIR IS THE STEALTH OF LCA EQUAL TO F22!" Any ways good news is they are integrating multi ejector racks as part of FOC.:thumb: If we want to sell our stuff we need to talk about its capabilities. Look at all the foreign programs. There is so much info available on them.

 

[vram]

Lot of guys are wasting time by generic questions is the problem,

Sakthivel where you the one asking about the AOA of the aircraft? I think he din't want ot come out and give the figure for that one. And about the people asking questions man....
lol! one guy wanted tickets for him and his family for republic day!!!
As for me I really really wanted to ask about the MMR hybrid radar...but ended up getting stuck in office

 

[vram]

"sir, is tejas capable of performing a cobra manoeuvre?" ..." sir whats ur future plan?" ....these are the sample kind of questions being shot at that guy
But seriously speaking I think he din't want to reply too much on the major technical questions being asked as I think he din't have the clearance for it. This data would have to come from some ADA or HAL honcho...sigh

 

[Pandora]

Guys Here are some of your answers:
>Will the production MK.1 really have an IFR probe as I think was reported but I'm still cynical about? Tarmak007 Refuelling probe is only an external attachment. All production aircraft will have it.
Sir,Performance of the EL/M-2032 radar on the LCA MK.1? >Tarmak007:Excellent
>Tarmak007 We will integrate tandom pylons to be able to carry more number of weapons. That is one of the FOC tasks.
>Tarmak007 Tejas FOC is planned for end of the year. The squadron will form as soon as the first production lot of Tejas are ready to be handed over. On the NAVAL version, design improvements shall be continuous. It will be done based on the flight test results.
>Tarmak007 Cockpit is hugely comfortable..... its truly HOTAS wherein the pilot can perform most of the functions without lifting his hands off the primary controls
>Tarmak007As on now we have cleared the Tejas to 1.6 Mach as per the IAF requirement
>Status of PV-5 please ?.Tarmak007 It is already undergoing ground tests after modifications and should start flying very shortly.
>Are they planing for multiejector for Tejas Mk1 ? Tarmak007 Yes
>Tarmak007 A new generation Martin baker ejection seat is fully integrated on the Tejas escape system.
>Tarmak007 Relaxed static stability along with state of the art fly by wire make the Tejas hugely manoeuvrable and gives optimum performance
>What is the maximum payload carried by LCA so far? Tarmak007: Above 3.5 tonnes
>Tarmak007 It is very capable and at the same time very easy to handle. Very comfortable to fly & operate ..
>Thank you for the reply Sir, how many targets can it track and engage at a time in a look and shoot mode ??? And sir it wd be better if u kindly answer my last question about any unique capabilities ? Tarmak007 Can't give any specific numbers(Confidential matter) . But be assured it is one of the best in its class...!
>Sir watz da stats f Tejas Mk2..by whn it vl b entrng servce? Tarmak007In design stage...
>Sir what about the AoA of Tejas? Will it reach 27 during FOC? What about Mk2. Tarmak007 We will be testing the aircraft to the AOA where we can derive maximum performance from it.... pure AoA number has not much meaning
>The HMDS is fully integrated on the Tejas. We can designate targets using the HMDS and fire weapons. It greatly improves Air to AIr and AIr to ground capabilities..!
>Tarmak007 Tejas will have a fixed air to air refuelling probe. Tejas can be refuelled pretty quickly on ground as well..

 

[ersakthivel]

The chat was more disappointment than anything else. Absolutely stupid questions are being asked and he is answering them!! He does not give any specifics as if it will compromise the entire program. I know sensitive information must be withheld but I guess you can answer some of them. And th kind of questions asked are just plain stupid like "SIR IS THE STEALTH OF LCA EQUAL TO F22!" Any ways good news is they are integrating multi ejector racks as part of FOC.:thumb: If we want to sell our stuff we need to talk about its capabilities. Look at all the foreign programs. There is so much info available on them.

He will reveal only what he is authorized to reveal.

For example i asked him , Sir will tejas be superior to PAF F-16 and IAF Mirage-2000,

he did not answer that,

But When another guy named dheeraj PB asked the question like Sir, is tejas superior to F-16 /18 ,

His curt reply was , tejas is a current generation fighter. So no point in comparing them to fighters designed 20 years ago,

For people who are knowledgeable the answer is plain.

it is superior to any F-16 or F-18 .

tejas has already crossed the top speed achieved by SU-30 MKi in indian hot air trial condition in mk-1 itself.

So there is no drag issue.

for my question whether it will achieve mach 1.8 in FOC ,

he replied that till now it has achieved mach 1.6 at 50000 feet as per IAF requirement for IOC-2.

So it clearly implies that tejas can go higher in altitude and faster in top speed than mach 1.6.

And all the info for the one who wants know is available in plenty.

With his confirmation of multi ejector rack for FOC.

For ground strike mission .

tejas can carry

one centerline fuel tank,

two heavy weight PGMs on two inner pylons, or any number of smaller bombs in multi rack pylons ,

four long range BVRs on multi rack pylons in two mid wing station pylon,

two WVR in outer wing pylon,

with a litenning pod in dedicated pylon and fully internal SPJ and MAWS.

pretty much the standard config for any modern 4.5th gen MRCA

it can strike ground target and defend itself during the mission with 6 air to air missiles with a multi mode radar.
What else do you want him to do?

write poetry?

 

[ersakthivel]

Sakthivel where you the one asking about the AOA of the aircraft? I think he din't want ot come out and give the figure for that one. And about the people asking questions man....
lol! one guy wanted tickets for him and his family for republic day!!!
As for me I really really wanted to ask about the MMR hybrid radar...but ended up getting stuck in office

he already told ajai shukla that for fOC they will reach 26-28 AOA .

And AOA expansion will go on further beyond with experimental LSP-6 platform.

I just wanted to make sure, but he didn't want to go into the specifics,

 

[ersakthivel]

For pure air to air missions it can carry
close to 12 air to air (both WVR and BVR )missiles with multi rack pylons and one centerline fuel tank,
and loiter for a long time because of the lesser weight of air to air missiles which will come around two tons only while having close to 4 tons of fuel with high fuel fraction,
with a radar that can target at 100 Plus Km range once radome material problem is sorted out,
what do we need more? that too for 26 million dollar a piece?

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Its been very nice of the good Sir to answer even the immature comments, Very good Indeed ..

Nice to know from people who are actually flying these birds .. :thumb:

 

[ersakthivel]

There are actually only a few things that interest me, although I don't expect too much insights of the project or IAF requirements of a test pilot. The one thing is, will the MK1 use EL2032 with some indigenous parts, similar to Bars radar with some indigenous parts in MKI and what is the issue with the indigenous radar in general?
Secondly, can you confirm that drag is a major issue, which is why speed requirements for example couldn't be met so far?
Thirdly, how much internal fuel increase is expected for the MK2?

This is what some stupid jackass called junior think tank(!?!?!) bluffs ,

The TP does not know much about IAF requirement!!!!!!!!!

Was he originally from planet mars?

It is astounding how few know nothings post stuff like this!!!!!!!!!!!!

Not just one post , but thousands of posts stretching across years , all endless retard rants made up of total lies!!!!!!!

591 pages of total BS under a thread titled HAL tejas!!!!!!!!!!!!!

may be they can't gripe endlessly that tejas is obsolete and it has too much drag and it can not have multi rack pylon and so on and on forever!!!!!!

Where is the drag? it exists in the minds of the fools,

When in hot air trials over summer skies in GOA tejas already crossed the Su-30 MKI top speed at sea level has been hammered over and over again.

Still they can't get it means , do they know english or not?

A few posts later another guy concludes , "that they seem to have sorted out drag issue"

What drag issue , and how it was sorted out?

people are simply unable to understand that in a fly by wire RSS fighter like tejas top speed and AOA increase must be carried out only step by step throughly validating all other parameters.

ignorant of this basic fact these guys conclude

that because it had drag tejas was stuck at an AOA of 20 deg and top speed of mach 1.4 and sub sonic at sea altitude for the past ten years

and

with RM A.K. Antony cracking the whip

and

with express help of retard ranting for 591 endless pages ,

on non existent drag in HAL tejas threads in terrorist forums

all of these basic flaws have been sorted out after furious effort!!!

No wonder they show no interest in asking any questions to a simpleton TP who may not know IAF requirements!!!!

Because if the truth is known they can't rant endlessly.


pity them!!!!!!!!!!

tonight is the time to shove some burning hot rod truths into their a$$

 

[shuvo@y2k10]

will tejas mk2 sport the elusive drdo developed aesa radar??

 

[sasi]

~Tejas is designed to be a multirole aircraft. It can easily swing between air -air to air - Gd role.
~Refuelling probe is only an external attachment. All production aircraft will have it.
~maximum payload carried by LCA so far Above 3.5 tonnes.
~As on now we have cleared the Tejas to 1.6 Mach as per the IAF requirement.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Yes, But it will have some Israeli influence ..

will tejas mk2 sport the elusive drdo developed aesa radar??

 

[Abhi9]

LCA Tejas - Indian & The Indigenous - Frontier India

Not by Percentage
The LCA Tejas, one of the star attraction on the Republic day- is truly labor of love and saga of indomitable resolve of our scientists from DRDO,CSIR and HAL for over the last three decades. A small aircraft of fourth plus generation with big punch would hopefully dominate the skies in this part of the world for decades to come? There has been much criticism on delays and import content as if these were unique to us. Such delays are expected when one begins from the beginning. Not speak of components, systems and sub systems-it is quite common to develop and manufacture defence systems including aircraft as joint ventures to have economy of scales. Eurofighter is best example of multi-national cooperation between UK, Germany, Italy for multi role fighter reinforcing that it is not that easy to go single handedly in such ventures. Especially in the present globalized world there are symbiotic relationships even in war machines based on mutual interests.

Import Content
However India has gone virtually all alone in its tryst with LCA project which saw many ups and downs during its long development cycle. Seldom encouraged and mostly at the receiving of media, the ADA team could eventually offer a magnificent flying machine, we are proud to have? The import proportion in the indigenous defence products is not unique to our country only. Even developed countries do not hesitate to import non-strategic components that are easily available at a much cheaper rate. To bring down the cost of the system, it is essential to import non-critical items from available sources, particularly when the demand is for very few numbers. It will be quite exorbitant to develop an ejection seats when the same can be imported as most of the other countries are doing. In the present day fourth & fifth generation aircraft, there are systems which need to be developed indigenously because no country will like to part with its critical technologies associated with these. Our proposed FGFA joint venture with Russia seems to in doubt on issue of doubts in sharing guarded design technologies?

Technology rich Tejas
The Tejas can boast of high end aviation technologies. Tejas airframe is made of advanced carbon composites covering more than 90% 0f the aircraft surface. This critical technology has been totally developed inhouse. A number of other components like wheels, brakes, undercarriage, heat exchangers and actuators were all designed and developed within the country. Its Digital Flight Control which is the heart of the fly by wire flight control system was designed by the Aeronautical Development Establishment of DRDO and manufactured by Bharat Electronics Ltd. The software required for the system including the complex 'Control Law' was developed especially chosen research team from NAL, ADA, ADE and HAL- with active participation from some academic institutions. The glass cockpit powered by the mission computer was designed and developed within the country. The Head Up Display (HUD) system was by CSIR-CSIO, Chandigarh.. Highly complex weapon management system which integrates an array of weapons and sensors has been developed by ADA. These strategic technologies are not available for love or money from any source. Even when one buys an aircraft from abroad, these technologies remain shrouded as a black box. Also many private and public sector companies were involved in the manufacture of these components

Competitive Edge
Sometimes cost of Tejas being in the region of $30 Million is questioned to be on the higher while the fact is that no aircraft of this class is available anywhere in the world market at his low price. Such economical price tag makes Tejas amply suited for export market once it comes of age. But we shall have to augment our aircraft industrial infrastructure to produce the requisite number within the time frame. If one has to bring down the indigenous content further, then the number of aircrafts to be manufactured should be much greater to amortize the manufacturing cost.

Air Cmde Raghubir Singh(Retd), Institute of Defence Scientists & Technologists, Pune