ADA Tejas (LCA) News and Discussions

[Saichand K]

Within July IMHO, SP-5 is only a few weeks behind SP-6 in terms of progress.

Yeah this is very true. SP-5 is coming from a alternate assembly line which must be the reason. And may be in next few SPs, second assembly line also catches up.

 

[Pulkit]

Hi All
we have till now built 21 Tejas (Prototypes+SP), what will happen to the Non SP ones?
Will they be kept with HAL DRDO ADA for shows as specimens or can they be converted into some form or trainer aircraft which can be used by IAF?

 

[tejas warrior]

Hi All
we have till now built 21 Tejas (Prototypes+SP), what will happen to the Non SP ones?
Will they be kept with HAL DRDO ADA for shows as specimens or can they be converted into some form or trainer aircraft which can be used by IAF?

IMHO, It all depends on life remaining with them.

Trainer prototypes can be given to IAF.
Few prototypes will be given to next development projects for modifications like Kaveri, Uttam.

 

[abingdonboy]

Hi All
we have till now built 21 Tejas (Prototypes+SP), what will happen to the Non SP ones?
Will they be kept with HAL DRDO ADA for shows as specimens or can they be converted into some form or trainer aircraft which can be used by IAF?

Those with life left in them will continue with the NFTC in their testing role, nothing has changed, there are still many things left to do; Kaveri integration/testing, Uttam flight testing, Mk.1A tech validation etc etc.

There isn't time or room for using prototypes as anything other than test beds, they certainly aren't about to become show stars.

 

[Pulkit]

IMHO, It all depends on life remaining with them.

Trainer prototypes can be given to IAF.
Few prototypes will be given to next development projects for modifications like Kaveri, Uttam.

Those with life left in them will continue with the NFTC in their testing role, nothing has changed, there are still many things left to do; Kaveri integration/testing, Uttam flight testing, Mk.1A tech validation etc etc.

There isn't time or room for using prototypes as anything other than test beds, they certainly aren't about to become show stars.

Thanks for the response .
Its sad that none of them can be upgraded and shared with IAF for use.

 

[Saichand K]

wtf ...from where you guys bring such numbers ....well me too going to join this party

20 IOC + 20 FOC + 83 MK1A + 200 MK 2 + 400 MK3 + 600 MK 4

India Tejas super power

@Kunal Biswas Does this not count as chit chat...:biggrin2::biggrin2:

 

[Saichand K]

Thanks for the response .
Its sad that none of them can be upgraded and shared with IAF for use.

IAF being the user, it is not professional for company like HAL to issue/supply used products like LSPs and PVs. Instead they can be used for development of Mk-1A, fine tuning controls, trying several new things such as unmanned Tejas, reduction of APUs by using Battery banks in place of ballast etc; However if these LSPs are upgraded to FOC standard, in the time of war, they can be used for point to point interception for Bangalore city.

 

[Prashant12]

http://indianairforce.nic.in/

 

[Saichand K]

http://indianairforce.nic.in/

These are old pics only right? Anything I am missing here....

 

[Prashant12]

These are old pics only right? Anything I am missing here....

These pics are from IAF iron fist exercise.

 

[GiantWithFeetOfClay]

If LCA was designed to replace MiG-21s then it should be a multi-role light fighter but I doubt if this kind of fighter has any meaning in the modern air warfare.. In my opinion India should have bought the "Lavi" project from Israel and build a "heavier" light fighter in smaller number.. The Chinese J-10 is a very potent adversary..

 

[Chinmoy]

If LCA was designed to replace MiG-21s then it should be a multi-role light fighter but I doubt if this kind of fighter has any meaning in the modern air warfare.. In my opinion India should have bought the "Lavi" project from Israel and build a "heavier" light fighter in smaller number.. The Chinese J-10 is a very potent adversary..

"heavier" light fighter

First time came across such a term. Could you kindly elaborate?

 

[Saichand K]

If LCA was designed to replace MiG-21s then it should be a multi-role light fighter but I doubt if this kind of fighter has any meaning in the modern air warfare.. In my opinion India should have bought the "Lavi" project from Israel and build a "heavier" light fighter in smaller number.. The Chinese J-10 is a very potent adversary..

Heavier in which sense? Heavier in weight or Payload?

 

[GiantWithFeetOfClay]

The term "light fighter" refers to a lightweight supersonic aircraft with after-burning engines and modern missile armament. The "light fighter" has almost half the capabilities of a "heavy fighter" in terms of combat range, combat load, cost of production and cost of operation.. In Cold War the "light fighter" had smaller RCS and could face any opponent in a dogfight. The idea was that since you go to war no matter what you are going to have losses; thus you need a large number of fighters available especially for the air-to-ground role...

In modern air warfare a "heavy" stealth fighter has lower RCS than any "light fighter". The BVR missiles are extremely reliable now and what it matters is the detection range and the number of missiles the fighter can carry.. Even the maneuverability of the fighter in close-range dogfights is not important anymore due to the new technologies (HMD, high off-boresight missiles, AESA radar, etc). What is more, "light fighters" have limited air-to-ground capabilities and can not be equipped with datalink- and network- electronic suites (no space, extra weight).

Therefore, the term "light fighter" is closer to "advanced trainer" and it is useful only to attack/support helicopters or intercept drones.
LCA should be a "middleweight" fighter like the Swedish JAS-39 Grippen with stealth characteristics and even greater payload.
It should be more expensive than LCA but still cheap enough for mass production..

 

[Chinmoy]

The term "light fighter" refers to a lightweight supersonic aircraft with after-burning engines and modern missile armament. The "light fighter" has almost half the capabilities of a "heavy fighter" in terms of combat range, combat load, cost of production and cost of operation.. In Cold War the "light fighter" had smaller RCS and could face any opponent in a dogfight. The idea was that since you go to war no matter what you are going to have losses; thus you need a large number of fighters available especially for the air-to-ground role...

In modern air warfare a "heavy" stealth fighter has lower RCS than any "light fighter". The BVR missiles are extremely reliable now and what it matters is the detection range and the number of missiles the fighter can carry.. Even the maneuverability of the fighter in close-range dogfights is not important anymore due to the new technologies (HMD, high off-boresight missiles, AESA radar, etc). What is more, "light fighters" have limited air-to-ground capabilities and can not be equipped with datalink- and network- electronic suites (no space, extra weight).

Therefore, the term "light fighter" is closer to "advanced trainer" and it is useful only to attack/support helicopters or intercept drones.
LCA should be a "middleweight" fighter like the Swedish JAS-39 Grippen with stealth characteristics and even greater payload.
It should be more expensive than LCA but still cheap enough for mass production..

Although you have given a quiet good going by book example, but you have not taken into context under what condition and for what purpose LCA was designed.

When LCA was conceived, US was still working on stealth. For India, we needed a fighter to replace the ageing Mig 21. So our goal was just to design a contemporary fighter to achieve the performance of Mig-21 of that time. As we all know that Mig was designed and used as interceptor and LCA too was conceptualised for that role only. But in due time the demands and design kept on increasing and evolving and we have got the LCA of today.

As far as medium weight category is concerned, we have gone for Rafale with MMRCA and working on AMCA. For heavy weight category we have MKI.

 

[Narasimh]

Bikaner Air base- most probably Tejas

 

[Saichand K]

They look like Mirages rather than Tejas.

View attachment 17407
Bikaner Air base- most probably Tejas

 

[square]

View attachment 17407
Bikaner Air base- most probably Tejas

its not tejas.....pic showing 5 ,.....i think the 5th is still under flight tests.....

 

[Narasimh]

They look like Mirages rather than Tejas.

possible but the color scheme makes me think Tejas

 

[Saichand K]

its not tejas.....pic showing 5 ,.....i think the 5th is still under flight tests.....

:blah::biggrin2::biggrin2::biggrin2: it can be SP-6 or some LSP.