Indeed! Also when we manage to develop something -- whose equivalents were not even on selling list before--almost sudden becomes available with so-called 100% ToT.
Gripen has nothing to do with Tejas. Tejas mk2 is smaller by approx a meter compared to Gripen E
In terms of volume that extra 1 meter does not mean equally larger volume. Tejas is chubbier in the centre while Gripen is as slim as a pencil.
Their is a big difference bw AF mk2 and Naval mk2, Afmk2 is 13.7mts long, 8.2mts span and 4.4m ht, Naval Mk2 is 14.56mts long, 8.9mts span and 4.64mts height. AF required enhanced performance over current design, not like naval variant. TEJAS MK2 at very best is a light multirole not a medium multirole.In terms of volume that extra 1 meter does not mean equally larger volume. Tejas is chubbier in the centre while Gripen is as slim as a pencil.
The naval variant of Tejas MK-2 is not that shorter than Gripen E either. It is short by only 0.644 m but has a larger wingspan by 0.3 m. And there is no logical reason for not using this model for IAF as well. Considering the advantage in capability in terms of fuel capacity, combat load and aerodynamic efficiency that Naval MK-2 model has over IAF MK-2 model.
View attachment 23258
IAF MK-2 was thought in 2009. Then it was supposed to be just a re-engined version of present Tejas to meet certain shortfall in performance. On other hand when it was found that present F-404 was simply not enough to meet thrust requirements of NLCA. A separate N LCA MK-2 was launched. This was around 2012-13 onwards. This is the reason why there are two separate models. However today when both models have seen completion of their respective design work and non of the models is under metal cutting stage there is no reason to opt for two separate designs. Earlier it was thought that AF will opt old 2009 concept of MK-2 for saving time and getting it inducted by 2018. MK-1A changed it all. However if AF will opt customised model of present NLCA MK-2 is or not, is not known. Though logic says both AF and Navy should go for same model which should Naval model because it significantly more capable than AF version.
'Cause of LEVCONs?
Yeah there are differences but not as big as one would become Medium category fighter and other remain as Light.Their is a big difference bw AF mk2 and Naval mk2, Afmk2 is 13.7mts long, 8.2mts span and 4.4m ht, Naval Mk2 is 14.56mts long, 8.9mts span and 4.64mts height. AF required enhanced performance over current design, not like naval variant. TEJAS MK2 at very best is a light multirole not a medium multirole.
Sent from my Aqua Ace II using Tapatalk
It's a completely redesigned airframe unlike AF version which has seen inclusion of just a plug to accommodate a larger engine and little more fuel.
Paid media and Dalals of Lutians are under extreme pressure from their patrons to tarnish Tejas whichever way possible.Hi @livemint, you’ve probably given people a real scare by using that picture of an LCA Tejas (flawless safety record), instead of the Virus SW80 microlight that tragically crashed.
Question: Does Tejas squadron have 18 aircraft per squadron or 20? What about MiG-21 Bison?
Standard full capacity is 20 aircraft per squadron. 18 single seat + 2 tandem seat fighter conversion trainer.
One last question. Does IAF plan to begin retiring MiG-21 Bison from 2019-2023 at the rate of 1 squadron per year or do they plan to retire them all in the same year (2023)?
They will have to retire once a Mig-21 airframe reaches expiry of life of its airframe. If replacements are made in a systematic manner than Mig-21s will be retired one by one. If not then there will be bulk retirement once significant number of Mig-21s have expired their air fram life.
very correct. We saw in recent conflict in Middle east how effective Russian planes are. Couple of them may fail but they will be night mare for enemy.
Which engines . Please elaborate.
If Mig-21 was such a useful platform, one can only imagine how good Tejas would perform with A2G weapons like SANT, SAAW, LGBs and Glide bombs in around border during any conflict with Pakistan and even China. Needless to mention that with A2A weapons all the time it would be defending itself on its own.
| Thread starter | Similar threads | Forum | Replies | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
AERO INDIA 2021 | Science and Technology | 308 | |
|
|
ADA Tejas Mark-II/Medium Weight Fighter | Knowledge Repository | 6 | |
|
ADA Tejas Mark-II/Medium Weight Fighter | Indian Air Force | 8939 | |
| P | ADA DRDO and HAL Delays a threat to National Security | Internal Security | 20 |
