ADA Tejas (LCA) News and Discussions

[ersakthivel]

That's not correct, an RFI was sent out to foreign OEMs, to supply AESA radar and EW for the MK1As. That's why they might be added later on MK1 IOC/FOC and MK2.




Again the key is space! LCA was sadly designed with limited foresight on upgradability, the focus was on a very small overall size, which in return leaves not enough space for internal systems. That's one reason MK1A will remain with an external SPJ, although that's not modern standard anymore, or why MK2 gets a plug to add avionics.
The same is the issue for MAWS, which require space either in the airframe, or in external housings on the airframe or pylons.

Pack of lies,
Gripen c& teja mk1 are identical.

Still teja mk1 has a bigger radar dia & lesser empty weight & bit higher fuel capacity than gripen c.

No one says gripen C is poorly designed.

 

[ersakthivel]

Not exactly,

MK1A = base of MK1 FOC + simple upgrades that initially were planned for MK2 (AESA radar, EW, avionics, external loads).
So this upgrade is rather simple, since it uses an (by then hopefully) available and certified airframe as the base. All that's left is, selecting, integrating and certifying the new systems.

MK2 however is based on a completely new airframe, with lots of internal and external changes, which itself makes development and certification a major task. So even if we would take the same systems of MK1A (which probably won't be the case the to DRDO lobbying), it's not a parallel development.

You basically have...

LCA IOC => FOC => MK1A to bridge the gap

And a separate MK2 development, to finally meet the requirements.

P.S. Just to put it in perspective...

We achieved IOC in 2013 and 5 years later we still integrating and testing modifications for FOC, while the certification is still not achieved.
MK2 does not just add modifications on the same airframe, but starts with a largely new design itself and that probably will require the most time to develop, test and certify. The risks therfore are higher with the MK2, than with FOC or MK1A. One can only hope that ADA has learned anything in the meantime and that IAF control will make things better and not worse.

Mk1A with ASEA ASTRA COMBO is as good as 5th gen stealth fighter for 90% of the PLAF & PAF fighters.

It has the smallest clean config RCS,

Engine fully shielded from enemy radar,

Composite airframe further reducing RCS,

IT HAS THE BIGGEST RADAR SIZE for its smallest frontal clean config RCS.

In most of the engagements it can't be fired upon by enemy fighter , before it fires its BVR.


Only enemy 5th gens by an edge over it.

ASEA jammer , EW suit are further assets, whether internal or externally mounted.


I am writing this probably for the 20 th time.

You hv no argument against any of it.

You typically don't refute it with facts.

Keep quiet for a while.

Then start typing the same deprecating stuff on teja mk1A on the next phase.


Why are you plunging this thread into useless repetitive arguments.

That will tire new guys .

Answer needed.

 

[Foff-Merceneries]

Looks like some paid agents deliberately spreading information to disgrace Tejas...

Sent from my Coolpad 3600I using Tapatalk

 

[ersakthivel]

If misinfimisinfo is spread repeatedly page after page,
It's effectively thread shut down.

It's a mischievous tactic.

No casual visitor will take the pains to go through tons of garbage to find any useful info

 

[Faithful Guy]

Hal Tejas is a decent fighter but it's 20 years late.

Seriously, I am not happy the way this project handled.

 

[Chinmoy]

Stop posting one-liners on every thread. Have the decency to introduce yourself first. And unless you can back up your one-liners with solid arguments, don't post crap.

A warning if you are a false flagger, 'cause we do get a fair bit of them here on this forum: you will be banned if you are found out. And you will be found out.

A suggestion: Change your name to "Faithless Guy", it suits you better.

Don't feed.....................

 

[darshan978]

p

Hal Tejas is a decent fighter but it's 20 years late.

Seriously, I am not happy the way this project handled.

.......................................................................

 

[Sancho]

If misinfimisinfo is spread repeatedly page after page,

Sadly true, because nothing you state is even remotly true. You spam your personal opinions with not even a basic understanding, let alone facts (of any matter, LCA, NLCA, Kaveri, Rafale, MMRCA...). That's why I keep telling you to gain proper knowledge first, from any credible source you can get, because you really need it =>

Mk1A with ASEA ASTRA COMBO is as good as 5th gen stealth fighter

 

[Sancho]

.................................................

 

[ersakthivel]

Sadly true, because nothing you state is even remotly true. You spam your personal opinions with not even a basic understanding, let alone facts (of any matter, LCA, NLCA, Kaveri, Rafale, MMRCA...). That's why I keep telling you to gain proper knowledge first, from any credible source you can get, because you really need it =>

Since you consider yourself a worthy,..WHAT THE HELL IS MI21 class fighter?

Fuel fraction

Texas mk1A>Gripen C>Mig21

Radar cross section
Mig 21>Gripen C>Tejas mk1A

Radome dia

Tejas mk1A,>Gripen C>Mig 21


Thrust to weight ratio

Gehad mk1A>Gripen C>Mig21

Deadly ASEA radar with longer detection range for NVR Missiles
1.Tejas mk1A is te deadliest.

2.Gripen C had smaller radar & No ASEA.

3.MIG 21 smallest , obsolete non ASEA radar.

 

[Sancho]

Since you consider yourself a worthy

That's what you said, not what I said. I suggested to take any credible source, to clear all the misunderstandings you have and then try to argue, not just based on an opinion.

WHAT THE HELL IS MI21 class fighter?

As anybody with basic knowledge would know, a light class fighter!

When you try to support LCA Tejas, shouldn't the minimum knowledge you need to have be, what "LCA" means and which fighter it is meant to replace?

And as always, I ignore your pointless comparisons to Gripen in this thread, once because you have proven time and time again, that you lack knowledge of LCA in the first place, which makes it clear how little knowledge you have on other fighters, but more importantly, because distracting and pointIng fingers to other matters, doesn't change the realities of Tejas!

Nobody ever required it to be an MMRCA or better than foreign fighters. All it needed to provide, were performance and capabilities, according to it's own ASR and the promised time lines!
That's why all that counts for Tejas, is fixing it's own problems and not hyping it into capabilities and comparison, that it simply can't live up to.

Any Light Class Flighter is limited by design, in terms of internal and external space, that's also a basic understanding you need to have.

 

[Advaidhya Tiwari]

As anybody with basic knowledge would know, a light class fighter!

When you try to support LCA Tejas, shouldn't the minimum knowledge you need to have be, what "LCA" means and which fighter it is meant to replace?

And as always, I ignore your pointless comparisons to Gripen in this thread, once because you have proven time and time again, that you lack knowledge of LCA in the first place, which makes it clear how little knowledge you have on other fighters, but more importantly, because distracting and pointIng fingers to other matters, doesn't change the realities of Tejas!

Nobody ever required it to be an MMRCA or better than foreign fighters. All it needed to provide, were performance and capabilities, according to it's own ASR and the promised time lines!
That's why all that counts for Tejas, is fixing it's own problems and not hyping it into capabilities and comparison, that it simply can't live up to.

Any Light Class Flighter is limited by design, in terms of internal and external space, that's also a basic understanding you need to have

This is not same as Mig21 class fighters. MiG21 is 3rd generation. All light class fighters can't be classified as MiG21 class fighter. The engine of MiG21 was also low thrust, MToW was less than 10tons and it had a lot of other deficiency.

@ersakthivel has a point here. But, please note that it is 'AESA' radar and not 'ASEA' radar. ASEA sounds more like ASEAN countries' radar

 

[ersakthivel]

Sadly true, because nothing you state is even remotly true. You spam your personal opinions with not even a basic understanding, let alone facts (of any matter, LCA, NLCA, Kaveri, Rafale, MMRCA...). That's why I keep telling you to gain proper knowledge first, from any credible source you can get, because you really need it =>

That's what you said, not what I said. I suggested to take any credible source, to clear all the misunderstandings you have and then try to argue, not just based on an opinion.


As anybody with basic knowledge would know, a light class fighter!

When you try to support LCA Tejas, shouldn't the minimum knowledge you need to have be, what "LCA" means and which fighter it is meant to replace?

And as always, I ignore your pointless comparisons to Gripen in this thread, once because you have proven time and time again, that you lack knowledge of LCA in the first place, which makes it clear how little knowledge you have on other fighters, but more importantly, because distracting and pointIng fingers to other matters, doesn't change the realities of Tejas!

Nobody ever required it to be an MMRCA or better than foreign fighters. All it needed to provide, were performance and capabilities, according to it's own ASR and the promised time lines!
That's why all that counts for Tejas, is fixing it's own problems and not hyping it into capabilities and comparison, that it simply can't live up to.

Any Light Class Flighter is limited by design, in terms of internal and external space, that's also a basic understanding you need to have.

Better try your skills in story writing .

You are unfit to even to hv a basic technical discussion..

There are three class of fighter
Light
Medium
Heavy.

Light single engineering fighter make up the bulk of fighter fleet world wide.

National like Russia, which hv vast airspaces &


US which prosecute wars long distance away from home,

Primarily rely on medium & heavy fighters nowadays, slowly retiring their fleet of light fighters.

Europe enjoys peace dividend, & standardizes on twin engined multi role fighters.


India which has its both its potential enemies right next to borders needs light 500 to 800 Km range light fighters in large numbers.

Light fighters doesn't mean inferior fighters,

Fighter's effective ness is rated by

Wing loading,
Thrust to weight ratio,
RCS,
ITR,
STR,
G max,
Fuel fraction,
G onset rate,
AESA radar, long range BVR combo,
EW suits
HMDS enabled high off bore WVR missile firing capability,

Etc,
Most importantly cost effective ness, geostrategic considerations .

In all these specs listed above

Texas is light years away from MIG 21.

SO ONLY AN AGENDA POSTER WILL REPEATEDLY DUMP GARBAGE SAYING TEJAS IS A MIG 21 CLASS FIGHTER.

One fighter can't be at more than one place , however effective it may be,

So we need numbers .

Not just range & load alone determine the best fighter


Different war scenario needs different class of fighters.

If we use your LIGHT CLASS, HEAVY CLASS, MIG 21 CLASS BS category as sole criteria for specifications

Then we can conclude B52 is the world's best fighter.

 

[ersakthivel]

Is the 300 KM band around indian borders going to be declared no man's zone in any future conflict?

Won't there be any targets?

Won't any stressed IA Column call for air support within these 400 km range?

Bulk of battle field air strikes will happen here in that area .

This range is fully covered by gehad with decent combat loads &PGMs, all cost effective & indigenously produced.

Especially pakistan can be fully covered by tejas

Also it has refuelling probe & buddy refueling.

So it can be operated from interior airbases also with in-flight refuelling safe from enemy retaliatory attack.

 

[Enquirer]

For the millionth time....there's no fighter categories like Light, Medium, Heavy. It's just nonsense the DRDO started because they called their fighter LCA! IAF joined the chorus & speaks of designing their fleet in terms of light/medium/heavy! Utter stupidity.

No air force, organization or think tank ever uses these stupid categorization.

Does a single person ever open his/her wardrobe and say my clothes are in small/medium/large sizes!! Instead, it's based on qualities/purpose - like formal wear, athletic wear, casual wear or like cotton, wool etc! Which means it's categorized based on capabilities/roles.

Mig29's MTOW is 20 tonnes and hence a Medium fighter?
Tejas Mk1 MTOW is less then 15 tonnes and hence a light fighter?
BUT Tejas and Mig29 have the similar payload capacity. Now does it make any sense?
Su30MKI and A10 warthog being are 'Heavy' fighters. Does it make any sense to put them in the same category?

Sensible people talk of fighters based on it's capabilities/roles like single/twin engined, interceptor, ground attack, air superiority, long range bomber etc etc.

 

[ersakthivel]

Medium & Heavy 30 ton fighters hv heavy maintenance foot prints., cost.

Light fighters are cost effective, can be operated in large numbers & ideally suited to defend strategic installations inside country, air patrol,recon, etc.

But there is no cattle classic like MIG 21 class fighters, anywhere in production .

Mig21 was primarily made to disrupt US bombers in Soviet airspace with missiles.

It came into service with no radar, gun & just missiles.

Calling Tejas mig 21 class is misleading

 

[Enquirer]

It's utter baloney and foolish thinking that a medium fighter is cheaper than a heavy fighter.
Fighter jets are not potatoes or scrap metal that's sold by the weight!

Bulk of the cost of a modern fighter jet is in avionics (which weigh very iittle) and not in the airframe (which contributes to most weight).

Name one air force in the world other than IAF/DRDO that talks about their fleet structured as light/medium/heavy!!!

 

[Sancho]

This is not same as Mig21 class fighters. MiG21 is 3rd generation.

You are mixing up 2 separate things here, weight class of a fighter, which is dependent on the Maximum Take Off Weight and fighter generations, which is dependent on standard capabilities or techs.
The Mig 21, just as Tejas is a light class fighter, just from 2 different generations, just as the Su 30 and the Su 57 are heavy class fighters, from 2 different generations. So the weight class category, has nothing to do with the generation.

 

[Advaidhya Tiwari]

You are mixing up 2 separate things here, weight class of a fighter, which is dependent on the Maximum Take Off Weight and fighter generations, which is dependent on standard capabilities or techs.
The Mig 21, just as Tejas is a light class fighter, just from 2 different generations, just as the Su 30 and the Su 57 are heavy class fighters, from 2 different generations. So the weight class category, has nothing to do with the generation.

MiG21 is not a capable fighter. It also has very poor payload. Even if you want to classify it on weight, its MToW of less than 10tons make it ultralight, not light. LCA Mk1 has MToW of 14tons and can carry much more than MiG21.

It's utter baloney and foolish thinking that a medium fighter is cheaper than a heavy fighter.
Fighter jets are not potatoes or scrap metal that's sold by the weight!

Bulk of the cost of a modern fighter jet is in avionics (which weigh very iittle) and not in the airframe (which contributes to most weight).

Name one air force in the world other than IAF/DRDO that talks about their fleet structured as light/medium/heavy!!!

It is correct that initial cost will not differ by weight. However, the fuel costs will be massive, Su30, for example, consumes over 2 times fuel as Tejas for same distance sortie. We are speaking in fuel that weighs tons per sortie. So, to attack a narrow country like Pakistan with maximum width of 600km, Tejas would be an ideal plane and cost less than half of that to operate Su30 and less than 70% of Rafale fuel expense. The added cost benefit of having to service only one engine is also there.

In today's world, the classification of plane as air superiority, strike don't mean much as strike has become an easy job with laser guided munition. Only air to air job remains to be focused. I am excluding CAS planes like A10 or Naval plane like MiG29K

 

[Enquirer]

MiG21 is not a capable fighter. It also has very poor payload. Even if you want to classify it on weight, its MToW of less than 10tons make it ultralight, not light. LCA Mk1 has MToW of 14tons and can carry much more than MiG21.


It is correct that initial cost will not differ by weight. However, the fuel costs will be massive, Su30, for example, consumes over 2 times fuel as Tejas for same distance sortie. We are speaking in fuel that weighs tons per sortie. So, to attack a narrow country like Pakistan with maximum width of 600km, Tejas would be an ideal plane and cost less than half of that to operate Su30 and less than 70% of Rafale fuel expense. The added cost benefit of having to service only one engine is also there.

In today's world, the classification of plane as air superiority, strike don't mean much as strike has become an easy job with laser guided munition. Only air to air job remains to be focused. I am excluding CAS planes like A10 or Naval plane like MiG29K

Fuel cost is the least of the worries for any airforce!!
The only reason they worry about engine efficiency is to maximize the fuel onboard. If an aircraft can carry more fuel (to lift heavy load or travel farther) airforces don't give a damn!