ADA Tejas Mark-II/Medium Weight Fighter

[Suryavanshi]

More than Bombers we are in Immediate need of transport aircraft.
We have buy foreign platforms for Tankers and AWACS, a indigenous solution will make these platforms more affordable.

Don't need to shoot straight for a System like C 17 but start with a more humble systems like NAL saras for VIP transport then scale up to systems like C-130 and beyond.

 

[Chinmoy]

Yup strikers will have drawbacks against proper bombers but dedicated bomber too has huge drawback against modern enemy. Bombers are too huge and slow that they are easy prey for Sam's and long range aam.

Unless you have Stealth bombers enemy awacs would locate your bomber easily and Sam and aam will be coming for you.

Now of course bomber could launch standoff weapons from safe distance but given the cost of stand off weapons the quantity will be rather limited and perhaps it's better to use multiple strikers for same job then ! At least they can run away faster.

A fully loaded bomb truck MKI would have a RCS as large as 6 to 7 sqm (minimum). On top of that with that much weight under belly and under wings, its better not to talk of maneuverability.
In Feb 2018, we used a group of 12 M2k to bomb Balakot. 6 among those 12 are only for ECM role which effectively masked our intrusion. Even the day later its the MKIs which were engaged in electronic warfare. So a slow moving bomber could also use ECM from its escorts.
As far as employing standoff weapons in concerned, we are moving towards smart weapons. A strike aircraft carrying dumb bombs is as vulnerable as a bomber carrying the same.
So saying that since we have strike aircraft and don't require Bomber is something which I don't agree with. Economically I do agree that it is a costly perspective. But hey war is a costly business. You can't win war with cost cutting.

 

[Aniruddha Mulay]

A fully loaded bomb truck MKI would have a RCS as large as 6 to 7 sqm (minimum). On top of that with that much weight under belly and under wings, its better not to talk of maneuverability.
In Feb 2018, we used a group of 12 M2k to bomb Balakot. 6 among those 12 are only for ECM role which effectively masked our intrusion. Even the day later its the MKIs which were engaged in electronic warfare. So a slow moving bomber could also use ECM from its escorts.
As far as employing standoff weapons in concerned, we are moving towards smart weapons. A strike aircraft carrying dumb bombs is as vulnerable as a bomber carrying the same.
So saying that since we have strike aircraft and don't require Bomber is something which I don't agree with. Economically I do agree that it is a costly perspective. But hey war is a costly business. You can't win war with cost cutting.

We need something like this.
Similar to the AGM-154 JSOW.
It was showcased at Aero India 2019, do not know what happened to it afterwards.

 

[Bleh]

Economically I do agree that it is a costly perspective. But hey war is a costly business. You can't win war with cost cutting.

2 tactical bombers supercruising with their own ECM & each with 5 Spice-2000 stealthily inside internal bomb-bays, WILL be more cost effective than a whole squadron of striker/fighters doing this;

we used a group of 12 M2k to bomb Balakot. 6 among those 12 are only for ECM role which effectively masked our intrusion.

 

[HariPrasad-1]

Why? It's either that, or our 270 strong Sukhoi fleet spends the war doing only CAP & escort missions instead of lending a hand in the airstrikes... it has the maximum range and payload in IAF.
We have enough of them for some to play mule.

I think the philosophy on which the plane was build has become a bit outdated. We can keep it relevant for few years by various updates which includes the measures to reduce RCS, putting latest electronics and radar and ultra long range BVR. Without the measures I listed, MKIs will be a good bombers where the air defense is very weak, Let us put Russia's heavy passive radar and Astra MK2 or SFDR on it. Then only MKI will make sense in current scenario.

 

[HariPrasad-1]

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

This is an excellent concept. We will not require MKI once we get this one. The only thing which is lacking in my opinion is frontal stealth even if it is not a complete stealth. If we are able to keep the weight bellow 9.5 tons, this one can be a great plane with very high T/W ratio. In my opinion, we should put GE 414 EPE in to this one. It will be unmatched in power to weight ratio.

 

[HariPrasad-1]

I understand your concern but comparing India of 2004 to 2014 to that of current one is not fair at all.
Something very significant has changed, I'll give u a hint.

Vs

Vs

Last is Badass. I like that one.

 

[HariPrasad-1]

Jaguar has longer legs than lca. More importantly jaguar squadron are already operational. It takes years to form and operationalize an squadron. No point throwing all that away in a jiffy.

Jaguar if re- engined will serve till 2035. If not they'll be retired before 2025. Our jaguars were built much later than western once and have life left in their airframes. No one throws away a platform which has structural life left. Not india not west. There jaguars were simply much older to ours.

Therefore, I recommend a scaled up version of HTFE 25 with afterburner. HTFE 35 with afterburner thrust of 50 KN + will keep this one relevant for more than a decade. After all we have spent a lot on Darin III upgrade.

 

[HariPrasad-1]

We are jumping on the program of slapping BRAHMOS on MKI. But we have effectively forgot that a MKI with BRAHMOS under its belly could take off, but can't land. It would be like the Khukri which would not go in scabbard unless it tastes blood. If a mission objective is changed or cancelled, which is common, then the MKI can't land unless it drops off the missile. A serious limitation I believe.

I do not know this. I doubt this one.

 

[HariPrasad-1]

We are jumping on the program of slapping BRAHMOS on MKI. But we have effectively forgot that a MKI with BRAHMOS under its belly could take off, but can't land. It would be like the Khukri which would not go in scabbard unless it tastes blood. If a mission objective is changed or cancelled, which is common, then the MKI can't land unless it drops off the missile. A serious limitation I believe.

I do not know this. I doubt this one.

 

[HariPrasad-1]

A fully loaded MWF is as manoeuvrable as a 747, even if its completely swing-role unlike those Su-30 as @Chinmoy pointed out. They can still get only as high as 50,000ft & easily shot down by BVR volley (considering jamming) at almost maximum range... Escorts won't protect it from that.

This is true for almost all planes. No plane can maneuver with high "g" turn with full load. MWF is a very light aircraft compared to other aircrafts which carries same payload. So this limitation is not MWF specific.

 

[Bhurki]

To be frank...
I just dont think jaguar will make it through this decade alive..
Even though the units taken from france, oman, uk will help with body LRU.
There are just no spare engines to keep the fleet operational beyond this batch of engines which will have its technical life end by 2025.

 

[Neptune]

This is true for almost all planes. No plane can maneuver with high "g" turn with full load. MWF is a very light aircraft compared to other aircrafts which carries same payload. So this limitation is not MWF specific.

Not true, Sukhois can still do cobras with weapons.

I think the philosophy on which the plane was build has become a bit outdated. We can keep it relevant for few years by various updates which includes the measures to reduce RCS, putting latest electronics and radar and ultra long range BVR. Without the measures I listed, MKIs will be a good bombers where the air defense is very weak, Let us put Russia's heavy passive radar and Astra MK2 or SFDR on it. Then only MKI will make sense in current scenario.

Long range, high payload, high maneuverability, multirole capability, and powerful radar is outdated? Not many aircraft have these capabilities and attributes, as an example some aircraft have good maneuverability but as a result have poor range and light payload. It’s a premium aircraft not some JF-17.

This is an excellent concept. We will not require MKI once we get this one. The only thing which is lacking in my opinion is frontal stealth even if it is not a complete stealth. If we are able to keep the weight bellow 9.5 tons, this one can be a great plane with very high T/W ratio. In my opinion, we should put GE 414 EPE in to this one. It will be unmatched in power to weight ratio.

Wrong, the LCA can never replace the MKI or match it’s capability, it’s a short range aircraft with a light payload which is limited by its radar size. It’s basically a modern day Mig-21 or F-16.

For deep penetration missions, the LCA just doesn’t have the range to match the MKI, likewise for CAP missions the MKI can stay airborne longer and challenging the enemy like it did in February. If India wanted to strike deep with LCAs, it would take up to 3 LCAs mark1s with aerial re-fuelers to match a single MKI which means the chances are higher that India will lose aircraft due to attrition. Moreover, it would take less sorties for MKIs, less sorties means less cost, and the fewer sorties are flown the fewer aircraft will be lost. Lastly the weapons the MKI carries are more capable, the Brhamos allows the MKI to safely strike from far away and inflict heavy damage.

 

[Bleh]

Can you put all quotes to a same person in a single post like this? Easier to read.

...various updates which includes the measures to reduce RCS, putting latest electronics and radar and ultra long range BVR. Without the measures I listed, MKIs will be a good bombers where the air defense is very weak

This is true for almost all planes. No plane can maneuver with high "g" turn with full load.

But a high-altitude stealth jet with 50t MTOW (just above the class of "heavy fighters") specifically designed with internal bomb-bays for its 10-12t load to maintain low RCS, will find the job MUCH easier than any updated Su-30!
Without exposed ordnance it's need to manoeuvre will be less. With that sort of payload, it'll only need to go alone or paired with enough toys to jam the fuck out if any incoming threat... unlike our whole Mirage squadron on Feb 2019 with 1 Spice-2000 each & half of them escorts with AAMs/ECMs.

Discussed above, please read the whole conversation.

It's not a concept I am making up... This sort of tactical bombers are called Interdictors, our Canberras were of that category.
Even USA considered one based on F-22 called FB-22 Strike Raptor, with delta-wings to increase payload to 54.5t & large weapons bay. But decided they already have too many heavy bombers to do the job after they fully dominate enemy airspace.

Earlier that the role was fulfilled by F-111, while Su-34 is a jugaad. Just concentrated on carrying payload & fuel.

But as @IndianHawk pointed out, first we need to build high payload ORCA platform & stealth AMCA... Only them will we be in a position to try bigger!

Wrong, the LCA can never replace the MKI or match it’s capability, it’s a short range aircraft with a light payload which is limited by its radar size. It’s basically a modern day Mig-21 or F-16.
...the Brhamos allows the MKI to safely strike from far away and inflict heavy damage.

Sukhoi fanboy was frozen in ice for two years, just got defrosted?

 

[IndianHawk]

I think the philosophy on which the plane was build has become a bit outdated. We can keep it relevant for few years by various updates which includes the measures to reduce RCS, putting latest electronics and radar and ultra long range BVR. Without the measures I listed, MKIs will be a good bombers where the air defense is very weak, Let us put Russia's heavy passive radar and Astra MK2 or SFDR on it. Then only MKI will make sense in current scenario.

Su30 will be useful still. It will carry standoff heavy weapons which rafale , lca/mwf would avoid to maintain low RCS while on a deep strike mission.

Su30 can carry three bramhos Ng in future or it can carry multiple ngram to take out enemy radars from safe distance. It's massive jammers can protect the attack party from enemy missiles and provide guidance with long range radar.

It can refuel LCA/mwf rafale and amca so that they don't have to carry drop tanks while going for deep strike.

Su30 will become force multiplier standoff weaponry platform in future .

 

[IndianHawk]

Therefore, I recommend a scaled up version of HTFE 25 with afterburner. HTFE 35 with afterburner thrust of 50 KN + will keep this one relevant for more than a decade. After all we have spent a lot on Darin III upgrade.

Htfe 35 might take some years to mature and there is no such plan as of now. Better to focus efforts on speeding up mwf. 2-4 additional sq of mk1a must be ordered meanwhile.

 

[Chinmoy]

I do not know this. I doubt this one.

You should listen and read the Air force or DRDO then.

Leave that. Could you show one video which shows a MKI landing with a BRAHMOS strapped in?

 

[Bhurki]

Htfe 35 might take some years to mature and there is no such plan as of now. Better to focus efforts on speeding up mwf. 2-4 additional sq of mk1a must be ordered meanwhile.

Darin 3 upgrade is said to have costed over a $ billion. You suggested that should be scrapped?!

 

[Bleh]

...Could you show one video which shows a MKI landing with a BRAHMOS strapped in?

Ofcourse he can't... I don't think Su-39l0 has ever flown with Brahmos to come back without firing it.

 

[Bleh]

Htfe 35 might take some years to mature and there is no such plan as of now. Better to focus efforts on speeding up mwf. 2-4 additional sq of mk1a must be ordered meanwhile.

Darin 3 upgrade is said to have costed over a $ billion. You suggested that should be scrapped?!

Rolls-Royce Turbomeca Adour Mk.102 can do 22.5-37.5kN while HTFE-25 is 25kN. Why not go for the Mk.951 version that powers India's BAE Hawks generating 29 kN?... Can the same afterburner not be fitted to it?

That could quickly give us a 29-40kN engine to see the jaguars off for the rest of their days.