Well wet thrust of mig21 is 70kn.. 110kn is the wet thrust as well.So they wanted to replace mig 21a 40kn engine plane and replace it with heavy 110kn and call it light combat aircraft
Well wet thrust of mig21 is 70kn.. 110kn is the wet thrust as well.So they wanted to replace mig 21a 40kn engine plane and replace it with heavy 110kn and call it light combat aircraft
The developers were bluffing that they will manage to make a 110kn engine and wasted indian government money.They must have presented a 70kn design over which tejas would have been made .Well wet thrust of mig21 is 70kn.. 110kn is the wet thrust as well.
Engine thrust has nothing to do with Weight class of a fighter. Its the payload it would be carrying and gross weight of the fighter which makes it a Light, Medium or Heavy category fighter.So they wanted to replace mig 21a 40kn engine plane and replace it with heavy 110kn and call it light combat aircraft
There is critical difference. If we were offering mk2 to another country they are welcome to doubt everything about it but our own airforce which is supposed to be deeply involved in development of mk2 ( there own staff quality requirements) and already operating mk1 ( with heavy praise from pilots ) must show some more confidence into the project.My point is, every jets under MRFA is flying and flying for a long time. But Mk2 has yet to make its first flight.
When it comes to Malaysian LCA competition, we do make fun of Hurjet by saying that how Turkish could compare it with Tejas when it has not even came out from drawing board. But when it comes to our end, we are doing exactly the same.
Let Mk2 fly first and then let us capitalize on its performance.
It's supposed to be a light interceptor for us...That was the role of Tejas when it was conceived in 80's to replace Mig-21, which was our interceptor. Tejas design wise is a Multi role fighter rather then an interceptor.
It would be their opinion nothing concreteBlock-II
View attachment 166509
Better have some truth in the statement and not pure hopium pakora from Mr. IDRW
If this is true .. Dependence on UK reduces .. With only the ejection seat remaining.Block-II
View attachment 166509
Better have some truth in the statement and not pure hopium pakora from Mr. IDRW
IAF should have outright commited to 6 squadron mkii blk1 & 4 squadron mk2 blk2. This talk of "will decide in future" , just create uncertainty which inhibits large scale private sector participation. Piecemeal orders are a bane for Indian MIC. Private sector investments are driven by certainty & clarity.Block-II
View attachment 166509
Better have some truth in the statement and not pure hopium pakora from Mr. IDRW
Without a confidence from IAF, GoI would not have sanctioned the project nor HAL would have invested in it.There is critical difference. If we were offering mk2 to another country they are welcome to doubt everything about it but our own airforce which is supposed to be deeply involved in development of mk2 ( there own staff quality requirements) and already operating mk1 ( with heavy praise from pilots ) must show some more confidence into the project.
Anyway 6 sq is a good start .
I think it just looks like ADA is cutting out Chobham .. Nose cone and retractable probe were both theirs.IAF should have outright commited to 6 squadron mkii blk1 & 4 squadron mk2 blk2. This talk of "will decide in future" , just create uncertainty which inhibits large scale private sector participation. Piecemeal orders are a bane for Indian MIC. Private sector investments are driven by certainty & clarity.
The other thing in that article which worries me is ADA agreeing to IAF to not develop a retractable refueling probe for mk2. ADA/HAL should keep in mind that their products have to compete in international arms market. If IAF wants a fixed probe, just give them a vanilla version of mk2 but mk2 should not be handicapped for IAF whims.
It WAS supposed to be a interceptor.It's supposed to be a light interceptor for us...
A low cost option to operate at the same time potent enough .
SAM won't replace the role of interceptor they have their own limitations....It WAS supposed to be a interceptor.
But it has some inherit design limitation over Mig-21 to be a true interceptor like it. So it was designed as a multirole fighter later on.
Anyway with the advance made in SAM, interceptor concept has taken a backseat.
Yeah, 105KN, out of thin air, no technology at hand. We still couldn't make jet engine by ourselves, thanks to import lobbies giving no chance and funds to agencies. Did they give active consultations like Navy does? No, they just identified and kept changing goal posts. They accepted mk1 and mk1a now, why?IAF wanted Mk1 with a 105kn engine from day 1. They identified 53 shortcomings on it and asked ADA/HAL to fix it.
But they has been provided with an interim solution with a 85kn engine which was actually a fall back jugaad for the prototypes. Now keep yourself in place of user who would have to fly it.
Yeah, more imports. The point was the forces except navy never supported development of domestic defence industry, even political will was missing.Tbh, that used to be true pre 2015. Of late forces are spending more than the sanctioned amount. Lots and lots of key acquisitions in armaments, drones, is never announced. Look for all the Israel sold such and such product to an undisclosed south Asian nation for hints.
Yeah right, not for the plane which we want to make by ourselves. If they wanted to, they would have done it already. Didn't even give active consultations and funds like what Navy does. They just wanted foreign ka maal, mig29 leke ro rahe ab,same goes for mki. Commies and yanks both infiltrated our ranks and sabotaged a lot DRDO and ISRO projects.Changing goal post thing is there I too accept. But you need to give credit to IAF for their past procurements where they have purchased the things best of it's category which they can offer. None of the purchases are useless. Also they improved them a lot after the purchase. So they know how to make things better. But their obsession with quality and slower than snail procurement policy of Govt is the problem. They choose a product and by the time Govt clears all approvals new gen aircrafts will be there in market and IAF do not want to settle for less. In my opinion this is the problem with IAF and frequent change in goal post also reason for this. You need to agree on the thing that fighter aircrafts are the only things which are upgrading at rapid phase and creating lot of imbalance between each generation in terms of it's capability and power with it. Like to tackle 5th gen fighter we require lot of 4th gen fighters.
Actually Mk2 is the exact form of LCA IAF wanted. But we force feed them Mk1A instead.
Now don't think that I am anyhow against force feeding Mk1A, but the fund which would have gone for Mk2 has been rerouted to Mk1A. So next time they would obviously be sceptic of what is coming out of the stable.
So its not damage control, but just reiterating what the have considered.
My point is, every jets under MRFA is flying and flying for a long time. But Mk2 has yet to make its first flight.
When it comes to Malaysian LCA competition, we do make fun of Hurjet by saying that how Turkish could compare it with Tejas when it has not even came out from drawing board. But when it comes to our end, we are doing exactly the same.
Let Mk2 fly first and then let us capitalize on its performance.
15??HAL made them even they could make an order out of its own pocket. That number is a joke. And let me remind you, this project and the projects you wrote are actually force feeded. Let's not talk about arjun, the numbers mediocre compared to 900+ T90s we have. ATAGS is already fucking awesome but yeah, we want athosLCH---- 15 LSPs already ordered.
LUH---- 12 LSPs already ordered.
Arjun Mk1--- 124 ordered
Arjun Mk1A-- 118 ordered
Dhanush----- 114 ordered
ATAGS----- AON has been created.
Apart from ATAGS, I believe you are aware of others. But intelligence has nothing to do with anything logical for most people here.
Thread starter | Similar threads | Forum | Replies | Date |
---|---|---|---|---|
ADA Tejas Mark-II/Medium Weight Fighter | Knowledge Repository | 6 | ||
AERO INDIA 2021 | Science and Technology | 308 | ||
ADA Tejas (LCA) News and Discussions | Indian Air Force | 17457 | ||
P | ADA DRDO and HAL Delays a threat to National Security | Internal Security | 20 |