Indian Air Force: News & Discussions

[p2prada]

From 1 to 21 seconds a vertical loop in 20 seconds gives it a Vertical STR of 18 deg(360 degree /20 seconds).

Once an idiot always an idiot.

 

[p2prada]

@p2prada not even giving a single reference and arguing with @ersakthivel who is giving reference for his every claim , p2prada sir, please give reference

Go back to 2009 and read all my posts from the beginning in all the LCA threads. We are in the fifth thread, I was there since the first.

The amount of information I have added to the archives here (along with many others) make ersakthivel's little references worth nothing but dribble.

 

[abhi_the _gr8_maratha]

Go back to 2009 and read all my posts from the beginning in all the LCA threads. We are in the fifth thread, I was there since the first.

The amount of information I have added to the archives here (along with many others) make ersakthivel's little references worth nothing but dribble.

things have change since 2009 like you said about j10 radar

 

[ersakthivel]

http://www.tejas.gov.in/IOC-Brochure.pdf

Envelope expansion done till 24 deg AOA is clearly mentioned in the documents, implicit that it will be further expanded with LSP-6 even after FOC as said by Suneet krishna.

 

[ersakthivel]

Go back to 2009 and read all my posts from the beginning in all the LCA threads. We are in the fifth thread, I was there since the first.

The amount of information I have added to the archives here (along with many others) make ersakthivel's little references worth nothing but dribble.

In one of those words of wisdom posts you have written that small fighters like tejas does not need asea radar at all.And a certain twin blade intervened to say grippen can do with asea radar, and you knidly granted the favor to grippen alone among all the small fighters!!!


Each and every one of your posts in tejas threads are heated fights based on your preconceived personal prejudiced opinion on tejas without a single source other than the bud headed half baked article by some Austin of flight global ,


through out the threads you repeated each and every word written by that stupid fool like pearls of wisdom with no understanding of a modern fly by wire fighter based on relaxed static stability, which even russians did not attempt in the eighties,

and mostly superfluous garbage since the release to service document during IOC-2 debunked all the claims of yours as worthless misinformation.

Thats why you are not seen in the tejas thread since IOC-2.

Once an idiot always an idiot.

But is it better than born as a retard and forever remain as retard, atleast an idiot has a scope for learning things a retard has no scope.

WDon't buy Apple, LG, Samsung, Nokia or any other foreign brand phone. There are new Indian brands available in the market today. Use those.

Top 10 desi mobile phones | Know Your Mobile India

Buy Videocon TVs and ACs. Buy Godrej refrigerators and washing machines.

We have such good car companies, still people buy Honda, Hyundai and Ford instead of Maruti, Tata and Mahindra.

If you have even one foreign product out of these then you don't deserve to even have the opinion that the IAF should buy Indian at all. Always remember that the consumer appliance industry is far, far bigger than the defence industry, and you are practically handing out money to foreign companies instead of Indian companies.

You want the IAF to buy Indian, then start at your home first. A modern Swadeshi movement has more benefit than IAF buying LCAs.

There is only one person on my ignore list. And don't worry, you won't go on my ignore list. You haven't earned that honor. :thumb:

btw you are really down to your knees with your buy foreign electronics for home appliance stuff,

Is that what we call authentic source based argument in a technical discussion, Hard to believe.

by the same token the best smartphones are now available with apple, samsung ,sony, does that mean Russians should scrap pakfa and buy a korean fighter?

Also can you list the timing of all non thrust vectoring fighters in a full vertical turn, in case you know a thing or two about fighters as you claim to be doing for 8 years?

And Ignore list!!!. Put tejas on your ignore list , not me.

if you stop posting your prejudiced personal opinion as gospel of truth on tejas why am i going to argue with you?

 

[abhi_the _gr8_maratha]

china is known for reverse engineering and not for innovation and they copied the radar of j10 with faults as well as fly by wire and it had met with many accidents and there is one mentioned at wikipedia, even sanctioned by america, tejas never met with any accidents and every pilot praises it and call it most pilot friendly plane of iaf

 

[Pulkit]

I think I gave a few reasons about this why.adding to it.. 1)Under uncertainity there has to be a bac up option....
2)It will keep ur assembly lines running..
3)Your man power will gain experience...
4)Help in future to save time in assembly of other aicrafts..
5)helps to find out remedies concerning aicraft..
6)helps to resolve present issues ...
7)provides balanced airforce structure mix of desi and videsi
8) and at top of all numbers....

I read somewhere do rectify i stated wrong..

"Quantity can sometimes be quality"....

Numbers provide faith it boost the man in uniform....
It brings down the enemy morale...

What use is it to the IAF? 40+80 till now if nothing else they can be escorts or trainers ... by the way you said there is some role for them ... Let them play what ever role u have in mind..... with 12 squad.....MK1+Mk2 .....
and we will also have MIGS Rafales FGAF as front runners.....MRCA will be also a contender if our MOD doesnt screw up again....

I dont wanna know about foreign countries I limit to concerns to my nation only...Like in school days our parents always used to copare us with the student who have scored more and never looked at the guy scored lesser than us....

I never said only Indian aircrafts but some day you must be capable enough to do that 100% change totally Indian.

Just for the sake of info... ne Indian who might be travelling in a BMW today will also remb Maruti800 days.... they moved on ... and so do we need to move on ... move from foreign dependency to self...

Phone I have Micromax Canvas 4,I have a maruti 800 still in house in use along with other few others but my mum till today prefer to ride 800 only...Godrej is also here .....

we can even go ahead Indian watches,powder ,soaps,sot drinks etc etc but thats not the point...

The best thing is to maintain balance .... Some you import some you manufacture....
I never said dont buy Rafale(Though i wished the same) but asked more LCA Tejas ...

As i remember you said there were two instead of one...
Honor ... thats nice... keep bragging...
U still didnt understand my POV ... and with your hawkish view u will ever understand that.....

Why? I know your PoV, but why? Why should we induct Tejas? What use is it to the IAF?

There has to be a solid reason for the IAF to buy more LCAs. They have already decided to buy 123. That number itself is more than what most air forces have. Total LCAs to be ordered are 178. Even France, UK, Germany, Italy and Spain have smaller aircraft numbers than that. Italy and Spain are less than 100 as a matter of fact. 178 is already a huge number.



I have asked this to many people, and I will ask this to you as well. Make a list of all electronics items and vehicles you have at your house. I am 100% certain that you have at least one foreign item. For every foreign household appliance or electronics you have at home there is an equivalent Indian brand available in the market. But I am pretty sure you have something foreign, be it a vehicle, or a phone or your refrigerator. Why?

Don't buy Apple, LG, Samsung, Nokia or any other foreign brand phone. There are new Indian brands available in the market today. Use those.
Top 10 desi mobile phones | Know Your Mobile India

Buy Videocon TVs and ACs. Buy Godrej refrigerators and washing machines.

We have such good car companies, still people buy Honda, Hyundai and Ford instead of Maruti, Tata and Mahindra.

If you have even one foreign product out of these then you don't deserve to even have the opinion that the IAF should buy Indian at all. Always remember that the consumer appliance industry is far, far bigger than the defence industry, and you are practically handing out money to foreign companies instead of Indian companies.

You want the IAF to buy Indian, then start at your home first. A modern Swadeshi movement has more benefit than IAF buying LCAs.

I have truncated the rest of your post since it is just repeating what I have already said.

There is only one person on my ignore list. And don't worry, you won't go on my ignore list. You haven't earned that honor. :thumb:

 

[Pulkit]

I think I gave a few reasons about this why.adding to it.. 1)Under uncertainity there has to be a bac up option....
2)It will keep ur assembly lines running..
3)Your man power will gain experience...
4)Help in future to save time in assembly of other aicrafts..
5)helps to find out remedies concerning aicraft..
6)helps to resolve present issues ...
7)provides balanced airforce structure mix of desi and videsi
8) and at top of all numbers....

I read somewhere do rectify i stated wrong..

"Quantity can sometimes be quality"....

Numbers provide faith it boost the man in uniform....
It brings down the enemy morale...

What use is it to the IAF? 40+80 till now if nothing else they can be escorts or trainers ... by the way you said there is some role for them ... Let them play what ever role u have in mind..... with 12 squad.....MK1+Mk2 .....
and we will also have MIGS Rafales FGAF as front runners.....MRCA will be also a contender if our MOD doesnt screw up again....

I dont wanna know about foreign countries I limit to concerns to my nation only...Like in school days our parents always used to copare us with the student who have scored more and never looked at the guy scored lesser than us....

I never said only Indian aircrafts but some day you must be capable enough to do that 100% change totally Indian.

Just for the sake of info... ne Indian who might be travelling in a BMW today will also remb Maruti800 days.... they moved on ... and so do we need to move on ... move from foreign dependency to self...

Phone I have Micromax Canvas 4,I have a maruti 800 still in house in use along with other few others but my mum till today prefer to ride 800 only...Godrej is also here .....

we can even go ahead Indian watches,powder ,soaps,sot drinks etc etc but thats not the point...

The best thing is to maintain balance .... Some you import some you manufacture....
I never said dont buy Rafale(Though i wished the same) but asked more LCA Tejas ...

As i remember you said there were two instead of one...
Honor ... thats nice... keep bragging...
U still didnt understand my POV ... and with your hawkish view u will ever understand that.....

Why? I know your PoV, but why? Why should we induct Tejas? What use is it to the IAF?

There has to be a solid reason for the IAF to buy more LCAs. They have already decided to buy 123. That number itself is more than what most air forces have. Total LCAs to be ordered are 178. Even France, UK, Germany, Italy and Spain have smaller aircraft numbers than that. Italy and Spain are less than 100 as a matter of fact. 178 is already a huge number.



I have asked this to many people, and I will ask this to you as well. Make a list of all electronics items and vehicles you have at your house. I am 100% certain that you have at least one foreign item. For every foreign household appliance or electronics you have at home there is an equivalent Indian brand available in the market. But I am pretty sure you have something foreign, be it a vehicle, or a phone or your refrigerator. Why?

Don't buy Apple, LG, Samsung, Nokia or any other foreign brand phone. There are new Indian brands available in the market today. Use those.
Top 10 desi mobile phones | Know Your Mobile India

Buy Videocon TVs and ACs. Buy Godrej refrigerators and washing machines.

We have such good car companies, still people buy Honda, Hyundai and Ford instead of Maruti, Tata and Mahindra.

If you have even one foreign product out of these then you don't deserve to even have the opinion that the IAF should buy Indian at all. Always remember that the consumer appliance industry is far, far bigger than the defence industry, and you are practically handing out money to foreign companies instead of Indian companies.

You want the IAF to buy Indian, then start at your home first. A modern Swadeshi movement has more benefit than IAF buying LCAs.

I have truncated the rest of your post since it is just repeating what I have already said.

There is only one person on my ignore list. And don't worry, you won't go on my ignore list. You haven't earned that honor. :thumb:

 

[p2prada]

I think I gave a few reasons about this why.adding to it.. 1)Under uncertainity there has to be a bac up option....

LCA is not a backup option. It is anything but.

2)It will keep ur assembly lines running..

The current 40 will take a long time for delivery and then production of Mk2 will start and go on for 10 years. Is that enough? With our current requirements we will be making LCAs until 2030.

3)Your man power will gain experience...

Even making 40 is enough. Manpower can be moved between the lines.

4)Help in future to save time in assembly of other aicrafts..

No it doesn't.

5)helps to find out remedies concerning aicraft..

No, it doesn't.

6)helps to resolve present issues ...

Not at all.

7)provides balanced airforce structure mix of desi and videsi

That's not how warfare works.

8) and at top of all numbers....

LCA manufacturing will be the least among all aircraft in a /year basis.

Numbers provide faith it boost the man in uniform....
It brings down the enemy morale...

800 twin engine aircraft do that. 123 single engine aircraft don't.

Do you know that out of all the hundreds of F-16s the USAF has, the first aircraft to enter Iraqi airspace were 2 F-15Es and 4 F-111s, all twin engine aircraft?

Do you also know that not one F-16 has ever received a single OCA mission to date over Iraq?

You are confused about the questions I asked. I wanted to know exactly how IAF is benefited by inducting more LCAs. The points you made, none of them really benefit the IAF. I am asking for the kind of capability LCA provides that IAF can use in a war.

What use is it to the IAF? 40+80 till now if nothing else they can be escorts or trainers ... by the way you said there is some role for them ... Let them play what ever role u have in mind..... with 12 squad.....MK1+Mk2 .....
and we will also have MIGS Rafales FGAF as front runners.....MRCA will be also a contender if our MOD doesnt screw up again....

Basically, you want our pilots to die at a higher rate than usual.

I dont wanna know about foreign countries I limit to concerns to my nation only...Like in school days our parents always used to copare us with the student who have scored more and never looked at the guy scored lesser than us....

I never said only Indian aircrafts but some day you must be capable enough to do that 100% change totally Indian.

So, we should sacrifice capability over indigenization?

It is different if we were talking about inducting AMCA over, say, a 5th gen Rafale with AMCA type specs. But we are not.

Just for the sake of info... ne Indian who might be travelling in a BMW today will also remb Maruti800 days.... they moved on ... and so do we need to move on ... move from foreign dependency to self...

Have you even been in a BMW? You will forget Maruti in a second. It's happened to me.

You can reminisce all day. Nobody regresses. What you are asking IAF to do is to regress. They are flying BMWs and you want them to switch to the Maruti 800. Why would they? They are not anyway. So, that makes the entire discussion is useless anyway.

we can even go ahead Indian watches,powder ,soaps,sot drinks etc etc but thats not the point...

That is the point. We have to kick out everything foreign and buy only Indian as long as an equivalent is available. Why should only the armed forces make the sacrifice?

The best thing is to maintain balance .... Some you import some you manufacture....

Military equipment is not procured based on desi or videshi, it is bought based on requirements, whether it is desi or videshi. The Americans also do the same. They buy armor modules from Germany for their Strykers. Their tank guns are also German and they used that for many decades and still do.

I never said dont buy Rafale(Though i wished the same) but asked more LCA Tejas ...

Now we are getting to the point. Answer why? What is so special the LCA provides that the Rafale does not and viceversa? Give me an answer to both.

As i remember you said there were two instead of one...
Honor ... thats nice... keep bragging...
U still didnt understand my POV ... and with your hawkish view u will ever understand that.....

Your PoV is... pointless. You are bringing emotions into a direct yes or no subject. And you don't have answers to the questions I am asking.

War is hawkish too. You don't stop your enemy before he shoots you and ask him if he is using desi or videshi gun. It is kill or be killed. And when it comes to modern warfare, the weapon you kill with matters a lot. There is a very good chance not a single LCA can survive against a Flanker. In our own exercises Mig-29s and Mirage-2000s have been beaten consistently by the MKI. Pilots have mentioned it was too one-sided, one even said that the M-2000 pilots had no idea they were dead in pretty much every engagement. In Singapore, Rafales and EF have fought F-16s in 1 vs 3 formations. Rafale and EF won consistently without any loss. It was no different when ALA Rafale pilots practiced with their older Mirage-2000 pilots. The kill ratio was consistently in Rafale's favor.

My question to you is very simple. If I give you the option between LCA and Rafale, which would you choose and why? I want direct answers on a tactical viewpoint. I don't want the reasons you gave earlier where you are not killing anybody.

I want to know how you will kill people depending on which plane you want. I want to know what's so special about LCA that it is more efficient at killing people than Rafale. These are the answers I want. These are the answers IAF is interested in. IAF wants aircraft to kill people, not play factory-factory with DRDO and HAL.

The IAF have no interest in fixing LCA's issues, or even Rafale's or FGFA's as a matter of fact. They want everything working perfectly when they get what they ordered. Think about this from the customer's POV. Say you buy a car and in just a month everything that can go wrong with a car happens to your car. Are you going to be understanding of the manufacturer or are you going to be pissed? Will you accept a reason like, "Relax, sir. This is our first time building a car and we have no experience. Use your broken car for a year and then buy a new car from us after we have gained enough experience in building it." Of course, with your logic you will happily accept what the dealer says and go home pushing your car. Is that fine? So, why should IAF follow your pointless logic?

 

[p2prada]

@Pulkit

These are some stark differences between Rafale and Mirage-2000 that can be used on LCA also.

These are snippets from the article. I would recommend reading the whole article, but before you do that read my post first.

Rafale in Combat: "War for Dummies"

Pilots of the eight-ship Rafale detachment based here at Solenzara air base in Corsica, and provisionally dubbed "Rafaletown," routinely take off with four MICA air-to-air missiles, three or six AASM Hammer precision-guided bombs, a Thales Damoclès laser targeting pod or a Reco NG reconnaissance pod and two drop tanks.

Such a payload is IMPOSSIBLE on LCA.

They can be tasked or re-tasked in flight, and routinely are, to fly combat air patrol, precision strike or reconnaissance missions during the same six- or seven-hour sortie.

LCA cannot do a 6 or 7 hour sortie and cannot do any of those missions in a single flight. The capability boost there is simply incomparable.

"Rafale was involved in Libya from Day One, and we fly several missions during a single sortie," says detachment commander Lt. Col. Pierre G., stressing that "Omnirole Rafale" is not simply an advertising slogan but an accurate description of the aircraft's very real capabilities.

This point again highlights Rafale's multirole capabilities in a single flight.

Pilots say the Rafale's networked sensors and systems make their job much easier and much more effective than with previous-generation fighters. "Two Rafales carry as much ordnance as two Mirage 2000-5 and four Mirage 2000D combined," notes Pierre G., adding that their sensor capabilities "are much greater even than that."

Again, two Rafales here do the job of 6 Mirage-2000s and are much more efficient in doing said job. If we bring in comparison differences between Mirage-2000 and LCA, then M-2000 has a payload of 6.5 tonnes while LCA can only carry 3.5 tonnes. In effect, M-2000 has roughly twice the payload as that of LCA Mk1. This means what two Rafales do, it takes 12 LCAs to do the same mission.

12 LCAs carry 24 bombs to 400 Km away, 2 Rafales carry 12-24 bombs anywhere between 800 and 1300 Km away.

Data from all on-board and off-board sensors are combined into a single tactical picture presented to the pilot on the cockpit's central color display or, if desired, on one of the lateral displays. The pilot can select the data he wants, combine it with other data, and pass it on to his wingman or to other allied aircraft, ships or ground troops through the Link 16, without speaking a single word on the radio and, if not using the radar, without any transmission whatsoever. Link 16 can also be used to de-conflict assignments with other aircraft without using radios.

LCA Mk1 can do none of this. LCA Mk2 is planned to have this.

"We can fire the AASM against targets abeam or behind us, and can hit up to six in a single pass," the pilot continues.

At Solenzara, reporters were shown video footage taken during a ground attack mission in Libya, in which three tanks said to be firing against civilian targets were destroyed by simultaneous direct hits by AASM.

LCA can never do this. Never.

"The idea that a single aircraft can be re-tasked in flight from reconnaissance to strike to interception during the same sortie is truly revolutionary, and we're just now beginning to understand all that this implies," says one officer.

This flexibility also translates into a major advantage for operational management, because any available Rafale can be tasked for any mission, without needing, as in the past, for a given aircraft-weapon combination to be available.

Again reiterating a point LCA can never perform.

Aircraft turn-around, even with live weapons on board, requires only 90 minutes and an engine change requires one hour, although none have been changed during current operations.

On LCA Mk1, the engine change is over 24 hours. It cannot be fixed. Currently it is 3 days.

You can read the article now. It contains more information than I have quoted here including Spectra which neither Mk1 nor Mk2 will have.

Now, you understand what I was asking from you. These were my points regarding why Rafale is the better bet over LCA. Now, present points which demonstrate why LCA is a better bet compared to Rafale without bringing costs and industrial benefits to the picture. IAF is not interested in that aspect.

 

[ersakthivel]

Importance of twin engines is there and will always be there ,,,,
but why is the world shifting to single engine aircrafts???
just referring to F35....
DO you think its a bad machine?
why have they not added 2 engines??
Why F22 has twin engine and not F35???
Is it due to weight????
IS it stealth feature but F22 is also called stealth?????
hmmmmmm......

About our requirement IAF surely knows better but we have the right to differ...
we want to have 42 squad right...
can we maintain all the 42 squad with only sukhoi rafale or better we must go for all i mean all f35 and F22(in future if they are available )as we can afford them... that would be the best option going by your logic only sir.....
but another question how will we maintain all of them....???

again requesting not to make it personal Sir... surely you know more that me I respect it.... just be polite enuf to your yellow friends if I may call myself one.....
We are here to discuss not to proove if one is wrong or not.....

Just ask him to post the accident rate of single engined mirage-2000s in IAF in comparison with
the accident rate of twin engined Mig-29,

most of the times guys make up as many spurious statements to support their flawed view point , check before accepting it.

For eons USAF had more number of single engined fighters than twin engined ones. Do you think they were risking their pilot life?

The russians were always relying on twin engined fighters as their jet engines are not as good as western engines.

If you still dig deeper, IAF wanted to buy additional 126 single Mirage-2000 in 2004 not additional 126 twin engined Mig-29s. Why?

Twin engined fighter heavy fleet will bust the air force budget in routine running cost alone.Thats why airforces all over the world that have reliable engine tech had a fair mix of both fighters.

He will keep silent for anther week.Check the facts before accepting some body's claim as fact!!!!

Number of posts is no indication of genius.

Basically, you want our pilots to die at a higher rate than usual.

AFAIK More IAF pilots faced death in tein engined mig-29 crashes than in single engine Mirage-2000 crashes,


To cut a long story short what tejas in large number does to IAF is ,

1. It iwll make IAF one of the largest airforces operating all 4.5 th gen plus fighter as both the AMCA, Su-30 MKI, and FGFA which is no mean objective, other than large number of Tejas mk-2 fighters there is noway for IAF to rech that level quickly.

2. No RAFALE can win hands down in combat with three or four tejas mk-2 , if you still have any doubt there are many accounts of F-16 pilots saying that they can give as good as they get against twin engined F-15s in exercises,No F-16 pilot can accept that in one F-15 vs F-16 engagement all F-16s will be wiped out.

3. Once we master the engine tech and ASEA tejas will be the only platform in IAF completely free of external linkages which is no mean objective for IAF.

4. No airforce in the world will dare to take on another air force which has more than fighters of Tejas mk-2 class for the next thirty years and this capability comes at dirt cheap cost for the first time IAF , just compare the cost of tejas with rafale.

5.Operating 800 twin engined fighters is only a dream for IAF. At the most they will have 126 rafales +270 Su-30 MKI for the forseeable future, i.e for the next two decades.Since nobody knows when Rusians will finish their new engine for FGFA and when will HAL(!!!) make all the never ending list of changes IAF wants. By the time we get all our contracted FGFA fighters it will be by 2030 if we take Su-30 MKI induction as any indication.

6. SO even by 2030 we will reach just 500 twin engined fighters, So when are we going to get 800 twin engined fighters?

7.By the time we reach 2030 most of the first batch of around 120 odd Su-30 MKI will be obsolete and at the end of their lifetime and need replacement , so AMCA will mostly cater to that, So no point in hoping for AMCA to increase the numbers,

8. So setting up two production lines of tejas with 16 each production capacity to start filling in the for the 400 odd obsolete fleet of Mig fighters is the only sensible choice right now, And no harm is done in going for a stelth tejas mk-3 as a stop gap measure once tejas mk-2 is finished design.

9. IAF, MOD and defence minister all know these basic facts and once tejas mk-2 proves its design they are bound to ramp up the numbers as they know there is no hope of facing the combned PAF-PLAF fleet of thousand plus fighters riding on the coat tails of 126 rafales.

 

[Pulkit]

LCA is not a backup option. It is anything but.



The current 40 will take a long time for delivery and then production of Mk2 will start and go on for 10 years. Is that enough? With our current requirements we will be making LCAs until 2030.



Even making 40 is enough. Manpower can be moved between the lines.



No it doesn't.



No, it doesn't.



Not at all.



That's not how warfare works.



LCA manufacturing will be the least among all aircraft in a /year basis.



800 twin engine aircraft do that. 123 single engine aircraft don't.

Do you know that out of all the hundreds of F-16s the USAF has, the first aircraft to enter Iraqi airspace were 2 F-15Es and 4 F-111s, all twin engine aircraft?

Do you also know that not one F-16 has ever received a single OCA mission to date over Iraq?

You are confused about the questions I asked. I wanted to know exactly how IAF is benefited by inducting more LCAs. The points you made, none of them really benefit the IAF. I am asking for the kind of capability LCA provides that IAF can use in a war.



Basically, you want our pilots to die at a higher rate than usual.

thats a very rude remark you had made , you have no right in the world to accuse on of anything and this is really serious and I protest at this remark of yours how dare you make such an remark
I thought wat ever we discuss we agree or not our aim is better Indian Defense Force and you make such charges.... @Singh @ersakthivel @Kunal Biswas kindly see that the morale code of discussion is not lost here.
I have nothing else to say..... Initially u appeared to be rude blunt but this is not acceptable

So, we should sacrifice capability over indigenization?

It is different if we were talking about inducting AMCA over, say, a 5th gen Rafale with AMCA type specs. But we are not.



Have you even been in a BMW? You will forget Maruti in a second. It's happened to me.

You can reminisce all day. Nobody regresses. What you are asking IAF to do is to regress. They are flying BMWs and you want them to switch to the Maruti 800. Why would they? They are not anyway. So, that makes the entire discussion is useless anyway.



That is the point. We have to kick out everything foreign and buy only Indian as long as an equivalent is available. Why should only the armed forces make the sacrifice?



Military equipment is not procured based on desi or videshi, it is bought based on requirements, whether it is desi or videshi. The Americans also do the same. They buy armor modules from Germany for their Strykers. Their tank guns are also German and they used that for many decades and still do.



Now we are getting to the point. Answer why? What is so special the LCA provides that the Rafale does not and viceversa? Give me an answer to both.



Your PoV is... pointless. You are bringing emotions into a direct yes or no subject. And you don't have answers to the questions I am asking.

War is hawkish too. You don't stop your enemy before he shoots you and ask him if he is using desi or videshi gun. It is kill or be killed. And when it comes to modern warfare, the weapon you kill with matters a lot. There is a very good chance not a single LCA can survive against a Flanker. In our own exercises Mig-29s and Mirage-2000s have been beaten consistently by the MKI. Pilots have mentioned it was too one-sided, one even said that the M-2000 pilots had no idea they were dead in pretty much every engagement. In Singapore, Rafales and EF have fought F-16s in 1 vs 3 formations. Rafale and EF won consistently without any loss. It was no different when ALA Rafale pilots practiced with their older Mirage-2000 pilots. The kill ratio was consistently in Rafale's favor.

My question to you is very simple. If I give you the option between LCA and Rafale, which would you choose and why? I want direct answers on a tactical viewpoint. I don't want the reasons you gave earlier where you are not killing anybody.

I want to know how you will kill people depending on which plane you want. I want to know what's so special about LCA that it is more efficient at killing people than Rafale. These are the answers I want. These are the answers IAF is interested in. IAF wants aircraft to kill people, not play factory-factory with DRDO and HAL.

The IAF have no interest in fixing LCA's issues, or even Rafale's or FGFA's as a matter of fact. They want everything working perfectly when they get what they ordered. Think about this from the customer's POV. Say you buy a car and in just a month everything that can go wrong with a car happens to your car. Are you going to be understanding of the manufacturer or are you going to be pissed? Will you accept a reason like, "Relax, sir. This is our first time building a car and we have no experience. Use your broken car for a year and then buy a new car from us after we have gained enough experience in building it." Of course, with your logic you will happily accept what the dealer says and go home pushing your car. Is that fine? So, why should IAF follow your pointless logic?

 

[Pulkit]

LCA is not a backup option. It is anything but.



The current 40 will take a long time for delivery and then production of Mk2 will start and go on for 10 years. Is that enough? With our current requirements we will be making LCAs until 2030.



Even making 40 is enough. Manpower can be moved between the lines.



No it doesn't.



No, it doesn't.



Not at all.



That's not how warfare works.



LCA manufacturing will be the least among all aircraft in a /year basis.



800 twin engine aircraft do that. 123 single engine aircraft don't.

Do you know that out of all the hundreds of F-16s the USAF has, the first aircraft to enter Iraqi airspace were 2 F-15Es and 4 F-111s, all twin engine aircraft?

Do you also know that not one F-16 has ever received a single OCA mission to date over Iraq?

You are confused about the questions I asked. I wanted to know exactly how IAF is benefited by inducting more LCAs. The points you made, none of them really benefit the IAF. I am asking for the kind of capability LCA provides that IAF can use in a war.



Basically, you want our pilots to die at a higher rate than usual.

thats a very rude remark you had made , you have no right in the world to accuse on of anything and this is really serious and I protest at this remark of yours how dare you make such an remark
I thought wat ever we discuss we agree or not our aim is better Indian Defense Force and you make such charges.... @Singh @ersakthivel @Kunal Biswas kindly see that the morale code of discussion is not lost here.
I have nothing else to say..... Initially u appeared to be rude blunt but this is not acceptable

So, we should sacrifice capability over indigenization?

It is different if we were talking about inducting AMCA over, say, a 5th gen Rafale with AMCA type specs. But we are not.



Have you even been in a BMW? You will forget Maruti in a second. It's happened to me.

You can reminisce all day. Nobody regresses. What you are asking IAF to do is to regress. They are flying BMWs and you want them to switch to the Maruti 800. Why would they? They are not anyway. So, that makes the entire discussion is useless anyway.



That is the point. We have to kick out everything foreign and buy only Indian as long as an equivalent is available. Why should only the armed forces make the sacrifice?



Military equipment is not procured based on desi or videshi, it is bought based on requirements, whether it is desi or videshi. The Americans also do the same. They buy armor modules from Germany for their Strykers. Their tank guns are also German and they used that for many decades and still do.



Now we are getting to the point. Answer why? What is so special the LCA provides that the Rafale does not and viceversa? Give me an answer to both.



Your PoV is... pointless. You are bringing emotions into a direct yes or no subject. And you don't have answers to the questions I am asking.

War is hawkish too. You don't stop your enemy before he shoots you and ask him if he is using desi or videshi gun. It is kill or be killed. And when it comes to modern warfare, the weapon you kill with matters a lot. There is a very good chance not a single LCA can survive against a Flanker. In our own exercises Mig-29s and Mirage-2000s have been beaten consistently by the MKI. Pilots have mentioned it was too one-sided, one even said that the M-2000 pilots had no idea they were dead in pretty much every engagement. In Singapore, Rafales and EF have fought F-16s in 1 vs 3 formations. Rafale and EF won consistently without any loss. It was no different when ALA Rafale pilots practiced with their older Mirage-2000 pilots. The kill ratio was consistently in Rafale's favor.

My question to you is very simple. If I give you the option between LCA and Rafale, which would you choose and why? I want direct answers on a tactical viewpoint. I don't want the reasons you gave earlier where you are not killing anybody.

I want to know how you will kill people depending on which plane you want. I want to know what's so special about LCA that it is more efficient at killing people than Rafale. These are the answers I want. These are the answers IAF is interested in. IAF wants aircraft to kill people, not play factory-factory with DRDO and HAL.

The IAF have no interest in fixing LCA's issues, or even Rafale's or FGFA's as a matter of fact. They want everything working perfectly when they get what they ordered. Think about this from the customer's POV. Say you buy a car and in just a month everything that can go wrong with a car happens to your car. Are you going to be understanding of the manufacturer or are you going to be pissed? Will you accept a reason like, "Relax, sir. This is our first time building a car and we have no experience. Use your broken car for a year and then buy a new car from us after we have gained enough experience in building it." Of course, with your logic you will happily accept what the dealer says and go home pushing your car. Is that fine? So, why should IAF follow your pointless logic?

 

[ersakthivel]

thats a very rude remark you had made , you have no right in the world to accuse on of anything and this is really serious and I protest at this remark of yours how dare you make such an remark
I thought wat ever we discuss we agree or not our aim is better Indian Defense Force and you make such charges.... @Singh @ersakthivel @Kunal Biswas kindly see that the morale code of discussion is not lost here.
I have nothing else to say..... Initially u appeared to be rude blunt but this is not acceptable

In DFI any discussion with p2p on tejas will end up in acrimony, so why getting worked up over it? Get used to to it. Dont post in such large letters,

 

[ersakthivel]

War is hawkish too. You don't stop your enemy before he shoots you and ask him if he is using desi or videshi gun. It is kill or be killed. And when it comes to modern warfare, the weapon you kill with matters a lot. There is a very good chance not a single LCA can survive against a Flanker. In our own exercises Mig-29s and Mirage-2000s have been beaten consistently by the MKI. Pilots have mentioned it was too one-sided, one even said that the M-2000 pilots had no idea they were dead in pretty much every engagement. In Singapore, Rafales and EF have fought F-16s in 1 vs 3 formations. Rafale and EF won consistently without any loss. It was no different when ALA Rafale pilots practiced with their older Mirage-2000 pilots. The kill ratio was consistently in Rafale's favor.

Modern warfare is team effort, not one on one bruce lee effort, Early warning platforms pick up the fighters in advance and defending fighters are vectored in radio silence with data link, And rarely does the twin engined fighters pilot allowed to display his flying skills in the fraction of second moments when he faces three or four attacking single engined fighters in enemy air space with no warning.

warfare is no exercise, attacks happen simultaneously and no rules are followed, So simulations like these have no meanings.

If one single engined fighter fires a single long range BVR on the twin engined fighter , the twin engined guy has to jettison all his 9 ton or 19 ton external weapon load to flee, So effectively with just WVR missiles his mission is over in enemy air space.Of course he will fire his own BVrs on the single engined fighter which too will jettison its external weapon load to evade.

If the other three single engined fighters (which are vectored out of twin engined fighters radar range till this point )then close in with multiple BVR shots what are the odds of survival for the twin engined pilot?

In the case of rafale and tejas they both have the same radar power to make matters even worse,which gives no palpable advantage for the 120 million dollar rafale in one to four engagement with tejas mk-2!!!

Even if rafale spoofs the tejas mk-2 radar with advanced EW, it surely can not fool the flanker or early warning aircraft in the attacking tejas group which is simply far more powerful to handle for rafale EW suit.So effectively tejas mk-2 can get data link from the more powerful early warning aircraft or flankers in the defending group to guide the BVR even while it is fleeing.

 

[ersakthivel]

@Pulkit

These are some stark differences between Rafale and Mirage-2000 that can be used on LCA also.

These are snippets from the article. I would recommend reading the whole article, but before you do that read my post first.

Rafale in Combat: "War for Dummies"


Such a payload is IMPOSSIBLE on LCA.

Such payload is impossible on one tejas mk-1 , but can be had on three tejas mk-2, if we compare the costs still tejas scores.

LCA cannot do a 6 or 7 hour sortie and cannot do any of those missions in a single flight. The capability boost there is simply incomparable.

Recently for a 10.5 hour sortie with just two external fuel tanks and no other loads rafales needed 5 refueling and covered close to 9800 Kms(1800 Km for each refueling), which will roughly be the same for tejas mk-2 if we take climatic conditions of india into effect.

This point again highlights Rafale's multirole capabilities in a single flight.

In the recently concluded iron Fist exercise tejas mk-1 fired two air to air missiles and dropped two PGMs with in hundred seconds, is this swing role or multi role or omni role?

Again, two Rafales here do the job of 6 Mirage-2000s and are much more efficient in doing said job. If we bring in comparison differences between Mirage-2000 and LCA, then M-2000 has a payload of 6.5 tonnes while LCA can only carry 3.5 tonnes. In effect, M-2000 has roughly twice the payload as that of LCA Mk1. This means what two Rafales do, it takes 12 LCAs to do the same mission.

Correct six tejas mk-2s can do the same job of 2 rafales (since tejas mk-2 is going to have 5 tons weapon load and the same fuel fraction and TWR ratio of rafales compared to inferior TWR and fuel fraction of mirages in the above comparison) the massive forex outgo on the rafale deal can be avoided. This is what defence experts are pointing out while saying that rafale is a huge forex out go deal with no benefits,

So your two vs 12 wont hold good for rafale vs tejas mk-2 comparison.

12 LCAs carry 24 bombs to 400 Km away, 2 Rafales carry 12-24 bombs anywhere between 800 and 1300 Km away.

Once again it may be true of tejas mk-1 but not correct for tejas mk-2 since mk-2 has 5 ton weaponload and almost the same fuel fraction and TWR of RAFALE. So no edge for rafale.

LCA Mk1 can do none of this. LCA Mk2 is planned to have this.



LCA can never do this. Never.

LCA can never do this. But tejas mk-2 can easily do it.

Again reiterating a point LCA can never perform.



On LCA Mk1, the engine change is over 24 hours. It cannot be fixed. Currently it is 3 days.

Mk-2 is to be built to take care of all these considerations in mind

You can read the article now. It contains more information than I have quoted here including Spectra which neither Mk1 nor Mk2 will have.

Spectra is a RWR cum ASEA jammer siute , that is no out of the world thing to justify a 20 plus billion dollar deal.

Now, you understand what I was asking from you. These were my points regarding why Rafale is the better bet over LCA. Now, present points which demonstrate why LCA is a better bet compared to Rafale without bringing costs and industrial benefits to the picture. IAF is not interested in that aspect.

Just now I have given the comparison to show three tejas mk-2 can do all the jobs of one rafale at a much more economical running cost.

And setting up two production lines with 16 each in capacity churning out 32 tejas mk-1 and mk-2 from now on will give the following benefits to IAF which can not be denied.

1. It will make IAF one of the largest airforces operating all 4.5 th gen plus fighter fleet by 2030 itself,besides both the Su-30 MKI, and FGFA which is no mean objective, other than large number of Tejas mk-2 fighters there is no way for IAF to rech that level quickly by 2030 and retire all the tottering Migs numbering 400.

2. No RAFALE can win hands down in combat with three or four tejas mk-2 , if you still have any doubt there are many accounts of F-16 pilots saying that they can give as good as they get against twin engined F-15s in exercises,No F-16 pilot can accept that in one F-15 vs 3 F-16 engagement all F-16s will be wiped out.

3. Once we master the engine tech and ASEA tejas will be the only platform in IAF completely free of external linkages which is no mean objective for IAF.

4. No airforce in the world will dare to take on another air force which has more than 400 fighters of Tejas mk-2 class for the next twenty years, and this capability comes at dirt cheap cost for the first time IAF , just compare the cost of tejas with rafale.

5.Operating 800 twin engined fighters is only a dream for IAF. At the most they will have 126 rafales +270 Su-30 MKI for the forseeable future, i.e for the next two decades.Since nobody knows when Rusians will finish their new engine for FGFA and when will HAL(!!!) make all the never ending list of changes IAF wants. By the time we get all our contracted FGFA fighters it will be by 2030 if we take Su-30 MKI induction as any indication.

6. SO even by 2030 we will reach just 500 twin engined fighters, So when are we going to get 800 twin engined fighters?

7.By the time we reach 2030 most of the first batch of around 120 odd Su-30 MKI will be obsolete and at the end of their lifetime and need replacement , so AMCA will mostly cater to that, So no point in hoping for AMCA to increase the numbers,

8. So setting up two production lines of tejas with 16 each production capacity to start filling in the for the 400 odd obsolete fleet of Mig fighters is the only sensible choice right now, And no harm is done in going for a stelth tejas mk-3 as a stop gap measure once tejas mk-2 is finished design.

9. IAF, MOD and defence minister all know these basic facts and once tejas mk-2 proves its design they are bound to ramp up the numbers as they know there is no hope of facing the combned PAF-PLAF fleet of thousand plus fighters riding on the coat tails of 126 rafales.


10. A thirty plus an year production target will interest indian private sector players in a major way and pave the way for the emergence of indian mil-aviation industry. Such a robust production capacity will bring keen export interest as well, further lowering the cost.

11. The AMCA engine tech can be applied in tejas mk-2 in future to make it completely indian which is a huge plus for strategic independence and even better export proposals .Besides it will reduce the costs further and establish india as a global strategic player.

12, Not to mention the quick scope of developing tejas mk-3 in stealth version ,which will be another huge boost in near future as AMCA specs seems to be set too top notch by IAF.
And this is why tejas mk-2 is the only safe bet that remains for IAF to evolve into a fully 4+ gen fleet with significant numbers and stay relevant in PAF- PLAF war theater.

 

[p2prada]

thats a very rude remark you had made , you have no right in the world to accuse on of anything and this is really serious and I protest at this remark of yours how dare you make such an remark
I thought wat ever we discuss we agree or not our aim is better Indian Defense Force and you make such charges.... @Singh @ersakthivel @Kunal Biswas kindly see that the morale code of discussion is not lost here.
I have nothing else to say..... Initially u appeared to be rude blunt but this is not acceptable

So, basically you are telling me you are a child who cannot discuss defence matters.

Did you think weapons are used for holding and posing for pictures? They are weapons of war, they are used for killing.

This forum is meant to discuss about killing or getting killed. It will seem more innocent when we just say we will use our aircraft to shoot down the enemy. However, we are talking about killing someone. Only people serious enough to discuss this should join in. The only difference is we are talking about how efficiently we plan on killing someone when we start comparing weapons. The idea of my previous post was to bring out the same (the post where I quoted the article). Rafale will kill people more efficiently than LCA can. It is as simple as that.

So, I don't see any difference between what you insinuated with your post and what I replied with. If you can't stomach it, you cannot discuss it. Giving our soldiers crappy weapons is a death sentence, and soldiers will tell you that to your face. That's why I want our pilots to fly the best, or at least better than what the enemy flies. That's why we use the term "overkill" and that's why we aim to achieve overkill. The purpose and aim of weapons is to kill and not die in the process. Indigenous or not, you need good weapons to win wars. Professionals know that, amateurs don't.

If you can't discuss on these terms, then you can't discuss this at all.

So, I will repeat my question again. What makes LCA so special that it can be more efficient at killing than Rafale can? This is all that matters to the IAF. Supporting and protecting industry interests is not in IAF's interest. Do you know that when Airbus won a massive contract to supply tankers to the USAF the US govt canceled the contract and gave it to Boeing instead. Basically, even the USAF doesn't give a shit about protecting their industry interests as much as you think. USAF wanted the A-330, but ended up with KC-46A. I would never want IAF to be in such a situation. This is the reality. The question is whether you want to accept it or live in your own dreamland like a few of the others here do.

Whatever you say or want is not going to change IAF's plans anyway.

 

[ersakthivel]

So, I will repeat my question again. What makes LCA so special that it can be more efficient at killing than Rafale can? This is all that matters to the IAF. Supporting and protecting industry interests is not in IAF's interest. Do you know that when Airbus won a massive contract to supply tankers to the USAF the US govt canceled the contract and gave it to Boeing instead. Basically, even the USAF doesn't give a shit about protecting their industry interests as much as you think. USAF wanted the A-330, but ended up with KC-46A. I would never want IAF to be in such a situation. This is the reality. The question is whether you want to accept it or live in your own dreamland like a few of the others here do.

Whatever you say or want is not going to change IAF's plans anyway.

Define how two rafales are more efficient than six tejas in killing any one.

A home grown fighter aircraft industry is just too important to be sacrificed at the alter of the fancies of few IAF top brass. Only nations with home grown mil industry are called super powers, others are client states impotent to guard their strategic interest, mere pawns in international chess games,

Both US, Russia, china and france reached this level by continuously building and inducting their industry level best tech fighters for six decades to reach that place.So it is a crime to hobble the indian effort called tejas with short sighted fancies on foreign stuff totally bleeding the budget with just 126 rafales.

One must compare the allocation for capital expenditure meant for new acquisition for the past ten IAF budgets and arrive at a realistic estimate of future budget allocations for next ten years . And then calculate whether this amount will be suffice to induct two hugely costly platforms(FGFA, RAFALE) side by side without compromising on the fighting capability of IAF hobbled with 400 obsolete Mig series fighters to arive at a realistic estimate.

No body is asking IAF to put all their eggs in tejas basket. They can have 270 or as many Su-30 MKis and 140 FGFAs as front line. tejas can do perfectly for the next line of tejas, Right now tejas mk-2 will score over most of the aircrafts in service on many counts if we compare the costs and capabilities realistically.

Modern warfare is team effort, not one on one bruce lee effort, Early warning platforms pick up the fighters in advance and defending fighters are vectored in radio silence with data link, And rarely does the twin engined fighters pilot allowed to display his flying skills in the fraction of second moments when he faces three or four attacking single engined fighters in enemy air space with no warning.

warfare is no exercise, attacks happen simultaneously and no rules are followed, So simulations like these have no meanings.

If one single engined fighter fires a single long range BVR on the twin engined fighter , the twin engined guy has to jettison all his 9 ton or 19 ton external weapon load to flee, So effectively with just WVR missiles his mission is over in enemy air space.Of course he will fire his own BVrs on the single engined fighter which too will jettison its external weapon load to evade.

If the other three single engined fighters (which are vectored out of twin engined fighters radar range till this point )then close in with multiple BVR shots what are the odds of survival for the twin engined pilot?

In the case of rafale and tejas they both have the same radar power to make matters even worse,which gives no palpable advantage for the 120 million dollar rafale in one to four engagement with tejas mk-2!!!

Even if rafale spoofs the tejas mk-2 radar with advanced EW, it surely can not fool the flanker or early warning aircraft in the attacking tejas group which is simply far more powerful to handle for rafale EW suit.So effectively tejas mk-2 can get data link from the more powerful early warning aircraft or flankers in the defending group to guide the BVR even while it is fleeing.

 

[SajeevJino]

.

Truth Remain Truth

For people saying that tejas is a short legged design flaw fighter , some food for thought,

The Beta Coefficient...: Search results for lca
----------------------------------------------------------

Some interesting statements on combat range of tejas in different profiles, presented by Vivek Ahuja

Low altitude air space penetration flight profile (4x 250 kg bombs, fuel max internal and all available external)combat radius of 700 Km,

high altitude PGM attack profile (2 LGBs , all available external and internal fuel)- a combat radius of 1200 Km,

HAL gives a radius of action up to 500 Km for tejas, but does not specifies the fuel or weapon combo along with flight altitude,

Just like a courier delivery ..Go drop and RTB ...If anyone Engaged RIP

as for SEAD the Tejas can Go around 350 KM deep inside enemy Space and Return .and1000 kg combat load ..we can add three 1200L external ...so maximum range of an Tejas here with 3x1200 litres + 1000 kg Load ...range 700 up/down or simply nearly 45 min ..!!

next one 2 LGB's nearly 500 kg or 600 kg..with 3x1200 liters ...but how they achieve 1200KM Combat radius


Combat radius is not range

 

[ersakthivel]

.

Truth Remain Truth



Just like a courier delivery ..Go drop and RTB ...If anyone Engaged RIP

thats the same manner in which most of the makers give max range for their fighters, go like a courier delivery, drop, return to base and RIP if any one engages, Why should it be different for tejas alone?

as for SEAD the Tejas can Go around 350 KM deep inside enemy Space and Return .and1000 kg combat load ..we can add three 1200L external ...so maximum range of an Tejas here with 3x1200 litres + 1000 kg Load ...range 700 up/down or simply nearly 45 min ..!!


next one 2 LGB's nearly 500 kg or 600 kg..with 3x1200 liters ...but how they achieve 1200KM Combat radius


Combat radius is not range

Fact is what was posted by Vivek Ahuja was accepted by indranil himself whose words you quoted from BR. Why dont you go there and ask clarification?

Fuel fractions is what counts ultimately whatever the makers tom tom about the range of the planes it does not matter. if tejas mk-2 has a close internal fuel weight/empty weight ratio of RAFALE it is imperative it will have the same ranges too with similar fractions of weapon loads and external fuel combos.