LCA TEJAS MK1 & MK1A: News and Discussion

[Bleh]

Production rate of tejas is 8 per year at the moment , even though it is planned to double it this year. Calculate how many years it will take to produce 500 tejas at this rate.

Increase it further to 24, about 20 years. Not a long time considering it was just 40 years back we had only mig-21s in our fleet.

It is 12/year right now. 8 in the first one 4 in the second one. The plan on expanding both to 10 and 6-8 respectively.
No existing 3rd line (total 24/year) as of now until Su-30 line dries up, no requirement for any with existing orders.

Source BRF.

 

[Flying Dagger]

Production rate of tejas is 8 per year at the moment , even though it is planned to double it this year. Calculate how many years it will take to produce 500 tejas at this rate.

If the order is huge it can be done production will be ramped up to 16 -18 soon but Let's be real to ourself it is a small aircraft with space not enough to utilise even Elta radar fully. 300 Tejas will be enough. infact with the proposal of deckbased fighter and ocra many of us who have been around since days of mca rumour are jerking over it

I would love to see mk1a mk2 ocra AMCA in line .

My only worry is if we have enough human resources at the top to do it .

It is 12/year right now. 8 in the first one 4 in the second one. The plan on expanding both to 10 and 6-8 respectively.
No existing 3rd line (total 24/year) as of now until Su-30 line dries up.

Source BRF.

Su line will be occupied for its super su upgrade onwards I think.

But this year will be down due to corona economy might suffer a big let's see what happens

 

[aditya10r]

300 Tejas will be enough.

300 of Tejas would be enough if it is mk1a.MK2 MWF is a different story,much greater range and payload.It can be our f-16.

Plus I sincerely believe there should be more than 500 Tejas in the air force simply because if we need a 45 squadron force,which we obviously need in next 10-15 years,then we also need something that is cheap to operate maintain and purchase but doesn't cuts corner in performance and weaponry.Tejas ticks all the boxes.Air force cannot have 900 combat jets of twin engine expensive fighters only.

Cost per flight hour of Sukhoi is over 20000 USD.Rafale is in the same league or maybe even more.Tejas is well below 5000 USD per hour(cost of gripen per hour flight is 4700 USD).Now if you just calculate the cost of operating 900 or 600 twin engine expensive jets you would realise that it's really expensive even to operate them and procure weaponry.We might have to cut down pilot hours which can be disastrous.Pilots need to fly planes for really long hours to familiarise themselves with the jet.

__________________________________________

Bottomline is that Tejas is the answer to all our problems.Operating 45 or even 30 squadrons of twin engine jets is gonna be expensive and we might not be fund other crucial things because of it.

 

[Kumata]

I dont think coding for tedbf fly by wire system will be written with ease, every thing will have to write from scratch. Its my opinion.

suggestion below for u



your peanut brain is not enough to process few simple funda's. Dont bother us with your opinion.

 

[janme]

TEDF/ORCA is a pipedream right now, since no funding has been released as far as I know. If IAF accepts TEDF proposal then wouldn't it mean that IAF is not happy with MWF in the first place?.

 

[fire starter]

TEDF/ORCA is a pipedream right now, since no funding has been released as far as I know. If IAF accepts TEDF proposal then wouldn't it mean that IAF is not happy with MWF in the first place?.

orca is not a bad concept for IAF it could have end the drama of mmrca 2.0 if it had came 10 years before.

 

[Kumata]

I beleive you ar an expert in this sissy boi

That was about your opinion..just trying to give u a option...to use it for your own pleasure...

 

[Hydra3]

That was about your opinion..just trying to give u a option...to use it for your own pleasure...

Oh your suggesting others tge way of getting sexual pleasure ! You must be a pimp i guess.

 

[Flying Dagger]

I dont think coding for tedbf fly by wire system will be written with ease, every thing will have to write from scratch. Its my opinion.

Yes coding will.be done from.scratch but with an experience and know how to do it. Let me make it clear to you when it comes to coding and software development we have no dearth of talent. 5-6 years are more than enough to put a fighter jet in air next 2-4 years will begin it's production.

 

[Hydra3]

Yes coding will.be done from.scratch but with an experience and know how to do it. Let me make it clear to you when it comes to coding and software development we have no dearth of talent. 5-6 years are more than enough to put a fighter jet in air next 2-4 years will begin it's production.

Agreed, unlike earlier airmarshals current one is supportive to home grown products. Hope for the best

 

[Shekhar Singh]

I dont have lobve for any of j10 or jf17 or j29. But we should not underestimate our enemy. J10 is a medium fightet designed to do the job of f16, lca is designed to the job of Mig21. I didn't say anything other than that.
For your information,i do love f15 ( not a joke, seriously i love that machine ) over lca & mki. You will call me a capitalist now?

With the exception of higher TWR and maybe more space for avionics, the J-10 and LCA Mk1 are practically the same. Both have the same limitations.

And no, it's impossible for the J-10 in its current state to even compare with the F-16. If you bring the J-10 into MMRCA evaluations, it wouldn't even have crossed the first phase paper evaluations. The reason is as simple as it has only 3 underwing hardpoints, the same as LCA and JF-17. This is the biggest drawback of the J-10. Although the J-10 has a few extra hardpoints on the fuselage, it can't carry AAMs there.

Don't matter which J-10 it is, all have the same problem.

 

[Aniruddha Mulay]

With the exception of higher TWR and maybe more space for avionics, the J-10 and LCA Mk1 are practically the same. Both have the same limitations.

And no, it's impossible for the J-10 in its current state to even compare with the F-16. If you bring the J-10 into MMRCA evaluations, it wouldn't even have crossed the first phase paper evaluations. The reason is as simple as it has only 3 underwing hardpoints, the same as LCA and JF-17. This is the biggest drawback of the J-10. Although the J-10 has a few extra hardpoints on the fuselage, it can't carry AAMs there.

Don't matter which J-10 it is, all have the same problem.

The thing J-10 has going for it are large production nos(426+ built) and higher thrust engine i.e. AL-31FN which makes 125kn wet thrust compared to 90kn wet thrust on Mk1/Mk1A Tejas.
But then again it weighs 3 tons more than Mk1( 4 tons for Mk1A) and can carry a payload of 4.5 tons compared to 5.3 tons on Mk1

 

[AbRaj]

The thing J-10 has going for it are large production nos(426+ built) and higher thrust engine i.e. AL-31FN which makes 125kn wet thrust compared to 90kn wet thrust on Mk1/Mk1A Tejas.
But then again it weighs 3 tons more than Mk1( 4 tons for Mk1A) and can carry a payload of 4.5 tons compared to 5.3 tons on Mk1

That payload is just pathetic for a Medium class fighter

 

[Karthi]

http://idrw.org/india-to-experiment-with-ai-based-unmanned-lca-tejas-concept/


Unmanned Combat Vehicles the perfect solution for dwindling Squadron strength of IAF . We should concentrate on UAV s which can shoot down enemy aircrafts and Stealthy Bombers for SEAD /DEAD

 

[Assassin 2.0]

The thing J-10 has going for it are large production nos(426+ built) and higher thrust engine i.e. AL-31FN which makes 125kn wet thrust compared to 90kn wet thrust on Mk1/Mk1A Tejas.
But then again it weighs 3 tons more than Mk1( 4 tons for Mk1A) and can carry a payload of 4.5 tons compared to 5.3 tons on Mk1

Ejactly my friend.
Ever wondered why Russians themselves are not building Single engine multi role aircraft? The basic reason is the engines which they have are old and inferior in every section of metallurgy they can push higher thrust but weight more and are bigger in size. AL-31F is only suitable Bigger jets no one would like to strap that engine in a tiny frame.
Even with lesser thrust LCA have weight advantages and Delta frame design which makes it more maneuverable in VWR fight.

 

[Bleh]

With the exception of higher TWR and maybe more space for avionics, the J-10 and LCA Mk1 are practically the same. Both have the same limitations.

And no, it's impossible for the J-10 in its current state to even compare with the F-16. If you bring the J-10 into MMRCA evaluations, it wouldn't even have crossed the first phase paper evaluations. The reason is as simple as it has only 3 underwing hardpoints, the same as LCA and JF-17. This is the biggest drawback of the J-10. Although the J-10 has a few extra hardpoints on the fuselage, it can't carry AAMs there.

Don't matter which J-10 it is, all have the same problem.

Even less. Tejas can carry AAMs in all 6 of its wing hardpoints. J-10 cannot I think. Never seen it with weapons in more than 4 pylons.
Its dual tracks are lovely though.

So yeah atleast in weapons payload Tejas can match J-10, make even cross it.

 

[shiphone]

lol...not a big deal at all...
------------------
in 2006/7, the first public display of commissioned J10 (Batch 01)

and on the international Competition event.

 

[Flying Dagger]

orca is not a bad concept for IAF it could have end the drama of mmrca 2.0 if it had came 10 years before.

It is still not bad.. as we all know AMCA won't come before 2035 so what if those 5 years + a buffer for delay is created with a twin engine which essentially replace and end the mmrcs and naval requirement for a foreign jet.

I have said it before only concern is the resources at the top in ADA for design and validation etc. If we have enough genius there it is a fantastic idea to follow on.

I understand IAF reluctance though they are in a very tight situation so for them we will need to throw money for 18-36 Rafale.

Even less. Tejas can carry AAMs in all 6 of its wing hardpoints. J-10 cannot I think. Never seen it with weapons in more than 4 pylons.
Its dual tracks are lovely though.

So yeah atleast in weapons payload Tejas can match J-10, make even cross it.

Not really. 6 missiles it can carry. Also the pylons can be modified but they chose it that way for ground attack purpose. I will mock JF 17 as much you want me to but not J 10 . Remember this is basically an Israeli Improvement over F 16 and Mirage experience.

J 10 engine is same as on Sukhoi .When it comes to the jet it is definitely better than F 16 in terms of performance available online (might be inflated) but one thing which will keep it definitely down is its ew suite radar and missiles compared to western one.

This is the area we can work on too.

Their best ir missile is basically Israeli python 3 and it's variant

Their Pl 12/15/21 is basically russian R 77 with Chinese rockets to increase range and improvement over the radars and electronics.
SD10 an improved Italian aspide missile.

So by choosing Derby ER for Tejas and ASRAAM IR we have an advantage.

Now Radar : they are definitely ahead in this game. But we got Elta 2052 AeSA radar better than what they got unfortunately the nose size and space of Tejas limit its tracking range.

The ew suite in development for AMCA will make its way into mk2 so we will even out in that dept too.

Rest assured they won't be sending their J 10 over himalayas nor our Tejas will be there.

If they give it to PAF then it will be a real threat.

 

[varun9509]

#SP21 | All about FOC Tejas

 

[advprashantbsr]

India will soon be taking up Artificial intelligence (AI) driven unmanned LCA-Tejas Concept shortly so that technology can be developed for the development of the next-generation fighter jets in the future. https://t.co/ghenCffhFa