LCA TEJAS MK1 & MK1A: News and Discussion

[Bleh]

These are 25lbs practice bombs.

View attachment 49616View attachment 49617


Image Courtesy: Bharat Rakshak

Indian Air Force Gallery :: Air to Surface Munitions - Bharat Rakshak

Oooh I like the setup... Hollow out that a bit & you can fit quad 100lbs in there.

Dual Rack pylons are under development...

...And may be IAF don't want Tejas as a ground attack Aircraft.

I meant for 250kg HSLD bombs. Tandemed at inboard pylon it Tejas would hold 8 of those... or FAB-250.

Looks like there's enough space on both sides.

 

[aerokan]

Yes. All the jets goes through weapon fire test by IAF before any deal is signed. Every jet we purchase comes with its own specific weapon package. For everything else to make a khichdi we have to return back to OEM for integration with a hefty sum payment. Look at the recent Rafale case. It is coming up with its own weapon package. Similarly Su-30 came with it s own weapon package just like the Migs.
This particular thought of yours that we integrate Russian and French jets without weapon tests is pure fantasy.

Good. Thank you for being straight. Please be patient with me and indulge in some more fantasy about Tejas MK1 and MK1A induction.

Since MK1 is already flying in IAF colors, i assume R73 and Derby are tested. Can't we use the same missiles on MK1A? Are they not sufficient enough to sign the MK1A deal and do an iterative upgrade?

If they are not sufficient and IAF wants the absolutely new shiny missiles from day 1, will the deal fail if the newer missile integration fails by any chance?

 

[Bleh]

Regarding the choice of weapon for ground-attacks, our Jagauars mostly carry 450kg dummies too.

I looked around a bit to find out that only & only Sukhoi-30 use FAB-250/500 & OFAB-100/120.
Wild guess, I think those have crap accuracy. So cannot be used other than carpetting the target in numbers below 20.

 

[Chinmoy]

Good. Thank you for being straight. Please be patient with me and indulge in some more fantasy about Tejas MK1 and MK1A induction.

Since MK1 is already flying in IAF colors, i assume R73 and Derby are tested. Can't we use the same missiles on MK1A? Are they not sufficient enough to sign the MK1A deal and do an iterative upgrade?

If they are not sufficient and IAF wants the absolutely new shiny missiles from day 1, will the deal fail if the newer missile integration fails by any chance?

Oh yes. They could be armed with R-73 and Derby alone. But then again IAF would have to upgrade the inventory of Derby missiles. The current lot which were integrated with Tejas were from the Harrier inventory. IAF themselves are mulling over Derby-ER for its Su-30 fleet. At this time making up a separate inventory for Tejas with Derby alone means another set of procurement issue. Arming the Su-30 fleet with Derby makes no sense and we have not tested R-77 with Tejas. So at the end of the day IAF would have to incur double expense. For that too they need to chalk out a plan now it self. Means Tejas is not just a standalone system. Su-30 is also bounded with it.
Now Tejas being a Light combat aircraft integrating any weapon system with it is no small deal. That part is easier with Su-30 fleet. So IAF would have to manage in between upgrading Su-30 fleet weapons as well as chalk out plan for Tejas too.

 

[aerokan]

Oh yes. They could be armed with R-73 and Derby alone. But then again IAF would have to upgrade the inventory of Derby missiles. The current lot which were integrated with Tejas were from the Harrier inventory. IAF themselves are mulling over Derby-ER for its Su-30 fleet. At this time making up a separate inventory for Tejas with Derby alone means another set of procurement issue. Arming the Su-30 fleet with Derby makes no sense and we have not tested R-77 with Tejas. So at the end of the day IAF would have to incur double expense. For that too they need to chalk out a plan now it self. Means Tejas is not just a standalone system. Su-30 is also bounded with it.
Now Tejas being a Light combat aircraft integrating any weapon system with it is no small deal. That part is easier with Su-30 fleet. So IAF would have to manage in between upgrading Su-30 fleet weapons as well as chalk out plan for Tejas too.

If they are not sufficient and IAF wants the absolutely new shiny missiles from day 1, will the deal fail if the newer missile integration fails by any chance?

Now for the second part.. Will the deal fail if the R-77 or Derby-ER integration doesn't happen properly?
How long before this testing happens is anybody's guess!! So why is everybody confidently saying that the deal will be signed in a few months?

 

[Chinmoy]

Now for the second part.. Will the deal fail if the R-77 or Derby-ER integration doesn't happen properly?
How long before this testing happens is anybody's guess!! So why is everybody confidently saying that the deal will be signed in a few months?

No, deal would not fail. As of now IAF would go forward with R-73 & Derby with Astra in tow.
But as I said, before going on, IAF would have to deal with armament issue & user strategy against it.

But I'd not be surprised if the numbers fall down in case of Astra or Derby-EE not getting integrated. Right now with Derby alone, which is more of a WVR rather then BVR, Tejas is fit only in bomber role.

 

[aerokan]

No, deal would not fail. As of now IAF would go forward with R-73 & Derby with Astra in tow.
But as I said, before going on, IAF would have to deal with armament issue & user strategy against it.

But I'd not be surprised if the numbers fall down in case of Astra or Derby-EE not getting integrated. Right now with Derby alone, which is more of a WVR rather then BVR, Tejas is fit only in bomber role.

If they are going to go ahead with same R73 and Derby as that of MK1, why they took so many years to make a user strategy when MK1 is inducted with similar weapons?

 

[Chinmoy]

If they are going to go ahead with same R73 and Derby as that of MK1, why they took so many years to make a user strategy when MK1 is inducted with similar weapons?

Because you don't make a strategy around a half cooked fighter. Tejas IOC version was not something which could be operationally deployed. Only now with FOC variant a proper strategy making around the plane would happen.

 

[aerokan]

Because you don't make a strategy around a half cooked fighter. Tejas IOC version was not something which could be operationally deployed. Only now with FOC variant a proper strategy making around the plane would happen.

So IAF paid for a IOC squadron without making any strategy? If they haven't paid for it.. good for IAF. If they paid for it by signing a deal, then why can't we sign it now for MK1A and do batch wise procurement like SU30MKI? Since you mentioned that they will sign with the same weapons R73 and Derby for now with MK1A..
i fail to understand the logic of delay, since they acquired IOC variant in a similar way.

 

[Chinmoy]

So IAF paid for a IOC squadron without making any strategy? If they haven't paid for it.. good for IAF. If they paid for it by signing a deal, then why can't we sign it now for MK1A and do batch wise procurement like SU30MKI? Since you mentioned that they will sign with the same weapons R73 and Derby for now with MK1A..
i fail to understand the logic of delay, since they acquired IOC variant in a similar way.

If they wouldn't have procured IOC variant do you think government would have go on with its funding? In late 2000 it was facing danger of getting shelved.

Second, for once stop comparing Tejas with Sukhoi or Migs or Dassault. In case of Sukhoi & Mig there was no problem on cross platform weapon integration. Any new platform from these OEM would be pre equipped with the earlier generation of weapons. Is this the case with Tejas?
What if tomorrow IAF want to upgrade it's whole CCM inventory? Do we have any other option for Tejas apart from R-73?
On top of that the two sqds of Tejas right now is equipped with F-404, but as per brochure Mk1A would be equipped with F-414. Means the RD of IAF would have to have man power for those too. On top of that, did HAL have provide a road map for maintenance of GE engines till now?
It is easier for IAF to sign deal of Sukhoi or Mig because you have an OEM to fall back on & back out from deal if anything goes haywire. Example FGFA. But could you do the same with LCA?

 

[Steven Rogers]

If they wouldn't have procured IOC variant do you think government would have go on with its funding? In late 2000 it was facing danger of getting shelved.

Second, for once stop comparing Tejas with Sukhoi or Migs or Dassault. In case of Sukhoi & Mig there was no problem on cross platform weapon integration. Any new platform from these OEM would be pre equipped with the earlier generation of weapons. Is this the case with Tejas?
What if tomorrow IAF want to upgrade it's whole CCM inventory? Do we have any other option for Tejas apart from R-73?
On top of that the two sqds of Tejas right now is equipped with F-404, but as per brochure Mk1A would be equipped with F-414. Means the RD of IAF would have to have man power for those too. On top of that, did HAL have provide a road map for maintenance of GE engines till now?
It is easier for IAF to sign deal of Sukhoi or Mig because you have an OEM to fall back on & back out from deal if anything goes haywire. Example FGFA. But could you do the same with LCA?

Which brochure suggests Mk1A with GEF414

 

[Bleh]

Which brochure suggests Mk1A with GEF414

That's surely a typo. He meant Mark2.

What if tomorrow IAF want to upgrade it's whole CCM inventory? Do we have any other option for Tejas apart from R-73?

This party though... IAF had been seriously considering standardisation of Astra series & ASRAAM althroughout the fleet. No news on adopting K-74.

 

[piKacHHu]

If they wouldn't have procured IOC variant do you think government would have go on with its funding? In late 2000 it was facing danger of getting shelved.

Second, for once stop comparing Tejas with Sukhoi or Migs or Dassault. In case of Sukhoi & Mig there was no problem on cross platform weapon integration. Any new platform from these OEM would be pre equipped with the earlier generation of weapons. Is this the case with Tejas?
What if tomorrow IAF want to upgrade it's whole CCM inventory? Do we have any other option for Tejas apart from R-73?
On top of that the two sqds of Tejas right now is equipped with F-404, but as per brochure Mk1A would be equipped with F-414. Means the RD of IAF would have to have man power for those too. On top of that, did HAL have provide a road map for maintenance of GE engines till now?
It is easier for IAF to sign deal of Sukhoi or Mig because you have an OEM to fall back on & back out from deal if anything goes haywire. Example FGFA. But could you do the same with LCA?

CCM replacement is relatively easier than BVR missile. The CCM doesn't need mating to the host aircraft's RADAR for mid-course update. However, some work needs to be done to link CCM to HMDS cueing system. So, Tejas has plenty of options to choose in CCM category but for BVR AAMs , they opted for easiest option i.e. mating an Israeli BVR AAM (salvaged from Harrier fleet) with Israeli RADAR on the IOC Tejas. So far no testing of R-77/R-27 integration has been planned with Tejas. It appears that they are going slow on AAM integration front ; Even for CCMs , which is a low hanging fruit, they could have easily integrated & tested existing ASRAAMs on Tejas .

It has been clear that the Tejas will be inducted in numbers (Even 40+83 aircraft are not a small fleet), it's prudent for HAL to come out with the proposed weapon suite for upcoming version. It will greatly help in sales pitch plus it will also attract missile giants like MBDA to invest in local facilities for production. AFAIK, there is no testing carried out for AAMs other than R-73 and Derby.

For engine part, GE 404IN is the engine selected for Mk1A.

Image Courtesy: DDR Tejas Mk1A (http://delhidefencereview.com/2017/...s-a-superior-option-for-the-indian-air-force/)

 

[IndianHawk]

CCM replacement is relatively easier than BVR missile. The CCM doesn't need mating to the host aircraft's RADAR for mid-course update. However, some work needs to be done to link CCM to HMDS cueing system. So, Tejas has plenty of options to choose in CCM category but for BVR AAMs , they opted for easiest option i.e. mating an Israeli BVR AAM (salvaged from Harrier fleet) with Israeli RADAR on the IOC Tejas. So far no testing of R-77/R-27 integration has been planned with Tejas. It appears that they are going slow on AAM integration front ; Even for CCMs , which is a low hanging fruit, they could have easily integrated & tested existing ASRAAMs on Tejas .

It has been clear that the Tejas will be inducted in numbers (Even 40+83 aircraft are not a small fleet), it's prudent for HAL to come out with the proposed weapon suite for upcoming version. It will greatly help in sales pitch plus it will also attract missile giants like MBDA to invest in local facilities for production. AFAIK, there is no testing carried out for AAMs other than R-73 and Derby.

For engine part, GE 404IN is the engine selected for Mk1A.

View attachment 49669
Image Courtesy: DDR Tejas Mk1A (http://delhidefencereview.com/2017/...s-a-superior-option-for-the-indian-air-force/)

Asraam can go up to 50km and can take cues from radar as well. So radar integration is required to exploit full performance of asraam.

 

[piKacHHu]

Asraam can go up to 50km and can take cues from radar as well. So radar integration is required to exploit full performance of asraam.

ASRAAM is an IR guided missile. Any reference to support your claim?

 

[IndianHawk]

ASRAAM is an IR guided missile. Any reference to support your claim?

Mbda

ASRAAM accepts target information via the aircraft sensors, such as the radar or helmet mounted sight but can also act as an autonomous infrared search and track system. The RAAF has demonstrated successful ‘over the shoulder’ firing in Lock On After Launch (LOAL) mode against target drones that were behind the wing-line of the launch aircraft.

ASRAAM | Air Dominance, AIR SUPERIORITY | MBDA

ASRAAM is in service with the Royal Air Force as its Within Visual Range (WVR) Dominance weapon.

www.mbda-systems.com

 

[abhay rajput]

Asraam can go up to 50km and can take cues from radar as well. So radar integration is required to exploit full performance of asraam.

50km too much for a 90kg missile. I would say 25km. At 50km the missile will not have enough energy to hit fighter jet.

 

[piKacHHu]

Mbda

ASRAAM accepts target information via the aircraft sensors, such as the radar or helmet mounted sight but can also act as an autonomous infrared search and track system. The RAAF has demonstrated successful ‘over the shoulder’ firing in Lock On After Launch (LOAL) mode against target drones that were behind the wing-line of the launch aircraft.

ASRAAM | Air Dominance, AIR SUPERIORITY | MBDA

ASRAAM is in service with the Royal Air Force as its Within Visual Range (WVR) Dominance weapon.

www.mbda-systems.com

ASRAAM is not a dual sensor missile, initial cueing w.r.t target vector may be provided with the help of RADAR, (anyway, this information is available to HMDS on pilot's visor) but it uses Imaging IR seeker (IIR) for acquiring target. It's fire and forget type of missile unlike Semi-active or Active seeker missiles in Intermediate to BVR range AAMs which requires host RADAR to either continuously paint the target or provide mid course correction to its trajectory.

So, integration of ASRAAM to Tejas is not bogged down by obstacles in RADAR integration IMO.

 

[HariPrasad-1]

We will require more than 200+ mwf in future

Updates on MWF.

It will have frontal stealth and will have some 5.5 generation technologies.

 

[Steven Rogers]

Updates on MWF.

It will have frontal stealth and will have some 5.5 generation technologies.

From where this update came,all everyone knows is the metal cutting going to be started soon...