LCA TEJAS MK1 & MK1A: News and Discussion

Bleh

Laughing member
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2017
Messages
3,507
Likes
10,155
Country flag
Marut was LCA of HAL just lacked engine then. They even scored victory against PAF Sabre and could fly at tree topheight as per IAF pilots.
Yes, but it was pretty large & twin engined... This one is more comparable to Gnat/Ajit or Mig-21.
 

Flying Dagger

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 26, 2019
Messages
1,481
Likes
3,172
Country flag
Yes, but it was pretty large & twin engined... This one is more comparable to Gnat/Ajit or Mig-21.
Ohh you are referring to this ?

This one wasn't our jet our role was to finance for engine dev to be used in HAL Marut.

Marut was our interceptor fighter sort of multirole.

Twin engine doesn't define light or heavy . Twin engine configuration provides reliability that's why IAF wanted it.
 

Bleh

Laughing member
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2017
Messages
3,507
Likes
10,155
Country flag
Marut literally was among the very best aircrafts ever made at that time, it was ahead of its time and was extensively used in 1971 war.
No not that much either... It was reliable (150 inducted, 1 crashed) & hardy, but in many aspects obsolete on arrival in 1967.
With no missiles, the HF-24 quickly became outdated within a few years. India had no missile tech of our own & that's it was used more for ground attack instead of originally intended interceptor roles.

I don't know of any attempts to add AAMs in '70s. Subsequent development of HF-73 was necessary but didn't happen.
 
Last edited:

FalconSlayers

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 14, 2020
Messages
118
Likes
196
Country flag
Our budget and production capabilities have plagued us. Instead of opting for ToT and similar things, we should have bought Su-30 MKIs directly from Russia in flyaway condition, would have saved our time, a lot of money as Russian ones cost less.

We have fewer production lines and that’s the reason why 18 Su-30 MKI order was reduced to 12, because 6 additional MKIs would mean addition 6 months occupied HAL Nashik facility delaying Tejas MK1A production by 6 months as MK1A will be produced in Nashik facility.

those 6 MKIs would have meant a Lot, may seem only 6 MKIs but 6 MKIs alone are fleet of many airforces (Armenian airforce only has 4 Su-30s). But we didn’t go for those 6 MKIs for Tejas MK1A early production.


I am afraid even if we are able to make Tejas MK2 MWF, ORCA, TEDBF, AMCA where will it be made Simultaneously with Tejas MK1A as 83 Tejas MK1A order will complete by 2028, how the hell we will manufacture others let alone quickly.
That’s why 114 MRFA is necessary, it will open another production line to be later used for indigenous aircraft manufacturing But all 114 aircraft won’t be manufactured before 2030.

We have capabilities to make very best fighters but lack capabilities in manufacturing them.
 

Bleh

Laughing member
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2017
Messages
3,507
Likes
10,155
Country flag
Twin engine doesn't define light or heavy . Twin engine configuration provides reliability that's why IAF wanted it.
It flew with 2 of Gnat/Ajeet's engines. Compare F404 users.

because 6 additional MKIs would mean addition 6 months occupied HAL Nashik facility delaying Tejas MK1A production by 6 months as MK1A will be produced in Nashik facility.
No.
 

Bleh

Laughing member
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2017
Messages
3,507
Likes
10,155
Country flag
So? I didn't get your point .

Gnat had a 21 kn class engine, F404 80 kn class.
I meant comparing single F404 Tejas/Gripen with twin-F404 F/A-18A & early Rafale.

Marut with two of Gnats engines may have been an interceptor, but not really light class (by '60s standard).
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

Articles

Top