LCA TEJAS MK1 & MK1A: News and Discussion

Aditya Ballal

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 16, 2020
Messages
1,399
Likes
6,833
Country flag
if we can't sell them the Mk1 in the 2020s, there's little hope we can sell them Mk2 in the 2030s. We are already doing the Mk1 FOC, Mk1A, Mk2, AMCA and TEDBF together- in various stages of dev/production. Why can't we replace just an ejection seat?

BTW, doesn't the JF-17 in Paxtani service also use MB seats for ejaculation(*)? How are the Chinese able to offer it to the Argentinians? We must follow the same strategy.


Initial TD variants of the JF-17 had Chinese ejaculation seats, but around that time, there were a string of ejection faliures of this type in China, so the Pakis decided to not go with the Chinese option, but the Chinese seemed to have solved that issue after few years.
 

Spitfire9

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2021
Messages
745
Likes
2,023
Country flag
if we can't sell them the Mk1 in the 2020s, there's little hope we can sell them Mk2 in the 2030s. We are already doing the Mk1 FOC, Mk1A, Mk2, AMCA and TEDBF together- in various stages of dev/production. Why can't we replace just an ejection seat?

BTW, doesn't the JF-17 in Paxtani service also use MB seats for ejaculation(*)? How are the Chinese able to offer it to the Argentinians? We must follow the same strategy.
Nobody is pressuring India not to develop ejection seats as far as I know. Is it incredibly difficult (like trying to develop a jet engine)? I guess not but is it worth it in the long run? I hazard it may be for sovereignty reasons + once India has learnt to make ejection seats, India should be able to equip Indian aircraft with them far into the future. Whether other countries will want to take the risk of buying non-MB until an Indian alternative has been proven many times is questionable, though.
 

shiphone

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2009
Messages
2,064
Likes
2,212
Country flag
Initial TD variants of the JF-17 had Chinese ejaculation seats, but around that time, there were a string of ejection faliures of this type in China, so the Pakis decided to not go with the Chinese option, but the Chinese seemed to have solved that issue after few years.


another funny lie here....lol....this is just an Optional/Alternative sub-system...Martin Baker seat is just he PAF standard equipment.---this is so called customized

Chinese HTY ejection seat is not something rare at least on the FC-1/JF-17 prototypes which took the maiden flight within China....for an export project, the sub system is optional.

and the first export order: the JF-17BM with HTY serial seat.



JF-17B for PAF

those prototypes and Myanmar AF's JF-17 have the export varient of PLAAF HTY-5B ejection seat equipped.

HTY-5BE ,which was displayed on Airshow China 2018..
 
Last edited:

Bleh

Laughing member
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2017
Messages
5,681
Likes
23,740
Country flag
Nobody is pressuring India not to develop ejection seats as far as I know. Is it incredibly difficult (like trying to develop a jet engine)? I guess not but is it worth it in the long run? I hazard it may be for sovereignty reasons + once India has learnt to make ejection seats, India should be able to equip Indian aircraft with them far into the future. Whether other countries will want to take the risk of buying non-MB until an Indian alternative has been proven many times is questionable, though.
ROI is very low... It'll need lotta money to perfect, but numbers will be very low in comparison. Simpler to import.

Similar with MAWS. It is very complicated & costly, however the advantage increase is not significant.
 

Spitfire9

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2021
Messages
745
Likes
2,023
Country flag
Even with AESA, FA 50 is no match to Tejas. Tejas is a state of art 4** generation aircraft with high agility, low RCS, state of art EW and lots of other goodies which can not be matchec by FA 50.
According to this source


the bids received by the deadline were for:

Tejas, MiG-35, China’s Catic L-15, FA-50, Hürjet and M-346.

Any guesses about the chances of each being selected? My guess:

Mk1A
MiG-35
FA-50 (not as capable as Mk1A, reported AESA delay)
M-346 (low speed)
L-15 (political problems with China)
Hurjet (might not even fly before 2023, so highly risky choice)
 

Ghost hale

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2021
Messages
544
Likes
1,649
Country flag
According to this source


the bids received by the deadline were for:

Tejas, MiG-35, China’s Catic L-15, FA-50, Hürjet and M-346.

Any guesses about the chances of each being selected? My guess:

Mk1A
MiG-35
FA-50 (not as capable as Mk1A, reported AESA delay)
M-346 (low speed)
L-15 (political problems with China)
Hurjet (might not even fly before 2023, so highly risky choice)
Mig 35 and FA 50 have deal with local partners for manufacturing. It might also play a factor in selection.
 

Okabe Rintarou

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2018
Messages
1,523
Likes
7,132
Country flag
According to this source


the bids received by the deadline were for:

Tejas, MiG-35, China’s Catic L-15, FA-50, Hürjet and M-346.

Any guesses about the chances of each being selected? My guess:

Mk1A
MiG-35
FA-50 (not as capable as Mk1A, reported AESA delay)
M-346 (low speed)
L-15 (political problems with China)
Hurjet (might not even fly before 2023, so highly risky choice)
Came across this Malaysian forum.
https://forum.lowyat.net/topic/5208135
My god the level of prejudice against Tejas is amazing. Started wondering if these people really Malaysians or Pakistanis. Nobody gave any real critique except for some vague "HAL poor safety record, Indian Sukhois and MiGs drop like flies", etc nonsense as well as a Pakistani response:-
  • Tejas
    • >took more than 30 years, still have problems
    • >budget overrun of 25x. not 25 percent more but 25 times more
    • >has 53 significant shortfalls including short range and could only carry around 3 ton payload (slightly more than tudm hawk)
    • >is less than 30 percent indian made even when it's touted as "indigenous made aircraft"
    • >still not achieve FOC, barely 2 squadron operational (roughly 24-30 planes)
  • JF-17
    • >50/50 JV between Pakistan and China
    • >developed in 1995, first flight in 2003, introduced in 2007
    • >Achieved FOC 10 years ago with problems pretty much sorted out
    • >Stealth (okay, more like "lo-observable) JF-17 is under development
    • >can carry 4.5 ton payload with worse engine (RD-33 vs F404 in Tejas)
    • >close to150 planes built
    • >actually has export potential
*
TejasCritiqueOnMalaysianForum1.png



Now I really want Tejas to win just to see the meltdown in that forum. :rofl:
 

mist_consecutive

Selling Wuhan Fried Bats
Contributor
Joined
Oct 2, 2018
Messages
1,836
Likes
14,729
Country flag
Call me unambitious, but I strongly believe we should not export Tejas till we have inducted our share (Mk1A/2) and manufacturing lines are running dry.

Also, a newly developed aircraft is bound to have problems and shortfalls which are only observed once it is in active service for some time. Hence we ought to mature the platform and sort out any such issues before giving them to friendly countries.

HAL/GoI did the same mistake in HAL Dhruv, sold it to Ecuador early on, the earlier versions of Dhruv were extremely maintenance-heavy and frequently encountered snags. Unavailability of local OEM and spare parts got them crashed and grounded.

Once we start Tejas Mk2, all the critical systems including indigenous AESA (Uttam Mk2), weapons (Astra), and EW + SPJ suites would have been matured by that time, which will be formidable and a capable export platform.
 

Okabe Rintarou

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2018
Messages
1,523
Likes
7,132
Country flag
Call me unambitious, but I strongly believe we should not export Tejas till we have inducted our share (Mk1A/2) and manufacturing lines are running dry.

Also, a newly developed aircraft is bound to have problems and shortfalls which are only observed once it is in active service for some time. Hence we ought to mature the platform and sort out any such issues before giving them to friendly countries.

HAL/GoI did the same mistake in HAL Dhruv, sold it to Ecuador early on, the earlier versions of Dhruv were extremely maintenance-heavy and frequently encountered snags. Unavailability of local OEM and spare parts got them crashed and grounded.

Once we start Tejas Mk2, all the critical systems including indigenous AESA (Uttam Mk2), weapons (Astra), and EW + SPJ suites would have been matured by that time, which will be formidable and a capable export platform.
On the contrary, I think early export success is better because it might make HAL consider more assembly lines which will be beneficial in the long term. Tejas Mk1A should be a lot more mature now than Dhruv Mk1 was. Maintenance problems are already sorted with LRU optimization. I heard HAL is offering an MRO facility in the deal, so spare support should be no problem.
 

warriorextreme

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2010
Messages
1,785
Likes
2,445
Country flag
Came across this Malaysian forum.
https://forum.lowyat.net/topic/5208135
My god the level of prejudice against Tejas is amazing. Started wondering if these people really Malaysians or Pakistanis. Nobody gave any real critique except for some vague "HAL poor safety record, Indian Sukhois and MiGs drop like flies", etc nonsense as well as a Pakistani response:-
  • Tejas
    • >took more than 30 years, still have problems
    • >budget overrun of 25x. not 25 percent more but 25 times more
    • >has 53 significant shortfalls including short range and could only carry around 3 ton payload (slightly more than tudm hawk)
    • >is less than 30 percent indian made even when it's touted as "indigenous made aircraft"
    • >still not achieve FOC, barely 2 squadron operational (roughly 24-30 planes)
  • JF-17
    • >50/50 JV between Pakistan and China
    • >developed in 1995, first flight in 2003, introduced in 2007
    • >Achieved FOC 10 years ago with problems pretty much sorted out
    • >Stealth (okay, more like "lo-observable) JF-17 is under development
    • >can carry 4.5 ton payload with worse engine (RD-33 vs F404 in Tejas)
    • >close to150 planes built
    • >actually has export potential
*
View attachment 115903


Now I really want Tejas to win just to see the meltdown in that forum. :rofl:
Mostly these people must have access to same sh*t that porkies smoke :) No one would make such comments without being high as they are completely baseless and can be easily googled and refuted point by point.
 

warriorextreme

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2010
Messages
1,785
Likes
2,445
Country flag
Call me unambitious, but I strongly believe we should not export Tejas till we have inducted our share (Mk1A/2) and manufacturing lines are running dry.

Also, a newly developed aircraft is bound to have problems and shortfalls which are only observed once it is in active service for some time. Hence we ought to mature the platform and sort out any such issues before giving them to friendly countries.

HAL/GoI did the same mistake in HAL Dhruv, sold it to Ecuador early on, the earlier versions of Dhruv were extremely maintenance-heavy and frequently encountered snags. Unavailability of local OEM and spare parts got them crashed and grounded.

Once we start Tejas Mk2, all the critical systems including indigenous AESA (Uttam Mk2), weapons (Astra), and EW + SPJ suites would have been matured by that time, which will be formidable and a capable export platform.
Agree with most of your points but my problem is exporting it to countries like Malaysia that have potential to be Porkistan 2.0 and in past have sided with Porkistan.
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top