LCA TEJAS MK1 & MK1A: News and Discussion

[brat4]

what about 36 nd possibly 114 rafale...r they not good enough to replace jaguar?? i think rafale is far better aircraft in ground attack than jaguar nd mirage 2000. even IAF will always choose mirage 2000 for ground strike missions than jaguar. rafale is next genration of mirage 2000.
AMCA will outclass all fighters (in india) in different missions, so they can be replacement of any current fighter in india.

point is to have lower cost aircraft for bankrupt nations. have you ever seen EAM or MAD giving replies to low level congi chaaps?
same way, we want home grown, well built machines to take care of beggar countries.
once our home grown machines get enough exercise and get stronger, we can then tackle the other ones as well.

 

[vin bharat mahan]

point is to have lower cost aircraft for bankrupt nations. have you ever seen EAM or MAD giving replies to low level congi chaaps?
same way, we want home grown, well built machines to take care of beggar countries.
once our home grown machines get enough exercise and get stronger, we can then tackle the other ones as well.

yeah i know for pakistan 200 tejas mark 1a is good number. other 200 tejas mark 2 will be good counter for chinese flankers. but we still need rafale type 4.5 genration aircraft which EW spectra nd other sensors etc world famous. it can challenge half cooked j 20 chinese. till 2035, we r going to replace 300-400 fighters. so we need tejas mark 1a nd tejas mark 2 in 350-400 numbers to maintain 34-35 squads. 6 additional squad of rafale can bring 40-41 squad for IAF. but currently we need 50+ squads to counter two front war. rest number can be filled by AMCA.

 

[mcpo117]

yeah i know for pakistan 200 tejas mark 1a is good number. other 200 tejas mark 2 will be good counter for chinese flankers. but we still need rafale type 4.5 genration aircraft which EW spectra nd other sensors etc world famous. it can challenge half cooked j 20 chinese. till 2035, we r going to replace 300-400 fighters. so we need tejas mark 1a nd tejas mark 2 in 350-400 numbers to maintain 34-35 squads. 6 additional squad of rafale can bring 40-41 squad for IAF. but currently we need 50+ squads to counter two front war. rest number can be filled by AMCA.

but we still need a robust training regime like those of USAF. It will be incredibly costly though. But then again we need to minimize Balakot type fiasco in the future.

 

[vin bharat mahan]

but we still need a robust training regime like those of USAF. It will be incredibly costly though. But then again we need to minimize Balakot type fiasco in the future.

IAF capital budget is 6 billion dollar this year....so for upcoming 12 years (untill 2035) IAF will get minimum (not counting increased capital budget every year) 12×6= 72 billion dollar. which is good enough money, if we spend them correctly.

 

[Gyyan]

IAF capital budget is 6 billion dollar this year....so for upcoming 12 years (untill 2035) IAF will get minimum (not counting increased capital budget every year) 12×6= 72 billion dollar. which is good enough money, if we spend them correctly.

I don't think capex will remain mere 6 billion dollars if it is currently is 6 billion dollars till 2035 we will be a much larger economy by then and much more self dependent.

 

[Bleh]

@Bleh

Should I ask you the way you asked me by Invoking Vedas by insulting Hindus???

Did Mother marry or Mohammad or Periyar/Bheemta told you that MKI have same payload capacity??? ( This reference you deserve at least once)

Su-30mki have 10 ton pure weapons carrying capacity with 9.5ton internal fuel capacity, means 5 tons more fuel than Rafale.

So if you comparing on Gl0b0h0m0s scale then I will say Su-30mki have roughly 15 tons payload capacity while Rafale have 9.5tons capacity.

Su-30mki payload is 1.5 times higher than Rafale. Now you can go and edit Wikipedia.

Yea if one id using derogatory words one should be prepared to recieve them... Anyways someone else did the sharing. I'm sure the specs of Rafale were originally in Vedas 5000 years ago, western French engineers surely copied from it like they a always do. You should read it again & confirm.

I'll update wiki

(But seriously, Rafale wings can take 9.5tons of ordnance. It'll cut internal fuel & be bomb truck at short range if conditions require. Su-30 wings can take max 8ton ordnance. It'll have much longer range tho)

 

[omaebakabaka]

Yea if one id using derogatory words one should be prepared to recieve them... Anyways someone else did the sharing. I'm sure the specs of Rafale were originally in Vedas 5000 years ago, western French engineers surely copied from it like they a always do. You should read it again & confirm.

I'll update wiki

(But seriously, Rafale wings can take 9.5tons of ordnance. It'll cut internal fuel & be bomb truck at short range if conditions require. Su-30 wings can take max 8ton ordnance. It'll have much longer range tho)

So can't take 9.5 tons seriously, Rafael is a good fighter in its class. Mki too in it's own class. 8 tons is more than enough and these aren't bombers by any means. Probably Rafael is more useful for us in terms of variety of mission profiles that are typical with mki backing them up especially if they get their upgrades. Iaf loves it's mirages

 

[Corvus Splendens]

 

[porky_kicker]

5 X Gautam PGMs on the Tejas Mk1A prototype..for those who thought it couldn't replace the MiG-27s..

450 kg hsld

 

[johnj]

All these are general purpose bombs, used against targets such as runways, bridges, docks, bunkers, buildings, railway tracks etc

 

[Saichand K]

I'm big fan of LCA tejas, and I'm not make foolish/dumb arguments.
If IAF want mig27 replacement then they can consider lca mk2 around 126. For mig21, 200+ lca mk1 versions. For jaguar, 144+ amca. Plus additional 150+ mk2 considering m2k, mig29, mig27
Total, 200lca mk1 + 300 mk2. I'm no longer interested in Russian junks.
Any shortcomings will be ratified by CATS, loyal wingman, stealth bomber drone.
I believe, LCA mk2 became most successful aircraft operated by IAF in future and become backbone of IAF with longest services record. The biggest advantage of mk2 over mk1 is, future availability of 110kn+ Indian engine for mk2.

I feel in modern day, tactical bombing is more relevant than ww2 era carpet bombing. So why a strike aircraft need so much payload. Even in russia-ukraine war, we see Su-34 inspite of its high payload capacity carry max. 4 FAB bombs with guidance modules.

 

[Bleh]

I feel in modern day, tactical bombing is more relevant than ww2 era carpet bombing. So why a strike aircraft need so much payload. Even in russia-ukraine war, we see Su-34 inspite of its high payload capacity carry max. 4 FAB bombs with guidance modules.

These are not due carpet bombing... The are for strikes but where you're to destroy a bunch of stuff, say arty or ammo depot kept over a hectare of land.

Exactly pin-point hits are not required often. You'll just need to obliterate a whole patch of land

 

[Saichand K]

These are not due carpet bombing... The are for strikes but where you're to destroy a bunch of stuff, say arty or ammo depot kept over a hectare of land.

Exactly pin-point hits are not required often. You'll just need to obliterate a whole patch of land

For that Su-30MKI fits better. Why use Tejas for that?

 

[NutCracker]

For that Su-30MKI fits better. Why use Tejas for that?

Small RCS, low stall speed, better turrain hugging capability to avoid SAMs.

 

[Chinmoy]

if i m not wrong...rafale can carry more weapons. coz it hv 14 hardpoints compaire to su 30 mki 12 hardpoint. nd rafale can carry 9500 kg weapon payloads, compaire to 8000 kg by su 30 mki.

If we compare it for CAS role, Rafale is better then MKI since MKI was built as an air superiority fighter. But if you compare it in attack role, MKI still holds an edge over Rafale.

 

[Bleh]

For that Su-30MKI fits better. Why use Tejas for that?

Adding to @NutCracker's point, you'd use Su-30 for larger target areas like hitting a tank column or parked aircrafts, with 10-12 piece of ordnance... Tejas with 4-5 pieces would take out more concentrated targets like an ammo dump or arty unit. It's much more accurate with unguided bombs & you can literally send 3 of them for same operational cost.

Guided-munition would be too costly in some cases. They're saved for taking out specific targets like a fortification or radar.

 

[DumbPilot]

Guided-munition would be too costly in some cases. They're saved for taking out specific targets like a fortification or radar.

I think in the future we should hopefully be at a stage where we're able to expend guided munitions without considering about the value of the target. GPS bombs(for standoff range)/LGB bombs(once the airspace has been sanitized) have a way better pk due to them being guided

 

[NutCracker]

Adding to @NutCracker's point, you'd use Su-30 for larger target areas like hitting a tank column or parked aircrafts, with 10-12 piece of ordnance... Tejas with 4-5 pieces would take out more concentrated targets like an ammo dump or arty unit. It's much more accurate with unguided bombs & you can literally send 3 of them for same operational cost.

Guided-munition would be too costly in some cases. They're saved for taking out specific targets like a fortification or radar.

Knock knock,
Hemlo Brozzer.

Did someone call for the Close Air support..
4 x 1000lbs Bombs express parcel on way.

Spoiler: Fuel tank

(Midboard fuel might be 800 ltr)

 

[vishnugupt]

bro..if Dassault give this data about 9000+ kg weapon load for rafale. will u consider it random data?? look at 5 line. total external load capacity is more than nine tonnes. they r not talking about inbuilt fuel storage. do u want how much su 30 mki can carry external load. it is 8000 kg approx. yes su 30 mki hv more internal fuel storage, coz it consume more fuel.

View attachment 223356

First of all you mentioned Weapons carrying capacity not payload capacity.
Most of time Rafale use external fuel so effective weapons carrying capacity is lower than payload capacity so understand the difference.

To match the Su-30mki range rafale need 3 external fuel tanks but MKI need none.

Su-30mki payload capacity is absolute weapons carrying capacity

he can't digest anything written by "Gl0b0h0m0s" in the words of @vishnugupt

You are one of DFI member whose posts often senseless. So you are irrelevant in any discussion.

Yea if one id using derogatory words one should be prepared to recieve them... Anyways someone else did the sharing. I'm sure the specs of Rafale were originally in Vedas 5000 years ago, western French engineers surely copied from it like they a always do. You should read it again & confirm.

I'll update wiki

(But seriously, Rafale wings can take 9.5tons of ordnance. It'll cut internal fuel & be bomb truck at short range if conditions require. Su-30 wings can take max 8ton ordnance. It'll have much longer range tho)

Person who assault my religion, I will address him in the same way for my rest of life.

Now your mother marry or Mohammad or Periyar/Bheemta told you Rafale can carry 9.5 tons?? Is Central pylon exclusively reserved for your stupidity?? Show me picture where Rafale carrying 9.5 tons of wings???

You Gl0b0h0m0s now finding loopholes. Raising Rafale payload by decreasing range and fuel but SU-30MKI in not allowed for this manipulation.

Probably, Bias is in the Blood of Abrahamic people.

 

[Azaad]

Yea if one id using derogatory words one should be prepared to recieve them... Anyways someone else did the sharing. I'm sure the specs of Rafale were originally in Vedas 5000 years ago, western French engineers surely copied from it like they a always do. You should read it again & confirm.

I'll update wiki

(But seriously, Rafale wings can take 9.5tons of ordnance. It'll cut internal fuel & be bomb truck at short range if conditions require. Su-30 wings can take max 8ton ordnance. It'll have much longer range tho)

What's with bringing in religious texts of a particular religion in a discussion not remotely connected to the Rafale ? The religious texts of other religions are replete with instances of people levitating / flying etc. Why don't you allude to them ? If you have a disagreement with the said member there are other ways to settle the matter