LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 15 Jan 2016 10:43

er gripen also has imported engine and imported missiles and imported bombs and ejection seats.
i do not see it being spat upon daily like a imported tejas

is it because it has gori chamri?

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 15 Jan 2016 11:36

manjgu wrote: But isnt its export potential very limited with imported engines, radars and ordanance in the lightweight category with a very capable Gripen as a competitor?

If you look at the military/combat aircraft market right from the 1950s you find that the primary market and the primary need for creating new aircraft was the domestic market for the top aerospace nations. I am not just talking about Amrika - but Britain and France as well that had huge air forces and aerospace interests. Exports were the icing on the cake.

Gradually America began to dominate because of its domestic market while Europe fell behind. Gradually Europeans started collaborating to get a bigger market like the Anglo French Jaguar and the Franco-German TransAll transport. Then came "Panavia" Tornado and the "Euro"fighter. Even in the US things got tougher and individual companies were bought up to make huge conglomerates.

So India's domestic market is a huge advantage that can lead innovation, followed secondarily for sales. So also China

viveksonkhla · Post by **viveksonkhla** » 15 Jan 2016 12:29

Alright folks.. this thread is going to be open in a separate tab till the time LCA is back in India... I am not going to restart my laptop for sometime now...and F5 button is going to give up real soon.

manjgu · Post by **manjgu** » 15 Jan 2016 12:49

shiv ..u r right...and i hope LCA programme spurs more innovation and multiple spinoffs. my point was will be allowed to sell a LCA powered with a american engine ..isreali radar etc.? not so much abt gori chamri..

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 15 Jan 2016 13:19

if we get 500 tejas of all shades which we need. massa would not mind some export sales. massa has stopped f16 production i think and would focus on jsf sales.

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 15 Jan 2016 13:56

From the Tejas - LCA Facebook page by Deb Rana

Click for hi-res

Smokewinders already installed (compare with this Aero India 2013 photo by Angad Singh)

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 15 Jan 2016 15:07

manjgu wrote:shiv ..u r right...and i hope LCA programme spurs more innovation and multiple spinoffs. my point was will be allowed to sell a LCA powered with a american engine ..isreali radar etc.? not so much abt gori chamri..

The Swedes have been successfully selling and marketing the Gripen all over the world, despite it being powered by a US engine. And in Brazil it beat out the Boeing built Super Hornet.

So yes, we can sell the Tejas wherever we want with a few exceptions. Exports to China, Iran, Venezuela, Syria, North Korea for example are strictly off-the-table. Not that they are high on our list of potential markets anyway.

Myanmar would have been iffy, but they have, in any case, already ordered the JF-17. Vietnam will be kosher given its rapidly warming relations with the US. Sri Lanka already operates fighters equipped with US engines (Kfir). Nigeria is another possibility.

The problem with the Gripen is that despite being small and light, its still fairly expensive - with a procurement cost upwards of $80 million, at least twice as high as the Tejas Mk1. Plus the Gripen C/D is now out of production, with the Gripen E bound to be pricier. For a country looking for a cheap non-Chinese fighter for basic roles, the only real competition to the Tejas is the FA-50.

The downside to the Tejas is the lack of NATO compatibility (Link 16, IFF) which excludes a great portion of the European market - Switzerland, Austria, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Bulgaria, Croatia, etc - all of whom have limited budgets (too small for the Gripen E) and relatively basic requirements. HAL could tie-up with BAE or EADS (or Elta?) to carry out a simple customisation of the Tejas specifically for such operators.

More importantly, there has to be a proactive attitude from the seller. The worst part about the Ecuadorian ALH Dhruv fiasco wasn't that the aircraft crashed or was grounded. It was that nobody seemed to give a damn. There was no recrimination from the MoD and there was no damage control from HAL's leadership. No committee was formed to investigate the issue and no recommendations were made to prevent a recurrence.

So if the next customer decides to reject the Tejas just because its made-in-India by HAL, I'm not sure I can blame them for it.

member_28482 · Post by **member_28482** » 15 Jan 2016 17:16

Abhishek Shrivastava One small question, Why we reached one week before show, Are we going to fly beforehead.

Tejas - LCA
Tejas - LCA Practice. We, at bangalore at height which is not same as bahrain. The diff in altitudes do impact the low level flyings. Makes lots of sense to practice to the inch perfect before the real show begins.

member_23694 · Post by **member_23694** » 15 Jan 2016 19:32

PratikDas wrote: From the Tejas - LCA Facebook page by Deb Rana

Click for hi-res

Tejas looking stunning

. Now for a mind blowing performance to show the world what its capable of.
If HAL/ADA does not come up with a good video then they have it

BTW as part of a PR exercise and hype, Tejas team could have come up with a video of its flight from India to Bahrain itself[ a short video] / some high res image of its journey

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 15 Jan 2016 19:49

^^^
Probably in the works

Really goodlooking plane! What was the BRF naamkaran for it again? After Rambha and Katrina?

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 15 Jan 2016 21:30

maitya wrote:
Tejas - LCA wrote: Thought is on to modify the OB pylon to carry both the spj and the missiles. Another thought is to utilize the wing tips for spj. Nothing concrete as of now.

Dual carriage of the SPJ+missile on the OB pylon is probably the least risky solution. But spj on the wingtips will be really sleek both to the eye as well as through the air. I prefer the second

.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 15 Jan 2016 21:35

SPJ + missile - wont it run the risk of asymmetric loadouts (more testing) + managing damage (if any) from missile plume

juvva · Post by **juvva** » 15 Jan 2016 22:09

Gagan wrote:^^^
Probably in the works

Really goodlooking plane! What was the BRF naamkaran for it again? After Rambha and Katrina?

Tejaswini ?

http://www.indiachildnames.com/name.aspx?name=Tejaswini

Lustrous; Bright; Radiant; Intelligent

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 15 Jan 2016 22:09

Shiv, My old Biggles books remind me that planes in transit could get sabotaged by Eric!!!

Hope they have a Garud contingent gaurding LCAs

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 15 Jan 2016 22:16

juvva wrote:
Gagan wrote:^^^
Probably in the works

Really goodlooking plane! What was the BRF naamkaran for it again? After Rambha and Katrina?
Tejaswini ?

http://www.indiachildnames.com/name.aspx?name=Tejaswini
Lustrous; Bright; Radiant; Intelligent

Oh please..lets not do this Rambha BS again.. no offense to you but just picking on this thought process.. this is a warplane not some actress

Tejas is a good enough name, lets let it be

Jaguar was Shamsher and MiG-29 was Baaz, now those are names.

shravanp · Post by **shravanp** » 15 Jan 2016 22:24

After a long time Tejas will be flying in phoren skies. I was trying to find out the dates for the fly-bys on bahrain site, can't be found. ALH's Sarang are going to be performing.

disha · Post by **disha** » 15 Jan 2016 22:46

Is there a fotu of SPJ?

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 15 Jan 2016 22:50

There is not one developed yet..

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 16 Jan 2016 01:06

Karan M wrote:SPJ + missile - wont it run the risk of asymmetric loadouts (more testing) + managing damage (if any) from missile plume

Asymmetry will be there when only one of the CCMs is fired, whether the SPJ is on a pylon or the wingtip. I don't know much about the effect of the missile plume. However, I am guessing this is not that big of a challenge either. Afterall, dual pylons are that uncommon.

fanne · Post by **fanne** » 16 Jan 2016 02:24

If symmetry is so important, does not that mean that every time LCA fires, it has to fire two aa missile at almost the same time, or drop two bombs?

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 16 Jan 2016 02:37

No. But additional non symmetric loads require additional fbw testing. See Rafale triple ejector rack for example

Shreeman · Post by **Shreeman** » 16 Jan 2016 03:22

The thing that is missing is HF-XX. SP1 but no HF designation? Frankly this glorification by name is rubbish. If they left it at HJT HTT HF it would be far more reasonable. 2c.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 16 Jan 2016 04:53

That "H" applies to aircrafts designed and built by HAL.

But I agree with you, we should an abbreviated series.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 16 Jan 2016 05:33

how much of survivability are talking with SPJ? I also assume the context is active rf jammer and not CCMs. Is this a combo? If it is pure CCM, then I would say asymmetric loadout with heat seekers on the other pylon.

I would like to see both RF and mmw seekers on one side, and CCM with heat seekers on the other side.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 16 Jan 2016 06:47

ramana wrote:Shiv, My old Biggles books remind me that planes in transit could get sabotaged by Eric!!!

Hope they have a Garud contingent gaurding LCAs

Ramana it is better to stick to what is often painted on the backs of lorries in India "boori nazar waala tera mooh kaala"

I think we are worried about our Tejas like a mom worries about her baby and non some other baby. Fact is that if such sabotage was simple the, the first terror target would be civilian flights and no one seems to worry about that though all of us do fly regularly. Under normal circumstances (not Pakistan) security will be tight.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 16 Jan 2016 06:52

Guessing that asymmetry would not be the problem. Flight control software probably encounters asymmetry ten thousand times per flight. It is the air flow around the new SPJ or pylon and things like safe separation of dispensable loads would need testing. Of course an asymmetric load would lead to some fuel penalty which could make a difference in a combat situation.

VijayN · Post by **VijayN** » 16 Jan 2016 06:58

indranilroy wrote:That "H" applies to aircrafts designed and built by HAL.

But I agree with you, we should an abbreviated series.

My 2c - T-MII (Tejas - Made In India) if I may quote you.

Shreeman · Post by **Shreeman** » 16 Jan 2016 09:31

shiv wrote:Guessing that asymmetry would not be the problem. Flight control software probably encounters asymmetry ten thousand times per flight. It is the air flow around the new SPJ or pylon and things like safe separation of dispensable loads would need testing. Of course an asymmetric load would lead to some fuel penalty which could make a difference in a combat situation.

shiv,

A thought occurs. first an SPJ, then a fleet jammer? Its an intercepter. The first 100 will stick around their bases and tell intruders to buzz off. Thats it. If its around your home, you ought to be able to use ground based protection and/or do without an SPJ.

If they want a true fighter, replacement for 2000/29 then start working on the twin. Now.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 16 Jan 2016 09:55

Shreeman
The SPJ is to make the incoming radar guided AAM fuze get confused. Preferable for each plane to carry its own. Having said that looks like internal distributed system is/was not viable. Hence the pylon is being used for it. Preferable to not give up more pylons. Has any one looked ag the cutaway drawing to see what space is available?

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 16 Jan 2016 10:41

Karan M wrote: Oh please..lets not do this Rambha BS again.. no offense to you but just picking on this thought process.. this is a warplane not some actress

Tejas is a good enough name, lets let it be

Jaguar was Shamsher and MiG-29 was Baaz, now those are names.

Disagree here saar - not about the actress name bit...not my cuppa either.but considering that it is a "warplane" as you put it yourself, what was ABVji thinking when he naamkaraned it Tejas?

Never was that pleased with Tejas - sounds like a bespectacled kid about to hit the board exams! From Shamsher, Baaz, Ajeet, Vajra Arihant, Agni to Tejas - really? What a let down that was. Hope the boys in the IAF rename it with something more dashing...

JMVVHMO of course - ducks for cover as he sees the hail of in bounds

uddu · Post by **uddu** » 16 Jan 2016 11:13

How Vajpayeeji must have explain it..
"When you see the Tejas (radiance), be assured that Surya (Sun) is indeed very close.

Tejas the radiance of India's aeronautical capability. Rambhas, menakas, will come and go, but the sun and its radiance is here to stay.

member_22539 · Post by **member_22539** » 16 Jan 2016 11:15

^ABV actually meant Texas (Spanish spelling). Now nothing is as tough as Texas right? Ask any American. Any opinion from the rest of the world doesn't count to the local morons reporting on the LCA. He was hoping for more positive reporting, but seems like this was too intelligent a reasoning to expect from the DDM morons.

hanumadu · Post by **hanumadu** » 16 Jan 2016 11:19

Tejas is used to mean sharp here, not radiance

Shreeman · Post by **Shreeman** » 16 Jan 2016 12:21

ramana wrote:Shreeman
The SPJ is to make the incoming radar guided AAM fuze get confused. Preferable for each plane to carry its own. Having said that looks like internal distributed system is/was not viable. Hence the pylon is being used for it. Preferable to not give up more pylons. Has any one looked ag the cutaway drawing to see what space is available?

Ramana,

Yes, I understand. We have also had this debate a few times over the years. The gist is: too small, too light for cramming every bell and whistle. Trying to make an Arjun Mk2 out of it will make it fat and ugly and sluggish and late and slow and .... and so on.

Consider : https://books.google.com/books?id=Y8keP ... er&f=false

or

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ ... /vajra.htm

Now these craft needed one. Did each one of them carry one? Did anyone cry foul?

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 16 Jan 2016 14:09

shiv wrote:
ramana wrote:Shiv, My old Biggles books remind me that planes in transit could get sabotaged by Eric!!!

Hope they have a Garud contingent gaurding LCAs
Ramana it is better to stick to what is often painted on the backs of lorries in India "boori nazar waala tera mooh kaala"

I think we are worried about our Tejas like a mom worries about her baby and non some other baby. Fact is that if such sabotage was simple the, the first terror target would be civilian flights and no one seems to worry about that though all of us do fly regularly. Under normal circumstances (not Pakistan) security will be tight.

In a discussion with the late B Harry, after he had visited HAL iirc, he mentioned sabotage was a real concern and agencies were on alert regarding the LCA.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 16 Jan 2016 14:11

Cain Marko wrote:
Karan M wrote: Oh please..lets not do this Rambha BS again.. no offense to you but just picking on this thought process.. this is a warplane not some actress

Tejas is a good enough name, lets let it be

Jaguar was Shamsher and MiG-29 was Baaz, now those are names.
Disagree here saar - not about the actress name bit...not my cuppa either.but considering that it is a "warplane" as you put it yourself, what was ABVji thinking when he naamkaraned it Tejas?

Never was that pleased with Tejas - sounds like a bespectacled kid about to hit the board exams! From Shamsher, Baaz, Ajeet, Vajra Arihant, Agni to Tejas - really? What a let down that was. Hope the boys in the IAF rename it with something more dashing...

JMVVHMO of course - ducks for cover as he sees the hail of in bounds

Point is I'll take Tejas any day over Shilpa or Katrina or similar cooked up whimsical names made up on BRF. They are worthless for warplanes..

If Tejas gets replaced by something more warlike, I am all for it.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 16 Jan 2016 14:16

Shreeman wrote:
ramana wrote:Shreeman
The SPJ is to make the incoming radar guided AAM fuze get confused. Preferable for each plane to carry its own. Having said that looks like internal distributed system is/was not viable. Hence the pylon is being used for it. Preferable to not give up more pylons. Has any one looked ag the cutaway drawing to see what space is available?
Ramana,

Yes, I understand. We have also had this debate a few times over the years. The gist is: too small, too light for cramming every bell and whistle. Trying to make an Arjun Mk2 out of it will make it fat and ugly and sluggish and late and slow and .... and so on.

Consider : https://books.google.com/books?id=Y8keP ... er&f=false

or

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ ... /vajra.htm

Now these craft needed one. Did each one of them carry one? Did anyone cry foul?

To add, the Vajra aka Mirage 2000 has 5 usable pylons in IAF service in its H-version.

Of which one would be used by its Remora pod.

And the IAF asked for 7 hardpoints on the LCA and now we are discussing on how to optimize that. With 7 pylons and 3 wet ones, even the range should be fairly Ok with useful weapons loads.

fanne · Post by **fanne** » 16 Jan 2016 17:35

When is the show

fanne · Post by **fanne** » 16 Jan 2016 18:28

One other thing people do not understand vis a vis LCA is the following -

1.LCA is our recent attempt to catch up in Tech and real plane/numbers (as per IAF, to counter TSPAF and PLAAF, we need nearly 57 fighter squadron, this is official IAF study and we are half that number).
2.It is also a technology that is not cutting edge in 2016 (and it does not have to be it is not the tip of our spear, SU30MKI is). This in itself is not a problem vis a vis TSPAF, they are more obselete, and Tejas can compete with their top end and maul their middle end of the planes. But China is developing fast, they have already moved on the next rung of technology. Sooner these planes will be available to TSPAF
3.We need to move on from LCA to the next rung (be it LCA MK3 or AMCA). But for that current LCA has to be put in SQ service, numbers pumped up and kinks ironed out NOW. This will have design team move to the next stage or iteration and also correct and learn what is wrong with current LCA. This delay is not only killing our present, but our future as well. This is not an IAF decision anymore (which is famous for not having plan

, it is a political decision and govt should force IAF for that. Mig 21 and SU30MKI both were political decision, not backed by IAF and they have done great.
4.We should also investigate what is the reason for IAF fascination with Rafael, a plane that may cost more than a F-22. I am not alleging bribe (that should be looked), but more like institutional blindness to (wrong) decision. What has led IAF to this pass, where they would have Rafael no matter the cost (even if it weighed more than it's weight in gold), not induct LCA, not augment SU30MKI numbers or look for any other alternative? It is not that if we had Rafael today, we will win PoK, free Tibet and rule the world, just on those Rafaels.

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 16 Jan 2016 18:36

Fanne- totally agree. It is not institutional blindness but arrogance.