LCA: News & Discussions: 15 August 2017

[Akshay Kapoor]

Very interesting discussion on low level flying. Thanks all.

[shiv]

Dr Shiv. Where did you get the MANPADS ? Can I too get a few ?

Er just change the gender and you get manpads..

[shiv]

No doubt you have tried sir - aiming a camera I mean.

Forget camera - I have been rushing out every time a hear a fighter since I was a boy and very often I can barely get a glimpse.

[shiv]

I think the LCA has been designed as an agile aircraft with low wing loading. I believe that a delta like the Tejas with a large wing area acts like a kite that catches the wind at low levels. Planes with low wing loading inevitably try to gain altitude if flown very fast at low levels. The only way to fly them very low is to go slower or fix the controls to keep it low. If forced to fly low the LCA will likely be a gas guzzler and may not be able to fly as fast as the Jag.

Bolded part doesn't make sense to me. One can always fly an aircraft at such combination of speed and AoA that it will maintain steady constant altitude, constant Mach flight, at low altitudes we are talking about here. If you wanna fly faster, reduce AoA. If you want to go slower, increase AoA and still produce same lift, enough to just balance the weight.

You have not understood what I am asking. It is so difficult in this medium. Let me explain.

If you take the same aircraft, same weight, same power setting and simply increase the wing area (for example by extending flaps as is done for take off) - the lift increases. The act of deploying flaps decreases wing loading by increasing wing area for the same weight

In other words - at a given airspeed the same aircraft with will generate more lift if the wing area is higher. That "more lift" will try to take the plane to a higher altitude than if that extra wing area were unavailable. Suppose you cannot retract those flaps and the wing area remains higher than a sister plane without extended flaps then the only way you can force that aircraft with lower wing loading (extended flaps) to fly low is to:
1. Slow down thereby reducing lift
or
2. Force nose down (decrease AoA) by using some aerodynamic surface

Case 1: If the plane is made to slow down it will be flying slower than its sister plane with flaps retracted at the same altitude

Case 2: If the plane is forced to fly low there is increased drag because a force is being applied to counteract the extra lift. That will burn more fuel

In the case of identical sister planes the plane with greater wing area (deployed flaps) will burn more fuel (to keep nose down and fly as fast as sister plane at low altitude) or fly more slowly to maintain the same altitude as its counterpart without extended flaps.

Kindly do not tell me that the Jag and Tejas are not sister planes with the same specs. I know that. And that is what makes the answer more difficult without data.

The questions that arise from here are as follows and I would like hard data if possible

• 1. Can the Tejas fly nap of earth at the same speeds that Jaguar achieves
  2. Would the fuel consumption of the Tejas, and hence its endurance be reduced if it was flown nap of earth like Jaguar

These are the critical facts in comparing performance of the Tejas versus Jaguar in a role that the Jaguar was designed for. It's not about whether the Tejas can do it or not.

Without hard data on this everything is guesswork. That is what I said in my reply to Sachin, whose question was the very question you said must not be asked.

[manjgu]

no expert but i beleive flying low and fast is still the best way to survive enemy AD ...experts may pl pitch in. very useful in india pak context with relatively short distances..

[srai]

no expert but i beleive flying low and fast is still the best way to survive enemy AD ...experts may pl pitch in. very useful in india pak context with relatively short distances..

Best way would be to lob bombs from standoff distances outside of the enemy AD envelope. 100km ... 300km ... 1000km

[Akshay Kapoor]

What a good idea sirji. Never thought of it before

[Dileep]

Well, I am sure that there are test profiles that required the Tejas to fly at very low AGL using the radio altimeter, and when that is not available, using the INS.

Why INS? A hard roll or sharp bank can get the radio altimeter to go blank, and the flight control still need to know where the plane is above ground.

[Kakkaji]

The IAF Jaguars still have a lot of life left, so there is plenty of time for the LCA to be adapted to their role.

In the meantime, I am heartened by reports that the LCA in squadron service is doing very well in the ground attack role. I am eager for the gun integration to be completed. Once that is done, the LCA Mk1 as it is today, will be ready to replace all the IAF Mig-27s that have retired or are about to retire.

In this context, I am happy to note that the next IAF squadron (the Sekhon squadron) to receive the LCAs is a Mig-27 squadron. They will absolutely love it, I am sure. And middle finger to all the doubters and import-lovers

By the way how many Mig-23/ Mig-27 ground attack squadrons did the IAF have at their peak? I bet there are at least 100 aircraft that can be better substituted immediately by LCA Mk1 without even waiting for the Mk1A.

[Vivek K]

About 170+ 27s were in service at one time, I think.

[Aditya_V]

There were 3 squadrons of Mig 23BN and 1 squadron of Mig 23 MF and about 7-8 squadrons of Mig 27 ML before the Mig 23 were and many Mig 27 squadrons were number plated. Don't know how true it is per Wiki 87Mig 27 ml have been upgraded to Mig 27h

[Katare]

no expert but i beleive flying low and fast is still the best way to survive enemy AD ...experts may pl pitch in. very useful in india pak context with relatively short distances..

Most 4th gen fighter aircrafts now a days are equipped with radars with lookdown and shoot down capabilities add the AEW/AWACS enviornment to the battlefield and you have lost most of the advantage of low and fast flying. Since the design has already sacrificed/lost the advantages that come from the agility of unstable high altitude performers it’s becoming a lemon with every passing year.

With that said, for our western boarders, Jaguars still retain almost all of their original edge but mostly because of enemy’s technical backwardness not by it’s own merit. With pasding time Pak will accumulate enough AWACS and 4th gen fighters with lookdown and shoot down capability that Jags would be left with only one trick that is not going away anytime soon- avoiding ground base radar systems.

Era of Jags is gone for good, a new species has taken over the skies.

[Eric Leiderman]

As a war progresses 1) the stand off weapons become scarce 2) the air defences are degraded, (including AWAC's ) 3) a quantum of air superority is introduced in the western front.
The jags will more than do their job.
Plus a large % are for marine attack role where they excel and the LCA cannot compete on range.

We are sort of re-hashing the F35 A10m syndrome here

Wrong thread so lets leave at that

[Kakkaji]

There were 3 squadrons of Mig 23BN and 1 squadron of Mig 23 MF and about 7-8 squadrons of Mig 27 ML before the Mig 23 were and many Mig 27 squadrons were number plated. Don't know how true it is per Wiki 87Mig 27 ml have been upgraded to Mig 27h

So 12 squadrons, i.e. over 200 aircraft, of LCA Mk1 (after gun integration) can be absorbed by the IAF, without any other enhancements, as soon as HAL can deliver them.

Then replace all Mig-21 squadrons by Mk1A.

I see a use case for ordering 500+ units just to do one-for-one replacement of Mig 21/23/27. No need to even think twice about it.

Just issue Letter of Intent for 500 units and release orders at the rate of 100 per year.

[ArjunPandit]

For a min i thought what would it take to create a LCA based dedicated ground attack plane, with
1. less wing area
2. larger fuel tanks
3. changes in guns
4. heavy armour
but that would be essentially a new plane. Can there be a MK1a style jugad?

[ArjunPandit]

^^^WW2 had many 1000 bomber raids on german cities. Large numbers of Tejas can enable us to launch multi sqdn raids on puki bases, agile Tejas hunting in wolf pack
[flight of imagination mode on]
or in 5/6 formation/configurations in a highly interconnected environment can obviate the need of cover from heavy hitters like Su 30/Mig 29 etc

[dkhare]

The Jaguars were acquired for the low level Deep Penetration Strike mission. With all the DARIN I, II, & III updates, they are still mission ready for the lo-lo-lo profile: penetrating below radar coverage, with updated navigation avionics, they can attack the same target from different directions, almost simultaneously, on a blind, first pass. That is their focus and what they train for.

The older MiG-23BNs would have had to "sight" the target, overfly, and peel off one by one to "commence" rocket and gun strafing attacks. That is when MANPADs will get time to line them up and engage them.

The LCA Tejas, can definitely undertake the Close Air Support (CAS) and Battlefield Strike (BFS) missions at medium-high altitude with all sorts of dumb, precision, and smart standoff munitions. Once the indigenous, cheaper, smart munitions get clearance, their usage should become widespread within the IAF (hopefully). Also, having an integrated EW/ECCM/RWR/SPJ/CMDS will be required going forward.

Question:
With the new radars (MMR/2032/2052/Uttam) combined with our own digital FBW, have they or will they incorporate Terrain Avoidance and automatic Terrain Following modes into the Tejas, for the low level penetration mission? I know it was never designed for that mission - just a jingo wondering...

[Indranil]

hakeem,

I think you are confusing two things here. At low altitude, a highly loaded wing allows for better handling, but it does not provide a more efficient way to carry load! Here are the things that increase efficiency of generating lift at subsonic flight near the ground: low wing loading, low wing sweep, relatively thick camber, high aspect ratio. As you can see, neither the LCA nor the Jaguar have ideal shape for low altitude cruise, no fighter does. The LCA has the advantage of being designed later and can utilize newer material technology for lower empty weight and aerodynamic refinements for lower trim drag. With the ground ammunition and fuel tanks hanging from either of the aircraft, it is unlikely that their drag counts are more than 5% apart for low-level cruise. Frankly, I won't be surprised if LCA is actually ahead for reasons that I described above.

The Jag's higher reach comes from higher fuel capacity: 37% (1150 ltrs) more internally and 12% (425 ltrs) more externally. This can be fixed for the LCA. LCA still has a lot of performance margin in terms of maneuverability and agility over the Jag that it can sacrifice for better reach. Internally, LCA Mk2 was supposed to have 800 ltrs of more fuel. If Mk2 is not happening, consider adding CFTs to Mk1A, or adding a fuel tank in stead of the the second pilot on a trainer. External fuel carriage can be easily increased by modifying the centerline tank to have an oval cross section to reach the 1200 ltr target.

Finally, other than provide a less bumpy ride, the Jag has nothing fancy about its airframe which allows better nape of the earth flying. The latter is possible thanks to some superb terrain following aids and pilot training. If Tejas is earmarked to take on the Jag's role as well, there is no reason why these aids cannot be added to the Tejas and pilots training imparted for the same.

[Kartik]

JayS correctly mentioned that the FCS on FBW equipped fighters generally should be able to handle gusts. The relevant portion for the Rafale is quoted below. This dates back to 1986, when it was in prototype form.

Two new control modes will be introduced on the Rafale. Gust alleviation will improve low-level ride quality at speeds up to 800kt. The foreplanes and elevons will be driven at high speed in response to disturbances detected by accelerometers mounted well forward in the aircraft, says Dassault.

Not exactly sure whether similar accelerometers have been mounted on the Tejas' forward fuselage or not, but if so, the elevons can be driven at high speed to smoothen out disturbances due to gust. Or it may just be that this hasn't yet been taken up on the Tejas. However, it can be done if required.

And although it was originally planned, in flight testing it was found that the Rafale did not need the gust alleviation modes as mentioned in these excerpts from Rafale flight tests

When clearing the firing area, Philippe Rebourg engaged the terrain following mode which uses a database to elaborate a safe trajectory. The hilly terrain provided an excellent environment to test this totally passive system. Thanks to an innovative symbology displayed on the HUD, the pilot always knows what to expect when deviating left or right from the planned route, when, for example, manoeuvring to avoid a sudden threat: the height of the surrounding terrain appears on the sight in an explicit way. The ride quality was excellent, and Philippe Rebourg explained that the gust-alleviation mode originally envisioned was eventually not needed. There was light turbulence in the area, but the aircraft remained rock-steady, even when orverflying ridges.

and

We break off and move into terrain-following flight. Here the Rafale relies on a terrain database and the pilot can see very precisely in the HUD the contours not only in the direction of flight but also to the side. Although there is some turbulence, the aircraft is extraordinarily stable in the air. It has not been fitted, as originally planned, with a gust alleviation system. At 450kt (830km/h) 150m above the ground the Rafale consumes less fuel than the single-engined Mirage 2000 with the same weapons configuration.

[Kartik]

LCA AF Mk2 variant - the most details that we've got so far, from ADA's 31st Annual Report for 2015-2016. Next year's report will reveal what has transpired with relation to the LCA AF Mk2 variant in 2017.

Clearly, a lot of work has already been done on the LCA AF Mk2 and it is obvious that this should be the way to go ahead, for the LCA program and for the IAF to have a large fleet of single engine fighters. Rather than looking at short cuts by importing the Gripen E, which seems to have been the ideal template for a single engine light/medium fighter for the IAF.

LCA AF Mk2
Background : LCA AF Mk 2 was conceived as the performance of LCA AF Mk1 was found inadequate with GEF404-IN20 engine The scope of FSED Phase 3 as per project sanction is as follows:-
Design, develop and build two aircraft with
• New Engine
• Necessary changes in the structure and systems to integrate the new engine
• Weight reduction to improve performance
• Unified EW Suite (UEWS)
• Development of new DFCC, its test facilities and integration
• Upgrade/modification/maintenance of test facilities.

Additional Scope:
Extensive studies were carried out at ADA to make suitable changes in LCA AF Mk2 to address the maintainability issues observed in LCA AF Mk1, improve the systems like fuel, landing gear and brakes, electrical, armament etc. Also a number of new/upgraded systems have been incorporated to make the aircraft more contemporary. As a result, the scope for FSED Phase 3 increased substantially due to extensive changes incorporated to have an improved aircraft with improved performance in all aspects. Important new/ upgrades of systems are listed below:
• Introduction of 500mm plug in fuselage
• Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radar
• On Board Oxygen Generation System (OBOGS)
• New Cockpit with larger size smart displays
• One Mission Management and Display Computer (MMDC) in place of two Open Architecture Computers
• HMDS based on optical sensor
• Smart HUD with improved Field of Vision
• Higher power Jet Fuel Starter
• Servo controlled Airbrake under the command of DFCC control
• Pressurized Fuel System
• Unified Pylon Interface Computer (UPIC) in place of individual Pylon Interface Boxes
• Combined Interrogator Transponder (CIT)
• Indigenous Actuators
• NVG compatible lighting

Activities Carried out:
Presently, the configuration of LCA AF Mk2 has been frozen with all the design improvements and Preliminary Design Review (PDR) has been carried out in June 2014 and detail design is in
progress. GE-F414 engine was selected as the higher thrust engine for LCA AF Mk2 and a contract was signed with M/s GE, USA in September 2012. The CDR of alternate engine has been completed. Engine is undergoing final qualification and lifing evaluation tests.

Milestones Achieved:
Following milestones have been achieved:
• Configuration freeze
• Engine contract finalization
• In-board and NMG freeze
• PDR

Progress of Design and Development
Activities:
10.5.1 Configuration & NMG:
The configuration of LCA AF Mk2 has been frozen. The Numerical Master Geometry (NMG) has been revised based on recommendations of PDR Committee to improve performance.
The changes in NMG have resulted in drag reduction and increase in fuel content by about 20kg. These improvements are going to result in improved point and mission performance.

Inboards & Layout: The inboards have been finalized addressing the accessibility and maintainability issues observed in LCA Mk1.
• Layouts preparation is in progress.
• The station wise mass distribution is under finalisation.

Aerodynamics : A number of aerodynamics improvements have been carried out to reduce drag and improve performance:
• Drag reduction studies have been completed. Canopy reshaping, outer cowl modification, actuator fairing extension and supersonic pylons have resulted in approx 20 counts (8%) drag reduction in supersonic regimes.
• Wind Tunnel studies have been completed.
• Aero loads computations have been completed.

Airframe:
• Three door AAID finalised.
• BMI material developed for high temperature applications.
• Composite pipelines developed for ECS.
• Spine widened for providing accessibility and maintainability.
• Pilot step provided for pilot's emergency egress.
• SPS bay redesigned to improve maintainability.

Engine:
• Aircraft engine bay ventilation scheme has been finalised.
• Engine-Airframe Interface Control Diagram (ICD) has been prepared.
• Aircraft Qualification Tests have been completed
• ASMET (Aircraft Simulated Mission Endurance Tests) results are under discussion.
• New JFS with higher torque GTSU-135 is under development.

Mechanical Systems:
• Layouts preparation and detail design is in progress.
• Feasibility to increase wheel size for increasing the capacity of brake system are in progress.
• Trials to offload one hydraulic system to reduce the load on JFS during starting are going on. This will help in cold weather high altitude operations.
• Liquid Cooling System configurations, separate for AESA and UEWS have been finalised.
• Studies to shift the Air to Air refueling probe to right are in progress to obviate probe coming in Field of View of Head Up Display (HUD).

Integrated Flight Control System:
• DFCC: CDR completed. Realization of QT unit by 31st Dec 2016.
• Indigenous Actuators: Primary Actuators QT completed, Iron Bird testing completed. Being evaluated on LCA Mk1. Secondary Actuators under development. Air worthy units will be available by December 2016.

Avionics:
• Avionics architecture has been finalised.
• New cockpit with bigger size (6”x8”) displays has been designed.
• Development of new LRUs is in progress.
• Avionics will be ready by Dec 2018.
• Configuration of Active Phased Array based Unified Electronic Warfare Suite (UEWS) finalised.
• The number of elements that can be incorporated with the existing geometry for the Antenna Array unit of AESA Radar has been finalized and performance parameters like range and Effective Radiated Power (ERP) computed.
• Night Vision Goggle (NVG) compatible LED lights for Navigation lights and Taxi / Landing Lights are being developed. Engineering models have been developed. Performance is being evaluated.
• Conformal antenna developed for V/UHF.

Interdisciplinary Studies:

Following studies are in progress to bring out improvements in design:
• LCA AF Mk2 cockpit assessment for new anthropometric data received from IAF is in progress.
• Thermal mapping studies of aircraft are in progress.
• New installation scheme in Avionics Bay for better accessibility /maintainability is under finalisation.
• Rationalisation of drop tanks is in progress to reduce variety of drop tanks.
• Electrical modeling of LCA AF Mk2 to study indirect effect of lightning is in progress at IISc, Bangalore.
• Studies to bring out necessary changes in LRUs to have Push-fit type connectors for quick removal/fitment of the same have been completed.
• Weight reduction studies have been carried out and design improvements required to reduce weight have been identified.

[shiv]

Finally, other than provide a less bumpy ride, the Jag has nothing fancy about its airframe which allows better nape of the earth flying. The latter is possible thanks to some superb terrain following aids and pilot training. If Tejas is earmarked to take on the Jag's role as well, there is no reason why these aids cannot be added to the Tejas and pilots training imparted for the same.

What terrain following aids does the Jaguar have?

That aside you still have not answered the question that I asked, which is admittedly a difficult one to answer. There is a huge difference between what the Tejas can do and what the Tejas does efficiently. Efficiency and capability are two different things. Can a Boeing 747 fly long distances at 3000 feet? Yes. It is capable. Is that the most efficient way for it to fly given its role as a long distance air carrier? No

Note that Jaguar is not the only plane that can be used for lo-lo-lo or lo-lo-hi mission profiles. Gnats, Hunters, Mysteres and even MiG 21s have been used. But none of them had the range to cover all targets in Pakistan. That is why the Jaguar was selected.

If the Tejas' radius of action is severely restricted in a lo-lo-lo mission profile then it is not going to be a one on one replacement for the Jaguar. "It can play the role" yes. But can it replace the Jaguar in that role? And before I am told that it is not meant to be a one on one replacement of the Jaguar I would like people to go back to the beginning of the discussion and look at the question that was asked.

[shiv]

JayS correctly mentioned that the FCS on FBW equipped fighters generally should be able to handle gusts. The relevant portion for the Rafale is quoted below. This dates back to 1986, when it was in prototype form.

Gust alleviation has attracted attention from the days before FBW because in the 70s and 80s NATO were designing aircraft for low ingress and pilot comfort and fatigue became an important factor

The pdf linked below deals with the subject of gust alleviation has a graphic on page 17 that defines ride comfort where 1/2G per minute is not exceeded at the pilot's seat. The graph lists the Tornado and Jaguar as "comfortable rides", F-104 as "acceptable" and others including F-4, F-15 and Delta-canards as "unacceptable"

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q ... l3Zxuw5uJA

So gust alleviation and tolerance is more than guesswork and needs active addressing as part of the design.

[Karan M]

AM Subhash Bhojwani had mentioned that in IAF exercises, Mirage 2000's routinely performed better than Jaguars in low alt air combat. He credited the delta wing + FBW for the same, especially the latter.

The Tejas should be able to do equally well, given the amount of Mirage 2000 performance requirements that flew into its ASRs.

[shiv]

AM Subhash Bhojwani had mentioned that in IAF exercises, Mirage 2000's routinely performed better than Jaguars in low alt air combat. He credited the delta wing + FBW for the same, especially the latter.

The Tejas should be able to do equally well, given the amount of Mirage 2000 performance requirements that flew into its ASRs.

Jaguars are hopeless at air combat - so that actually does not say much. But then again that was not what the discussion is all about

[srai]

^^^
Put in some scenarios of what IAF's Jaguar would do. That way there is some direct way to compare range/payload values in lo-lo-lo or med-lo-med etc.

[Karan M]

AM Subhash Bhojwani had mentioned that in IAF exercises, Mirage 2000's routinely performed better than Jaguars in low alt air combat. He credited the delta wing + FBW for the same, especially the latter.

The Tejas should be able to do equally well, given the amount of Mirage 2000 performance requirements that flew into its ASRs.

Jaguars are hopeless at air combat - so that actually does not say much. But then again that was not what the discussion is all about

He specifically meant flew better than the Jaguars at low altitude because of their FBW. The article was posted on BR itself, comparing the Mirage 2000 to the Su-30 K - it might still be somewhere in the archives.

In short, the FBW constantly reacts to changing flight conditions and minimizes pilot response and improves flight quality. We have had repeated IAF pilot praises noting LCA FBW>> Mirage 2000 FBW in smoothness etc. Its not unreasonable to suppose it should do as well as the Mirage in low-alt too.

[Karan M]

Also, the French AF uses Mirage 2000-Ds in the low altitude nuclear mission, with the radar being a special variant for TFR modes.

[ks_sachin]

Shiv Saar,

My original question was to explore if we could replace the Jags with LCA. Forget the engine upgrades etc, flog them and progressively replace with LCA ( lots of other assumptions there!!!).

After all the learned responses the one that remains outstanding now is that;

- If the LCA can do what the Jag do
- can it do so sufficiently
- can it do so in a sufficiently efficient manner that if for some hypothetical reason tomorrow the Jag are no longer available Air HQ will not think twice about the LCA doing that role.

[shiv]

I think that the LCA currently does not have the reach of the Jaguar, putting Sargodha and Peshawar out of reach. In that role the Tejas as it is now will not replace the Jaguar

[Karan M]

For deep targets, heavily defended, IMHO - Su-30s or Mirages will be preferred by the IAF, because they have even better endurance & payload than the Jaguar & can self defend & require fewer aircraft in a strike package. The PAF is getting LY-80 and HQ-19 SAMs per reports (which means heavy EW support) & with AEW&C directed CAPs, fighters like Su-30s and Mirages which have long legs but can also carry fight their way out of the situation seem better suited for the role.

The Jaguars greater endurance than the LCA is an advantage no doubt, but better suited for closer targets, which gives it more flexibility for time over target - eg armoured formations and the like. Explains why the CBU-105 integration is going for that role.

[shiv]

We have 120 Jaguars - which is about 30% of our fleet. They will be used for anything and everything that they can possibly be used for. They may be escorted by Sukhois.

[Indranil]

Hakeem,

I answered your question. May be you read past it. The superior reach of Jaguar with respect to the LCA is not by virtue of lower drag for cruise at low altitude. The drag counts must be within 5% of each other. The Jaguar carries much more fuel than LCA.

For terrain hugging, it has RLG inertial navigation and digital terrain mapping system.

[Aditya_V]

I think that the LCA currently does not have the reach of the Jaguar, putting Sargodha and Peshawar out of reach. In that role the Tejas as it is now will not replace the Jaguar

Sir Su-7's did one raid on Sargodha in 1971, I am sure a Tejas can definitely be part of strike package on Sargodha and can provide top cover for raids on Sargodha/Peshawar.

Tejas will also relive other platforms from Homeland CAP cover, provide air cover to fighter returning from raids etc.

Agreed Jaguar, Su-30 will have to do the Quetta/Peshwar/Mianwali raids which should hopefully first have a Nirbhay/Brahmos and long range BM salvo first disabling key radars and put run ranways temporarily out of operation.

[shiv]

I think that the LCA currently does not have the reach of the Jaguar, putting Sargodha and Peshawar out of reach. In that role the Tejas as it is now will not replace the Jaguar

Sir Su-7's did one raid on Sargodha in 1971, I am sure a Tejas can definitely be part of strike package on Sargodha and can provide top cover for raids on Sargodha/Peshawar.

Tejas will also relive other platforms from Homeland CAP cover, provide air cover to fighter returning from raids etc.

Agreed Jaguar, Su-30 will have to do the Quetta/Peshwar/Mianwali raids which should hopefully first have a Nirbhay/Brahmos and long range BM salvo first disabling key radars and put run ranways temporarily out of operation.

It is not the ability to reach. It may get that far. But there has to be some reserve fuel in case they get held up with combat or other issues. If they have just 10 minutes fuel for time over target - even 12 minutes will put the plane at risk. There are dozens of stories of such things happening when planes were sent out to the absolute limits of their range. Even Mysteres did Sargodha - but it was the limit of their reach. So I think it is not a good idea to bluff ourselves that Tejas will serve every role - almost like when you have a hammer everything looks like a nail

[shiv]

For terrain hugging, it has RLG inertial navigation and digital terrain mapping system.

That would be after Darin III upgrades.

[Kersi]

Dr Shiv. Where did you get the MANPADS ? Can I too get a few ?

Er just change the gender and you get manpads..

[Cybaru]

I think lo lo lo is in the past. The tornadoes got creamed right at the beginning of gulf war 1. Yes we have jaguars, but putting pilots at risk is kinda harsh. They will end up over atleast at 20k as hard deck for all runs. DRDO is working on solutions like sdb sbd sudarshan for this reason alone... If 20k is hard deck, the Tejas can reach anywhere and back as far as Western front is concerned.. AWACS and mki will provide top cover to all bombing runs..if we had something like growler, that would have been awesome to shut any ground based assets should they raise thier ugly heads.

[Kersi]

no expert but i beleive flying low and fast is still the best way to survive enemy AD ...experts may pl pitch in. very useful in india pak context with relatively short distances..

Best way would be to lob bombs from standoff distances outside of the enemy AD envelope. 100km ... 300km ... 1000km

So we fly to China and lob bombs from their air space. I hope thye will allow us !!!!!

Definitely better to be out of harm's way. But it amy not be possible all the time. The depth of the war zone, for Indo Puke conflict may be hardly 100+ kms. But we should find an alternatively to CAS (which is dangerous). Thinking out of the box, maybe we use Pinka or some UAV instead of risking a pilot for CAS

[shiv]

"Lo Lo Lo in the past", "combat is risky and should not be risky" are all USA versus useless air forces. If we get into conflict with Pakistan or China - you the only way of avoiding attrition is to move all aircraft to Andamans and keep them there and hope PLAN does not get there. So I think we need to ask what the Air Force knows about fighting rather than what the US did against Iraq and Afghanistan.

IAF is not saying lo lo lo is obsolete or that they want to avoid manpads altogether and let some other method do a job that needs to be done, so where do we get all these theories and advice to IAF from? Every weapon, tactic or combat profile has a situation where it can and will be used. Nothing is obsolete or useless. Some are more risky and would ideally be applied using some risk mitigation.

[Cybaru]

"Lo Lo Lo in the past", "combat is risky and should not be risky" are all USA versus useless air forces.

If the mighty usaf can't clean against useless forces and stays away from going fast and lo, what makes you think it will work against our sophisticated enemies?