Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Post Reply
Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4215
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Post by Prem Kumar »

There seems to be this newly developed view in BRF that IAF has moved towards a higher medium-heavy mix and so the Tejas-MK1/MK1a will be limited by definition.

Where is this coming from? Has any IAF Chief said so - or is it just a way to interpret why the IAF wants 114 MRFA? To the best of my knowledge, the IAF hasn't spelled out the "mix of aircraft needed in its 42 squadrons". Nor has it drawn up a plan (including estimated budget) to attain those levels. Without this, "42 squadrons" is not a plan, but a wish.

So, better to come up with a plan that is actually achievable in the short & mid-term. This is where the Mk1 & Mk1a come in:

a) Like Vivek K pointed out, there is no reason to not order more squadrons of Mk1 to replace Mig-21s, the Jags & even the retired Mig-27s. The IAF owes its pilots at least that. Production engineering issues must be sorted by now for the FOC aircraft. If not, kick HAL's butt. Saying that MK1's LRU replacements are not as easy as MK1a's is not a good argument when we are facing serious fleet depletion & looming war. At the end of the day, what matters is that the MK1 is an excellent fighter with high sortie rates. What more do we need?

b) Mk1s & Mk1a's with refuelling can not only be effective against Pakistan but also China. Their airbases (that will come into play in the LAC theatre) are within striking range of the Tejas. Sure it won't carry as much ordnance as a SU-30, but you can have more aircraft in the air, packed with SAAWs

c) If there were doctrinal issues regarding Tejas being only a "CAP" platform, its time to change the view, given the excellent scores it achieved in A2G missions. Barring the Rafale, its probably the best A2G platform that we have. So, yes - having enough of these babies in the air can cause serious damage not only to the ground troops of the PLA but also bring their airbases within range. At any rate, if war happens in the near future, having more Tejas is the only feasible option we have, barring buying more Rafales. None of the other aircraft (MK2 or MRFA) is going to appear in time.
nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9097
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Post by nachiket »

It's not just a question of funding Mk2 development. You also have to put in the funds for building new production lines which need to be larger and perhaps employ more expensive production techniques to speed up production. It is essential to reach a high production rate as fast as possible. That means all the components sourced from other vendors (domestic and foreign) need to be ordered in large numbers and well in advance with no funding delays. We can't go about this like we went about the MKI production, trundling along at 8-12 aircraft a year and only reaching the max rate by the time the order was almost fulfilled. HAL cannot do this without a serious monetary commitment by the govt. which will not happen if we order 114 MRFA's. The money is just not there. We have to realize that we need to master true large scale production of an indigenous platform well before it is time to build the AMCA and the MK2 is our only chance to do that. Otherwise we will see the familiar rate of 4 AMCA per year for the initial couple of years after we start production, slowly increasing to 6 then increasing to 8 after many years and so on. We cannot afford this kind of an induction process going forward when our adversary is inducting 80 aircraft a year.
Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8428
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Post by Indranil »

YashG wrote: IR, what technologies in Mk2 are so sticky that putting in more money wont accelerate them no matter how. Genuinely asking ?
None. Design is complete. Manufacturing has commenced. There are two things to complete. 1. Complete flight testing. and 2. Stabilize production line.
Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8428
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Post by Indranil »

If IAF doesn't push for MRFA today, it won't happen in the next 6-7 years. If you ask my opinion, if ADA/HAL can stick to first flight by 2022 and certification for 2024, then it will probably never happen.
LakshmanPST
BRFite
Posts: 673
Joined: 05 Apr 2019 18:23

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Post by LakshmanPST »

Some assumed timelines:-
1) Tejas Mk1A production time:- 2021-2029
3 years Standard + 6 years delivery (2 years for delivery to pick up + 4 years @16 jets per year final delivery rate)
2) MRFA production time:- 2025-2038 (assuming 2025 Contract sign date)
3 years Standard + 10 years delivery (@ Avg 12 jets per year)
3) Tejas Mk2 development:- Upto 2026
4) Tejas Mk2 production:- 2027-2040
3 years Standard + 10 years delivery (@ Avg 16 jets per year)
5) AMCA Mk1 development:- Upto 2030
6) AMCA Mk1 production:- 2031-2038
3 years Standard + 4 years delivery (@ Avg 12 jets per year)
7) AMCA Mk2 development:- 2030-2034
8-) AMCA Mk2 production:- 2035-2045
3 years Standard + 7 years delivery (@Avg 12 jets per year)
9) Super Sukhoi upgrade:- Starting 2025?
----
Considering above timelines, active programs each year starting from 2023 will be as follows:-
1) 2023-2025:-
- Tejas Mk1A production & initial deliveries
- Tejas Mk2 development
- AMCA Mk1 development
2) 2025-2027:-
- Tejas Mk1A deliveries
- MRFA production start
- Tejas Mk2 development
- AMCA Mk1 development
- Super Sukhoi
3) 2027-2029:-
- Tejas Mk1A deliveries end
- MRFA deliveries start
- Tejas Mk2 production start
- AMCA Mk1 development
- Super Sukhoi
4) 2029-2031:-
- MRFA deliveries
- Tejas Mk2 deliveries
- AMCA Mk1 development end & Mk2 development start
- Super Sukhoi
5) 2031-2035:-
- MRFA deliveries
- Tejas Mk2 deliveries
- AMCA Mk1 production start & initial deliveries
- AMCA Mk2 development ends
- Super Sukhoi
- Development of Replacement program for Su30s?
6) 2035-2038:-
- MRFA deliveries end
- Tejas Mk2 deliveries
- AMCA Mk1 deliveries end
- AMCA Mk2 initial deliveries
- Super Sukhoi
- Development of Replacement program for Su30s?
7) 2038-2040:-
- Tejas Mk2 deliveries end
- AMCA Mk2 deliveries
- Super Sukhoi end?
- Development of Replacement program for Su30s?
8-) 2040-2045:-
- AMCA Mk2 deliveries
- Development of Replacement program for Su30s?
----
I think real challenge for IAF will be the 8 years between 2030-2038 when MRFA, Tejas Mk2 and AMCA Mk1 will be in delivery stages at peak rates apart from Super Sukhoi program...
Maybe IAF is banking on the possibility of improved economy and increased defence budget over the next 8 years...
If capital budget is not increased as expected, one of these projects will definitely be delayed...
Last edited by LakshmanPST on 20 Oct 2021 04:18, edited 2 times in total.
fanne
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4282
Joined: 11 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Post by fanne »

But why is the new chief saying they do not need the next 36 Rafale? What's the logic behind that?
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Post by Rakesh »

fanne wrote:But why is the new chief saying they do not need the next 36 Rafale? What's the logic behind that?
If he asks for 36, he will get 0. If he asks for 114, he will get at minimum 36. That simple.

Even he knows, 114 Rafales are not coming in one go.
nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9097
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Post by nachiket »

Indranil wrote:If IAF doesn't push for MRFA today, it won't happen in the next 6-7 years. If you ask my opinion, if ADA/HAL can stick to first flight by 2022 and certification for 2024, then it will probably never happen.
Prototype rollout is supposed to be in Aug 2022 not the first flight. First flight is a year later as per the timeline. By certification do you mean IOC or something else? Won't that take several years?
Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12186
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Post by Pratyush »

Why does the MWF need to go through the IOC and FOC standard grind. I was under the impression that under the skin it was just the mk1a.
YashG
BRFite
Posts: 936
Joined: 22 Apr 2017 00:10

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Post by YashG »

Indranil wrote:If IAF doesn't push for MRFA today, it won't happen in the next 6-7 years. If you ask my opinion, if ADA/HAL can stick to first flight by 2022 and certification for 2024, then it will probably never happen.
Thats the most lynchpin kind of observation. Ponder upon.If this is true then it explain everything.
nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9097
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Post by nachiket »

Pratyush wrote:Why does the MWF need to go through the IOC and FOC standard grind. I was under the impression that under the skin it was just the mk1a.
New engine, canards, modified air intakes, a larger modified airframe that can carry heavier armament and a lot more internal fuel. How is it just the Mk1A? It is a Mirage 2000 class fighter.
Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12186
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Post by Pratyush »

Sir Ji, when I say under the skin. I mean the Radar, Mission computer, the EW systems.

The flight certification and weapons seperation trials are the only major challange for the Aircraft. Before it can be accepted into service.

All the hard work has already been done with the mk1a.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20772
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Post by Karan M »

I am not too sure about that. Many changes in Mk2.
Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4215
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Post by Prem Kumar »

Indranil wrote:If IAF doesn't push for MRFA today, it won't happen in the next 6-7 years. If you ask my opinion, if ADA/HAL can stick to first flight by 2022 and certification for 2024, then it will probably never happen.
Pushing for MRFA now (if they want it 6 years from now) makes sense .... if we need the MRFA & can afford it in the first place. I think there is consensus that there is no budget for this

But asking for 114 MRFAs so that we get at least 36 Rafales (or) use the MRFA as a threat so that ADA/DRDO delivers MK2 on time, shows bad faith.

Because of the Tejas success, the ADA has earned the right to be trusted. So, if the IAF wants say 36 Rafales more, followed by timely MK2, the right thing to do is to get on the same page with the MoD & DRDO. Make it clear that no delays will be tolerated.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Post by Rakesh »

Vivek K wrote:Rakesh, why are we there are other ways of looking at the same situation. In a ugly fight, homeland defense from hostile aircraft, and attack into Pakistan may be tasks performed very capably by the Tejas while the Sukhois, Mirages and Rafales penetrate deep inside China. The Tejas could also be used for CAS against the Chinese in Tibet.
One of the Rafale's key missions will be to act as a door crasher. So break down the door of the Chinese AD network, so that the Rambha (and the other IAF strike aircraft) can do their job. In fact, Air Chief Marshal RKS Bhaduria even alluded to this fact when he said that the Rafale-Rambha combination will be lethal. But with the layers of the Chinese AD network, the IAF needs more than just 36 Rafales. You have to take into account attrition losses of the Rafale in trying to penetrate and destroy this Chinese AD network. It is vast and very capable, with multiple units of Russian SAM systems and their Chinese clones. So 36 aircraft is not enough and the Rafale is no F-35 either. Now please don't say I am arguing for F-35. I am not.

To send strike aircraft in a heavy AD environment - without breaking down the door - is asking for an unacceptable attrition rate and in mission failure. You will also lose a very large number of pilots in the process. So the Rafale is very crucial in this role. However, 36 Rafales are negligible. So more Rafales are needed because that is the threat scenario that the IAF is facing. But what the IAF is asking for - 114 MRFA - is not going to happen in one go. And no other aircraft - in the IAF inventory - can do what the Rafale is expected to do. Not the Tejas or the Rambha or the Mirage 2000 or the Jaguar. Either they don't have the capability or they do not have the sensors to accomplish that task.

SEAD is a very dangerous task to accomplish, but it has to be done. Otherwise, the IAF will only be left defending her own airspace and not attacking targets inside China. That will be pointless. The IAF has to be able to enter Chinese airspace and destroy whatever targets they have been asked to eliminate. The only way to achieve mission success for the IAF, is to destroy the AD environment that the Chinese have built. And despite after destroying or at least blunting the Chinese AD network, the IAF will still face losses. But the attrition rate will be much less.

This CAS role that you are asking for the Tejas to do in Tibet, will only be possible if the Chinese AD network in Tibet is severely destroyed. If you want the Tejas Mk1/Mk1A to succeed in a theatre of conflict, then the airspace she will operate in has to be sanitized. Otherwise the IAF will face a very high attrition rate of the Tejas Mk1/Mk1A. There is no way around this, unless some magic solution springs out of thin air. But there is none. The Rafale is absolutely necessary for the IAF and more than 36 will come. You will not like that, but that is what will happen.
Vivek K wrote:Let me ask you this - we don't want to increase MK1s, but we want to keep the Jaguars and spend limited resources in upgrading them while the aircraft remains underpowered. This type of decision making shows the mindset against domestic that needs to change. Why? So that we may be prepared to meet the evolving threat scenario in our neighborhood. Replacing the less capable Mig-21s (100 odd bisons in service) and the Jaguars, say 60-100 odd of the aging ones that have little airframe life left. You say we will never come close to 42 squadrons - Well, the MK1 provides a way to come really close to it. And the MK1 can be brought up to MK1A standards as a MLU.
1) Not all the Jaguars are being upgraded. Only the newer lots are. And those newer Jaguars have residual life left in them. For a squadron strapped IAF, to discard airworthy airframes is foolishness.

2) Yes, the Jaguar is underpowered. It will be a long back-and-forth blame story which is pointless to revisit right now. But to not upgrade airworthy airframes is equally foolish. That is why the MiG-29 was upgraded, the Mirage 2000 was upgraded and the Super Sukhoi upgrade is in the works. And when it is the turn of the Tejas, the same will happen. That is what budget conscious air forces do.

3) The Mk1 will end her production run by 2022. HAL is gearing up for the Mk1A, of which 83 are on order. If any additional aircraft of this type are ordered, it will be of the Mk1A variant only. No more Mk1s are coming.
Vivek K wrote:So what I find stifling in India is that
a) we think so small, we think that injecting 50 aircraft will change our strength projection ability. We conveniently ignore the capabilities of the enemy and to make our case, pooh pooh the enemy's capability. Look around and see what our enemies are doing. How may J-10s, J-11 and J-20 the Chinese are putting up. And to their credit, while we kept pushing the Arjun through trials, the Pakistanis put the Al-Khalid into their force structure. The same with JF-17. Now we have already declared LCA (or its configuration) to be outdated for the current threat scenario and therefore the need to move to MK1A (which could be a MLU or a in-service upgrade).
b) We keep delaying induction and with our MIC not cash rich, we cannot build incremental improvements. And then out come the complainers - it isn't the spec i need today!!! China is at our door and we need Rafale capability urgently!! Not realizing that placing orders and then executing them does not happen overnight.
c) We complain that deliveries are not fast enough - the meagre orders are supported by laboratory like assembly lines leading to lower quality and efficiency of scale.
1) What 50 aircraft are you talking about in Point A? Can you please advise?

2) When the Chinese are producing hundreds of J-10s, J-11s and J-20s...who is there in China to question them? The CCP is accountable to no one. What you are asking for to replicate in India, requires the introduction of communism. Who is going to bell that cat? To order 83 Mk1As, it took a lot of rona dhona. To order 36 Rafales, it was an even greater rona dhona. Welcome to democracy and to our famed bureaucracy. But introduce communism in India and I will personally guarantee you an even greater production rate than what China is making right now. But don't blame me if I bulldoze your ancestral home for land, to build another production line for Tejas. Because that is what happens in China. And I will also kill scores of people in the process. Why? Because I felt like it and I can. I am a ChiCom and I can do whatever I please. Just like the Borg in Star Trek, everything flows into and serves the Xi Collective. That is not how it works in India.

3) Placing orders and executing them happens also to Tejas. When you increase delivery of airframes, the customer has to pay for those airframes upon delivery. Those payments come out of the IAF's annual CAPEX budget which is quite meagre to begin with. Even the IAF does not want to induct more than 13 MRFA (or shiny toys as you call them) per year, in the 114 contract. For 83 Mk1A aircraft, the average annual production rate will be similar. First Mk1A delivery will be in 2024, exactly three years after contract signature in Feb 2021. Three years is the worldwide industry standard. To increase deliveries, you have to be able to pay for those deliveries. No one is going to give it to you for free and there is no take-now-and-pay-later scheme either. This is not 2-for-1 pizza delivery.

4) No point in faster deliveries if QC is not maintained. When crashes happen in China...it is hushed up because of the strict control of the Chinese state media. When Tejas crashes in India, the rona-dhona will be a sight to watch and it will come from the import lobbies. So strict QC has to be adhered to. The risk is quite great.
Vivek K wrote:When we try to appease hard nosed idiots like me, we apply the balm of - " oh we will buy a few LCA along with our more desired toys". This helps to further destroy/erode our economic security and future. If we do not realize this then there is no point bringing the forum down insisting this point. You have to realize that the LCA and Arjun represent OUR future National Security (= Economic Security + Territorial Security + Sovereign Decision Making). We look in India at National Security = Territorial Security and gleefully sacrifice our economic security and some parts of Sovereign Decision making for the short term benefit. Buying the Rafale helps (to a limited extent) our territorial security only.
If you want Tejas to succeed and if you want to see the Mk2 in service, then you should allow HAL to do her job. Right now, the Mk1 production is winding down and HAL will shift gears to the Mk1A. If the Mk1A production line does not meet her mark, then criticize HAL.

The Tejas Mk2 will come and in the required numbers. Otherwise please indicate - with evidence - what aircraft will take her place?
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Post by Rakesh »

Prem Kumar wrote:There seems to be this newly developed view in BRF that IAF has moved towards a higher medium-heavy mix and so the Tejas-MK1/MK1a will be limited by definition.

Where is this coming from? Has any IAF Chief said so - or is it just a way to interpret why the IAF wants 114 MRFA? To the best of my knowledge, the IAF hasn't spelled out the "mix of aircraft needed in its 42 squadrons". Nor has it drawn up a plan (including estimated budget) to attain those levels. Without this, "42 squadrons" is not a plan, but a wish.
Air Marshal Nambiar (retd) has spelt out this in the video below...from 33:05 to 33:40 in the video. As per him, the 114 number was mathematically worked out by Air HQ. And as per him, if the IAF acquires 90 more Rafales it will hit the number of 126. But if it is a different type, then 114 will be required. It is the IAF's job to advise the govt on her projected force levels to meet the threat scenario. The govt has to fund that desired force level. The impasse lies in the ability to fund.

The IAF holds the view that the Tejas Mk1A will be limited in her ability to meet the threat requirements faced by the IAF. Thus the reason for the Tejas Mk2, which as per Air Marshal Nambiar himself will exceed the Rafale. However that requirement is needed right now and no amount of money or manpower thrown at the Mk2 program, will overcome the time it will take to develop the aircraft. There is a lot to be done with the Tejas Mk2. Even the Chinese - despite all their hyperbole - cannot overcome the laws of R&D and science.

Only a few on BRF "fake" dhoti shiver over the Chinese claims, to push for Amreeki maal.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8428
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Post by Indranil »

BIG: LRDE is looking at Uttam Mk2 antenna with a repositioner with up to +-90 degree and +-20 degree slewability in azimuth and elevation respectively. That is state of the art!

As you know Uttam Mk2 has better capability than Mk1 with reduced size. LRDE and ADA have also worked out how to place the antenna closer to the radome. This results in reduction in nose cone diameter by 18% (from 900mm to 740mm). This reduces drag and opens up space behind the radar for IRST.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Post by Rakesh »

Great news. Good show by LRDE.
Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2931
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Post by Vivek K »

Self Deleted.
Last edited by Vivek K on 21 Oct 2021 05:33, edited 2 times in total.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Post by Rakesh »

Vivek, on this very forum (that you find funny :lol: ) many were celebrating when IAF Mirage 2000s successfully bombed their targets at Balakot with pin point precision and came home unscathed. Both upgraded and non upgraded Mirage 2000s took part in that mission. Among the many who celebrated were a few (not you!) who whined and complained when the IAF spent $43 million per Mirage 2000 to upgrade. You cannot have it both ways - whine and complain when you have to spend, but want USAF style capability to hit the enemy with zero losses of your own.

You also misread my post. The sensors aboard the Rafale are not present right now on the Tejas. When the Tejas Mk2 comes, it will exceed what the Rafale has. And that is from Air Marshal Nambiar himself. But the threat scenario that exists is very real right now. The IAF cannot wait till the end of the decade to start inducting Tejas Mk2s to overcome that threat scenario. So all this talk about "...LCA representing OUR future National Security (= Economic Security + Territorial Security + Sovereign Decision Making)..." is nice to have, but it does not change the fact about the threat scenario that exists at present.

Please explain as to how you want our scientists to replicate the capability (on the Rafale) as a national mission and then port it over to a platform that has not yet even had her first flight?

You want India to hide big ticket purchases? You want local programs to succeed and you are willing to cook the books to achieve it? Were you asleep when Bofors happened? When the fake Rafale scam happened? You think the opposition gives a damn about protecting territorial security? They are only concerned with protecting their vote bank. I don't know how you can honestly come up with these naive statements.

I don't know how 36/72 Rafales = 50 aircraft. But okay. I am not going to even bother contesting you on this. Prior to the Air Chief's press conference in early October, we were having discussions on this very "funny" forum :), about the IAF having private discussions on increasing squadron strength beyond 42. The IAF will not hit 42 this decade and that is from the Air Chief himself. So all this talk about an air force needing more than 600 aircraft is quite frankly moot.

Please explain how you are planning to steal sensors and other equipment? Please do illustrate.

The Mirage 2000 has been with the IAF since 1985, more than 35+ years now. In these past 3+ decades, how many IAF personnel do you know that have spoken about the Mirage 2000 in the negative? So this comment of yours ---> "...in 30 years someone from the IAF may write in his memoirs how truly awful the Rafale was but was purchased and hyped for deterrent value..." quite frankly has no merit. In fact to date, just like the Mirage 2000, the IAF has nothing but praises for the aircraft. And the same IAF speaks very highly of the Tejas as well. Why did China deploy J-20 to counter Rafale? Why not just employ the hundreds of J-10s and J-11s they have?
Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2931
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Post by Vivek K »

Self deleted - we have entrenched views with some disagreements though wanting the same end result. No point wasting bandwidth.
YashG
BRFite
Posts: 936
Joined: 22 Apr 2017 00:10

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Post by YashG »

Rakesh wrote: Tejas Mk2, which as per Air Marshal Nambiar himself will exceed the Rafale. However that requirement is needed right now and no amount of money or manpower thrown at the Mk2 program, will overcome the time it will take to develop the aircraft. There is a lot to be done with the Tejas Mk2.
1. If we were to throw more money on Mk2 ecosystem, timelines will accelerate - or atleast we will be able to stick to timelines.
More money = possible acquisitions we can do, talented engineers whom HAL/NAL/Connected orgs can hire/retain , Dont have to wait for certifications & testing infra through any external means - we could build our own, run more multiple-higher resourced teams at the same time on multiple components, put in money into ancillaries, private manufacturing partners, or even give larger initial orders as long as procurement rules allow any or all or more can be done.

But I dont see that effort to accelerate Mk2 ecosystem. Complaints abound when there are delays but why not shrink the timelines. Its doable. Not all delays are purely due to insurmountable R&D problems, many are just bad planning, lack of funds, mis-management.

2. There is no money is our perennial argument. Agreed its not without merit/But then if this is national defence, we should and can find that money.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19224
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Post by NRao »

https://twitter.com/Sandeep_Mave/status ... 0807408643 -----
Astra Microwave Flag of India to supply Upgraded X-Band AESA( Uttam MK-2) radar unit of Tejas MK-2 at a cost of INR 12.8 crore , deliveries to be completed by april 2022.

Via` Alpha Defence
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19224
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Post by NRao »

https://twitter.com/Sandeep_Mave/status ... 3272977408 ----->
LCA Mk-II / MWF / Tejas Mk-II prototype roll out early next year ...
Yagnasri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10388
Joined: 29 May 2007 18:03

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Post by Yagnasri »

Great news.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Post by Rakesh »

Beautiful m_saini. Awesome art work!
Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12186
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Post by Pratyush »

It might just be entering service by 2025.
nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9097
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Post by nachiket »

Indranil saar making important points about the need for Mk2 on twitter. Anyone here who thinks we can or should magically jump directly to AMCA from the Mk1A should read this

https://twitter.com/Indrani1_Roy/status ... 0392004621
I keep hearing this again and again. AMCA is future. Jump from Tejas Mk1A to AMCA. Don’t waste your time on Tejas Mk2. IMHO this is divorced from ground reality.
https://twitter.com/Indrani1_Roy/status ... 1341442050
Firstly, there is only one AF with experience on 5th generation aircrafts to lean on. They've operated 5th- gen aircraft in numbers for 2 decades, have a quality “economical” 5th gen aircraft in hand & yet have decided to develop a 4.5 gen aircraft to operationalize beyond 2030
https://twitter.com/Indrani1_Roy/status ... 9772463105
Second, let’s come to India’s context. India does not have proven design capability for LRUs of 5th gen aircraft. Design in lab settings and designing with operational knowledge are completely different things. That is what operational Mk1/1A/2 allows.
https://twitter.com/Indrani1_Roy/status ... 7573563394
Third, India has proven design capability on only one 4.5 gen-aircraft. This aircraft namely Tejas Mk1/Mk1A can only have podded solutions on a variety of critical technology like MAWS, IRST, SPJ etc. Mk2 is the first instance where they can test integrated airframe mounted LRUs.
https://twitter.com/Indrani1_Roy/status ... 2668753925
Fourth, please realize that mass production is a capability on to itself. Just like design and testing it is an iterative learning process. For example, Dhruv Mk3 is world class and is produced at mass scale. But it took us 2 decades and 4 iterations to reach here.
https://twitter.com/Indrani1_Roy/status ... 2053488642
But now that they are there the machine is well-oiled and players identified they can churn out LUHs and LCHs at scale from near day-1.

On fixed wings, we are not there yet. Mk1 production hasn’t stabilized.
https://twitter.com/Indrani1_Roy/status ... 3802407940
Mk1A and Mk2 will help us fully refine this. When mass scale production of AMCA begins, it can start with LRUs that are well tested, operated, refined and mass produced. It will also be able to be produced at mass scale from day 1
https://twitter.com/Indrani1_Roy/status ... 2844218371
So make no mistake, deletion of Mk2 will not accelerate the time to smooth production of a refined AMCA at scale. It will actually delay it by greatly adding risk and uncertainty.
Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12186
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Post by Pratyush »

I can understand that AMCA will require too much efforts and in areas were our Air space industry is currently lacking.

However, I fail to understand the point where the mk2 is vital to the development of the AMCA.

If the challenge is to develop MC and avionics package and AMCA is expected to use an evolutionary descendent of this system. Then a notional LCA mk1b can also be a suitable path to take post the mk1a.

I submit that in terms of being a platform for development of technology the Tejas mk2 is not going to do anything that a notional Tejas mk1b cannot do.

The mk2 might be a platform which gives 50% extra range and payload to the airforce. It is required for the capacity that it brings to the IAF. Does the IAF require this capacity?

They certainly think that they do.

But that additional range and payload is not necessary for a future development of LPI radar or latest EW capacity or MC for that matter to be used by the AMCA.

These are 2 seperate programs, that stand apart and on own merits and have a place in the future IAF fleet.

But to say that one is essential for the development of another is a stretch.
Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14331
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Post by Aditya_V »

Pratyush wrote:I can understand that AMCA will require too much efforts and in areas were our Air space industry is currently lacking.

However, I fail to understand the point where the mk2 is vital to the development of the AMCA.

If the challenge is to develop MC and avionics package and AMCA is expected to use an evolutionary descendent of this system. Then a notional LCA mk1b can also be a suitable path to take post the mk1a.

I submit that in terms of being a platform for development of technology the Tejas mk2 is not going to do anything that a notional Tejas mk1b cannot do.

The mk2 might be a platform which gives 50% extra range and payload to the airforce. It is required for the capacity that it brings to the IAF. Does the IAF require this capacity?

They certainly think that they do.

But that additional range and payload is not necessary for a future development of LPI radar or latest EW capacity or MC for that matter to be used by the AMCA.

These are 2 seperate programs, that stand apart and on own merits and have a place in the future IAF fleet.

But to say that one is essential for the development of another is a stretch.
The more you produce the Better you will get at it, it will have many technologies and Vendors - ecosystem making very similar parts data etc. The reason we are struggling with LCA numbers we have never had an ecosystem manufacturing Indian designed fighters in numbers.

It will be stupid to stop with 123 LCA MK1/1A and expect AMCA to come out fast. The reason US took soo long for F-22 / F-35 a lot of technologies were freshly developed and back fitted to earlier Generation F-15/16. AESA radar, use of composites, Various avionics , OBOGS, inbuilt Jammers etc.

Today it is different and even the USA is inducting F-15Ex and will continue F-18E/F, F-15's and F16's to come.

Stealth aircraft can be tip of the spear, for Air to Air Dogfighting, do some specialized strike role, but Gen 4.5 fighters are going to the bulk of the sorties.

From a manufacturing perspective, we will develop a lot of production ecosystem which can further develop from LCA Mk1/1A, buying large quantities of 4.5 gen aircraft does not make sense, this ecosystem will help reduce the timelines for the AMCA. Nothing works in Isolation.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Post by Rakesh »

nachiket wrote:Indranil saar making important points about the need for Mk2 on twitter. Anyone here who thinks we can or should magically jump directly to AMCA from the Mk1A should read this.
Thank you for posting this. I saw this last night and was going to post it myself.

Well put by IR Saar.
Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5128
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Post by Manish_Sharma »

Tejas Mk2: The Pride & Future of Indian Air Force
https://airpowerasia.com/2021/10/27/tej ... air-force/
27 October 2021

By Udit Tripathi
Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5350
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Post by Cain Marko »

Rakesh wrote:
nachiket wrote:Indranil saar making important points about the need for Mk2 on twitter. Anyone here who thinks we can or should magically jump directly to AMCA from the Mk1A should read this.
Thank you for posting this. I saw this last night and was going to post it myself.

Well put by IR Saar.
Whilei can see the logic behind Indranils posts, I can't understand why all this can't be achieved via a tedbf/orca? Either or both of these programs could serve the evolutionary function of mk2. Quite importantly, they will provide more powerful platforms, something that the iaf seems to want (mrca), meet naval aviation needs, and possibly mitigate engine issues. Being twin engined (excess power) and larger they should be easier to develop with more room for error.

Until these come online, maximum priority should be given to mass producing mk1a. at least 200 till 2030 should be the goal. This would reduce the learning curve associated with mass production of fighters, and the lines will be smoothly operational by the time the 2 engined birds come along. Not too mention support iaf numerical strength.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Post by brar_w »

Cain Marko wrote: I can't understand why all this can't be achieved via a tedbf/orca? Either or both of these programs could serve the evolutionary function of mk2.
The IAF has requirements that the MWF/Mk2 fulfills. Not just capability requirements but those around delivering by a certain timeline and at a certain scale. No customer (operating Air Force) they I’m aware of will sign off on those requirements, factor X squadrons and operational timelines into its future force and then wait and see the developer switch to a completely different platform. The leap from Mk1A to MWF/Mk2 is not trivial. It is not without risk and no one should expect a completely trouble free development and testing program. Completing switching the aircraft is basically staring from scratch and introduces tremendous technical and schedule risk. Having backed the MWF, the IAF committed to an operational program and not an e experiment.
nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9097
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Post by nachiket »

Cain Marko wrote: Whilei can see the logic behind Indranils posts, I can't understand why all this can't be achieved via a tedbf/orca? Either or both of these programs could serve the evolutionary function of mk2. Quite importantly, they will provide more powerful platforms, something that the iaf seems to want (mrca), meet naval aviation needs, and possibly mitigate engine issues. Being twin engined (excess power) and larger they should be easier to develop with more room for error.

Until these come online, maximum priority should be given to mass producing mk1a. at least 200 till 2030 should be the goal. This would reduce the learning curve associated with mass production of fighters, and the lines will be smoothly operational by the time the 2 engined birds come along. Not too mention support iaf numerical strength.
It is not just development, but mass production which is important. That is the thrust of what Indranil is saying. The Mk2 design process started years before TEDBF and it is a simpler process relatively to designing what is essentially a new aircraft (TEDBF) with 2 engines and much larger airframe. TEDBF is a program that will benefit from R&D done for the AMCA rather than vice versa in some cases (e.g. the DSI and serpentine intake ducts). Mk2 prototype can fly in 2023 if all goes well. There is no such possibility for the TEDBF. It is a more complex project which was started later than the Mk2. Not only will the prototype itself take longer but the testing and certification process will also be longer. For the AMCA production to benefit from a previous program we need to mass produce that jet years before the AMCA and iron out its issues. That is unlikely to happen with TEDBF considering the timelines and low order quantity (navy only most likely). ORCA will take even longer if the IAF insists on a lighter AF version without the heavy undercarriage and other Navy specific design elements on the TEDBF. The IAF wants the MRFA now and are looking for imports even as the Mk2 is being developed. You ask them to wait for the ORCA which is little more than a vague idea at this point and they will balk and say they will wait for the AMCA. Meanwhile more imports.
Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5350
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Post by Cain Marko »

nachiket wrote:
Cain Marko wrote: Whilei can see the logic behind Indranils posts, I can't understand why all this can't be achieved via a tedbf/orca? Either or both of these programs could serve the evolutionary function of mk2. Quite importantly, they will provide more powerful platforms, something that the iaf seems to want (mrca), meet naval aviation needs, and possibly mitigate engine issues. Being twin engined (excess power) and larger they should be easier to develop with more room for error.

Until these come online, maximum priority should be given to mass producing mk1a. at least 200 till 2030 should be the goal. This would reduce the learning curve associated with mass production of fighters, and the lines will be smoothly operational by the time the 2 engined birds come along. Not too mention support iaf numerical strength.
It is not just development, but mass production which is important. That is the thrust of what Indranil is saying. The Mk2 design process started years before TEDBF and it is a simpler process relatively to designing what is essentially a new aircraft (TEDBF) with 2 engines and much larger airframe. TEDBF is a program that will benefit from R&D done for the AMCA rather than vice versa in some cases (e.g. the DSI and serpentine intake ducts). Mk2 prototype can fly in 2023 if all goes well. There is no such possibility for the TEDBF. It is a more complex project which was started later than the Mk2. Not only will the prototype itself take longer but the testing and certification process will also be longer. For the AMCA production to benefit from a previous program we need to mass produce that jet years before the AMCA and iron out its issues. That is unlikely to happen with TEDBF considering the timelines and low order quantity (navy only most likely). ORCA will take even longer if the IAF insists on a lighter AF version without the heavy undercarriage and other Navy specific design elements on the TEDBF. The IAF wants the MRFA now and are looking for imports even as the Mk2 is being developed. You ask them to wait for the ORCA which is little more than a vague idea at this point and they will balk and say they will wait for the AMCA. Meanwhile more imports.
I take your point but am hugely skeptical of the timeline that the mk2 will fly in 2023. If mk2 is so crucial for development and production of AMCA, what is the need for ORCA? There are some indications now that the IAF doesn't really seem that interested in the Mk2 at all. the justification for this is that the IAF's threat scenario has evolved and it wants larger birds (see Karan M's posts earlier). Whatever man.

Frankly at this point, I'm coming around to Vivek's point - the IAF planning/procurement design seems nefarious. Or they are doing this to avoid the GE engines, which to me seems plausible what with all the Caatsa rnd.
Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5350
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Post by Cain Marko »

brar_w wrote:
Cain Marko wrote: I can't understand why all this can't be achieved via a tedbf/orca? Either or both of these programs could serve the evolutionary function of mk2.
The IAF has requirements that the MWF/Mk2 fulfills. Not just capability requirements but those around delivering by a certain timeline and at a certain scale. No customer (operating Air Force) they I’m aware of will sign off on those requirements, factor X squadrons and operational timelines into its future force and then wait and see the developer switch to a completely different platform.
All this makes sense. But not for the IAF. At this stage (and for a sometime) they have "kidincandyshop syndrome". Let me see - we want a little mk1A, few mk2, definitely some orca, a smattering of amca, and garnish with mk1. Of course main course is MRFA. Oh and hand me some extra Rafale too!
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Post by brar_w »

Has the IAF backtracked on its commitment to the MWF/MK2, stopped funding it or not included it in its post 2030 fighter mix? If so then that's a worry. If not then this has no basis.
Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14331
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Post by Aditya_V »

TEDBF/ORCA is a Naval requirement, IAF will piggyback if in production. Mk2 is a must have. MK1flows in MK1A which in turns allows for Mk2 which allows for AMCA.

For analysis, LM factory and suppliers who produced 190 F16s a year 25 years ago today produce 160 F35's. US has been the dominant airpower from 1930's. Germany victories in WW2 were mainly due to airpower, once their army lost airsuperiorty it was retreat on all fronts.
Post Reply