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: 4218
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

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

Post by Prem Kumar »

Pratyush wrote:PS they have sabotaged to AMCA as well by limiting the internal weapons bay to under 1.5 tons. When the F35 has a weapons bay of 2.8 tons.

I am quite sure that the IAF, once the aircraft is ready to enter service will turn arround and say that the IWB is too small we need F35.
This is my fear too with the AMCA. I have always been frustrated about why it suffers from a limited IWB. Seemed like the small-thinking while framing the ASQR for Tejas is being repeated.

ADA is on record saying that they are building it per the Air HQ requirement. I hope there is no intentional sabotage here via the ASQR
KSingh
BRFite
Posts: 504
Joined: 16 Jun 2020 17:52

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

Post by KSingh »

Pratyush wrote:
bala wrote:The Govt needs to hasten Tejas MK2, KungFlu is no more an excuse. Time for HAL / ADA to get this done quickly, delays are costing India while the Indian public needs to endure the circus of IAF chief lusting after videshi birds. Time to hasten the AMCA fighter too, now that S. Korea has demonstrated similar capabilities.

Snip...
Is there any point to such an activity? Given how the IAF is thinking.

PS they have sabotaged to AMCA as well by limiting the internal weapons bay to under 1.5 tons. When the F35 has a weapons bay of 2.8 tons.

I am quite sure that the IAF, once the aircraft is ready to enter service will turn arround and say that the IWB is too small we need F35.
Everyone saying that IAF is fully committed to AMCA and we should cheer about that really thinks a tiger changes it’s stripes? The IAF were always talking up LCA MK.2 during the troubles of MK.1 then when it comes time to support the project/pay/plan for induction/provision they suddenly start to add qualifications and downplay the bird?


There is ZERO indication IAF is changing their mindset, if they get their demand for 114 MRFA met, in 5-7 years we will start hearing of troubles with AMCA and MRFA-NG RFIs will start being drawn up

Something has to change because IAF do not seem capable of doing it organically, their default will always be import first.

Do we REALLY think that when in 5+ years F35 is in service in the 100s all around the world and the tech is not as sensitive anymore that USH won’t be pushing it heavily on India? They’ll talk the usual BS about interoperability and Quad commonality and the same old lobby currently setting their eyes on LCA will do the same to AMCA


Give them an inch and they’ll take a mile. Save this post gentlemen.
KSingh
BRFite
Posts: 504
Joined: 16 Jun 2020 17:52

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

Post by KSingh »

konaseema wrote:My humble 2 cents in this matter. If we look from IAF's perspective, they have already committed to an aircraft that hasn't hit the production line in Tejas Mk1A. They don't want to put all their eggs in this basket as it is yet to be proven, aka Tejas Mk2. There is a definite CAPEX budget for this year and minor increments in the upcoming years if they are lucky (if economy doesn't tank). But there is also an endless list of CAPEX to be made for earlier commitments and for new contracts. I don't think IAF is looking at the cost alone when it comes to MRFA. For them it might be the only opportunity (last one) with a BJP government in power, which has the people's mandate (majority with out coalition partners) and has the balls to make some not so popular decisions. So it is now or never to acquire a proven 4.5 generation platform before it is too late (with AMCA knocking the doors at the end of this decade). As an eternal optimist (and also realist) I think IAF and its new chief in 2 years time, will commit to a larger number of Tejas Mk2 once the Tejas Mk1A enters production. We all need to respect anyone who wears the uniform and especially those who have the guts to (still) fly a Mig 21.
Why does IAF think this way? In almost every aerospace project you commit before the plane has flown/entered production- both civlian and military. How else is development and production infrastructure funded?

IAF’s hands off strategy of ‘we will wait and watch, let you spend your own money and if at the end of it we like what we see you might get a contract’ is the stuff of insanity and points to a complete lack of ownership or even basic project management skills inside the world’s 4th largest Airforce.


HAL and ADA through LCA, ALH, LCH etc have earned the right to have more respect and trust than this by now- it’s not a risky proposition to go from LCA MK.1 to MK.1A to MK.2, that is as iterative as it gets but to IAF this is the riskier than when they gave 100s of millions of dollars to Russia for an Indianised two seat version of an experimental single seat version of an untested Russian 5th gen fighter
Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4218
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

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

Post by Prem Kumar »

KSingh wrote: Something has to change because IAF do not seem capable of doing it organically, their default will always be import first.

Do we REALLY think that when in 5+ years F35 is in service in the 100s all around the world and the tech is not as sensitive anymore that USH won’t be pushing it heavily on India? They’ll talk the usual BS about interoperability and Quad commonality and the same old lobby currently setting their eyes on LCA will do the same to AMCA
Amen
KSingh
BRFite
Posts: 504
Joined: 16 Jun 2020 17:52

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

Post by KSingh »

When I put myself in IAF’s mindset it’s actually quite disturbing what they are imagining india and its industries to be

IAF’s obsession with MMRCA/Rafale is 2+ decades old. They haven’t adjusted their approach despite much changing in the meantime. It’s not 2001 anymore and LCA still a pipe dream.

In 2022 LCA MK.2 is a 17.5T MMRCA in its own right. Apparently IAF objected to the MWF (medium weight fighter) nomenclature after ADA created a larger airframe from what was originally planned so instead of doggedly pursuing 100+ Rafale IAF ought to be reimagining their plans based on the changed environment that now exists domestically and in the region.

who else is buying 100+ jets off the shelf other than the oil rich Arabs with no industry to speak of? Koreans, Turks and even Indonesians are thinking about next gen projects of their own. Even Pakis have JF-17 as their backbone and default solution.

So IAF’s world view is that Indian industry are on par with Egyptians, Malaysians etc who are seeking licence assembly of 4th gen jets- ironically HAL is in talks to setup LCA assembly in both (not that I expect this to fructify )

LCA MK.2 can do >90% of the mission profiles of Rafale for maybe 60-70% of the cost. The only real thing Rafale will have on MK.2 come 2030s is payload/range and a slight edge in EW. So yes buy a couple more SQNs of Rafale for DPSA role but 114 more? 6 SQNs of MRFA can easily pay for 10++ LCA MK.2 SQNs. A force whose fleet strength is in freefall isn’t thinking about this?
Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12196
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

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

Post by Pratyush »

The irony is that the Mk2 is an IAF creation.
KSingh
BRFite
Posts: 504
Joined: 16 Jun 2020 17:52

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

Post by KSingh »

Pratyush wrote:The irony is that the Mk2 is an IAF creation.
Tin foil hat- created to kill off/limit LCA MK.1/1A’s prospects, always kick the can down the road and demand imported interim/emergency solutions
Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12196
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

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

Post by Pratyush »

Yeah, what's 10 years of Modi. He can always be voted out in a general election. Then buy under the a different government.

In the meanwhile of f squadrons come down then that's just too bad.
kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6278
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

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

Post by kit »

The outcome of IAFs obsession with foreign fighters is rather simple and concerning at same time : it will not be able to fight a prolonged war especially on 2 fronts, no numbers and no capable industrial capacity to back them up.

Beginning of a war they might be able show success but as attrition starts it won't be able to hold up.


The army's artillery saga rewritten , this time the IAF.

Basically forcing the governments hand not to try any foreign adventures.

Open to debate as to whether there are foreign influences in these policy decisions
Last edited by kit on 21 Jul 2022 22:04, edited 1 time in total.
Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12196
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

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

Post by Pratyush »

Given the length of time it takes to induct any system in Indian armed forces. If there is foreign subversion, it will have to be extremely broad based and deep.

Not the subversion of one official here or one official there. Coupled with non specialist officers on civilian side in MOD. You have a recipe for disaster.

There is something rotten in the state of air HQ. That is something that cannot be denied. If they are not brought under control, we are going to lose the next war.
skumar
BRFite
Posts: 244
Joined: 30 Nov 2008 08:22

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

Post by skumar »

KSingh wrote: ..
Something has to change because IAF do not seem capable of doing it organically, their default will always be import first.
...
+1. I hope this is now clear to the people who matter. IN has shown a mindset change which is simply lacking in the IAF.
konaseema
BRFite
Posts: 115
Joined: 16 Nov 2020 09:54

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

Post by konaseema »

There is a saying in Tamil which can be loosely translated to Leaving one's husband by trusting the King. That said, I hope IAF's story isn't the same in the case of Tejas Mk2 & MRFA. When I tried to think through this defiance by the IAF's top boss to stand by ADA, DRDO & HAL, I think it boils down to trust deficit on the maturity of our Aerospace Industry as I don't want to buy the reason of an internal sabotage to the idea of Atmanirbar IAF. As much it is difficult and painful to comprehend why IAF doesn't trust our research agencies, it is also equally baffling why they can't trust in spite of a growing list of excellent products in both fixed wing and Rotary wing segments. The Indian govt is not helping the matter either with a shoestring budget. But it may also be due to the fear of the Union govt forcing their hand to buy only Tejas Mk2 or more Tejas Mk1A, if they openly back these products and / or commit to more squadrons of these two. I wish a middle ground will be found soon and we settle for 4 squadrons of Rafale and 12 Squadrons of Tejas Mk2 without any arm twisting by the Union Govt but I wouldn't be surprised if they end up doing just that.

It is also true that the govt has to invest in the MIC and our research organizations to realize our dream of fighting the next war with the best of home grown weapons. HAL is just not setup to be successful to build prototypes across 3 programs (Tejas Mk2, TEDBF & AMCA) and to manufacture these platforms in parallel (even with the JV with a private partner for AMCA). We need a visionaries at the helm of every agency involved that includes a Visionary Raksha Mantri.
Haridas
BRFite
Posts: 879
Joined: 26 Dec 2017 07:53

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

Post by Haridas »

Pratyush wrote:The irony is that the Mk2 is an IAF creation.
IAF is incompetent of even that.

Tejas Mk2 is actually Indian Navy creation (thanks to Commodore Mavlankar).

INavy worked with HAL/ADA to define adaptation to NLCA for NLCA Mk2 with canard, stretched fuselage, internal fuel capacity, trans-sonic shaping, bigger F414 engine .....

IAF winged brass then woke up to find its clown-jewels aero-expertise stolen by sea fairing Indian Navy.

Me Too joined IAF to avoid commitment to buy anymore Tejas Mk-1.

That gentlemen is the true colors of IAF senior brass (in)competence.

Now IAF wants to repeat the same game to avoid buying indigineous Tejas by showing DEEP interest in Indian Navy TEDBF program, so that after TEDBF is successfull, they want its IAF varient called ORCA. Till then no interest in the underpowered, SDRE three legged Tejas Mk1A or Mk2. [Wolf wolf, falling Squadron strength, only 114 imported MMRCA solve the problem]
Last edited by Haridas on 21 Jul 2022 21:26, edited 2 times in total.
kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6278
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

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

Post by kit »

Wonder if the CDS when he comes can enforce changes ?., that seems to be the only hope ?

BTW , for conspiracy theorists, the way LBS and HB were done for by the agency one would think they are still working to "guide" the GOIs strategic direction
isubodh
BRFite
Posts: 176
Joined: 03 Oct 2008 18:23

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

Post by isubodh »

Pratyush wrote:Given the length of time it takes to induct any system in Indian armed forces. If there is foreign subversion, it will have to be extremely broad based and deep.

Not the subversion of one official here or one official there. Coupled with non specialist officers on civilian side in MOD. You have a recipe for disaster.

There is something rotten in the state of air HQ. That is something that cannot be denied. If they are not brought under control, we are going to lose the next war.
This not unique to MOD/HQ/IAF is general and it everywhere including private organization. There are three factors
- Organizational Inertia
- Personal interests
- No incentive for action (more common to public organizations )

Only good part is this is common factor even to our adversaries. A good leader at top can minimize these and still mage progress. Private organization pay top dollar for top posts for the same reason.

Doctor may seem like God to patients but for a doctor its his job, and you can see doctor Whatspping, taking breaks, going on strikes, prescribing medicine for margin, prescribing tests for commission. While patient wondering why the God is behaving like this. Same applies everywhere.

I wouldn't fully rule out conspiracy though, as statecraft involves that and also motivated salesman trying push own wares.
KSingh
BRFite
Posts: 504
Joined: 16 Jun 2020 17:52

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

Post by KSingh »

konaseema wrote:There is a saying in Tamil which can be loosely translated to Leaving one's husband by trusting the King. That said, I hope IAF's story isn't the same in the case of Tejas Mk2 & MRFA. When I tried to think through this defiance by the IAF's top boss to stand by ADA, DRDO & HAL, I think it boils down to trust deficit on the maturity of our Aerospace Industry as I don't want to buy the reason of an internal sabotage to the idea of Atmanirbar IAF. As much it is difficult and painful to comprehend why IAF doesn't trust our research agencies, it is also equally baffling why they can't trust in spite of a growing list of excellent products in both fixed wing and Rotary wing segments. The Indian govt is not helping the matter either with a shoestring budget. But it may also be due to the fear of the Union govt forcing their hand to buy only Tejas Mk2 or more Tejas Mk1A, if they openly back these products and / or commit to more squadrons of these two. I wish a middle ground will be found soon and we settle for 4 squadrons of Rafale and 12 Squadrons of Tejas Mk2 without any arm twisting by the Union Govt but I wouldn't be surprised if they end up doing just that.

It is also true that the govt has to invest in the MIC and our research organizations to realize our dream of fighting the next war with the best of home grown weapons. HAL is just not setup to be successful to build prototypes across 3 programs (Tejas Mk2, TEDBF & AMCA) and to manufacture these platforms in parallel (even with the JV with a private partner for AMCA). We need a visionaries at the helm of every agency involved that includes a Visionary Raksha Mantri.
What blows my mind is that the IAF brass doesn’t want to or doesn’t seem to take pride in IDDM solutions. Shouldn’t it be a motivating factor to have their fleet packed with indigenous machines? They act like global citizens with no ties to India and no real skin in the game as far as Indian industry goes. This really is baffling when you consider how wars are actually fought (domestic industry makes or breaks your strategic desires)

+ who says HAL isn’t setup to be successful in LCA, TEDBF and AMCA simultaneously? They have built multiple types simultaneously before and that was before they had the LCA experience. They are just about finding their feet on this with ALH/LUH/LCH (orders permitting)

And AMCA itself will be de-risked by the SPV.

We don’t know how HAL will perform because this is very new to everyone in india BUT they have not been standing still and have become very capable in the last 10 years, if they have the money and firm commitments I think they can do what’s asked.
Tanaji
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4521
Joined: 21 Jun 2000 11:31

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

Post by Tanaji »

One of the radical ways to get around this is to transfer fixed wing CAS assets and hence a chunk of the budget to IA on the condition that they are Tejas fighters.

Watch how quickly IAF changes its tune in that case.
bala
BRFite
Posts: 1994
Joined: 02 Sep 1999 11:31
Location: Office Lounge

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

Post by bala »

We are no longer fighting adversaries who are no match to our capabilities, instead we have the real threat from the North-East. The North-east country is developing its own capabilities and weapons at an alarming rate. In a war, on protracted basis, having equipment from just foreign sources is a liability. I don't believe our leadership have really thought about 2-front or 1-front war scenario, even if they did, they are seriously underestimating what India needs. I think India requires a separate entity for acquisitions of weapons & munitions for all 3 services and look holistically with a proper roadmap on where we ought to be in next few years. This is too important a task to be neglected. I don't think a CDS would solve this. Just IMHO.
KSingh
BRFite
Posts: 504
Joined: 16 Jun 2020 17:52

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

Post by KSingh »

bala wrote:We are no longer fighting adversaries who are no match to our capabilities, instead we have the real threat from the North-East. The North-east country is developing its own capabilities and weapons at an alarming rate. In a war, on protracted basis, having equipment from just foreign sources is a liability. I don't believe our leadership have really thought about 2-front or 1-front war scenario, even if they did, they are seriously underestimating what India needs. I think India requires a separate entity for acquisitions of weapons & munitions for all 3 services and look holistically with a proper roadmap on where we ought to be in next few years. This is too important a task to be neglected. I don't think a CDS would solve this. Just IMHO.
A lot of what was proposed under CDS was a rationalisation of resources, avoiding duplication of efforts and I even remember hearing about the possibility of joint procurements


Of course for whatever reason CDS seems to an entirely abandoned idea now. The status quo always seems to come out on top in india
yensoy
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2494
Joined: 29 May 2002 11:31
Location: USA

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

Post by yensoy »

Tanaji wrote:One of the radical ways to get around this is to transfer fixed wing CAS assets and hence a chunk of the budget to IA on the condition that they are Tejas fighters.
Watch how quickly IAF changes its tune in that case.
Indian Air National Guard under the IA, as I suggested earlier. Nothing like free market competition to make people and entities fall in line. IANG to be second line of defence (defence in numbers) in north/central India, and possibly even first line of defence over much of the Pak border. Maritime cover (Thanjavur) to be moved to IN. IA's mission should be to push into enemy territory only and yes for that they can have whatever gold plated platform they need.
ks_sachin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2906
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

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

Post by ks_sachin »

A critical appraisal without blinkers on is required on this governments reforms to the defence set-up in the country.

It appears that the more things appear to change the more they remain the same.

The fact that "kadi ninda" is the Def Min says it all.

Everything else flows from that.....

All the tactical bravado like Balakot, Surgical Strikes etc are just that superficial. Makes the armed forces feel good and all that but are no substitute for deep reforms.

And before everyone bangs on about previous dispensations - 2 wrongs don't make a right!!
ks_sachin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2906
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

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

Post by ks_sachin »

yensoy wrote:
Tanaji wrote:One of the radical ways to get around this is to transfer fixed wing CAS assets and hence a chunk of the budget to IA on the condition that they are Tejas fighters.
Watch how quickly IAF changes its tune in that case.
Indian Air National Guard under the IA, as I suggested earlier. Nothing like free market competition to make people and entities fall in line. IANG to be second line of defence (defence in numbers) in north/central India, and possibly even first line of defence over much of the Pak border. Maritime cover (Thanjavur) to be moved to IN. IA's mission should be to push into enemy territory only and yes for that they can have whatever gold plated platform they need.
So get rid of the IAF?
Pray tell how the free market competition fixes issues here.
Or can you please link to your previous post so I can try and make sense of your logic.
Last edited by ks_sachin on 22 Jul 2022 05:50, edited 1 time in total.
yensoy
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2494
Joined: 29 May 2002 11:31
Location: USA

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

Post by yensoy »

ks_sachin wrote:
yensoy wrote: Indian Air National Guard under the IA, as I suggested earlier. Nothing like free market competition to make people and entities fall in line. IANG to be second line of defence (defence in numbers) in north/central India, and possibly even first line of defence over much of the Pak border. Maritime cover (Thanjavur) to be moved to IN. IA's mission should be to push into enemy territory only and yes for that they can have whatever gold plated platform they need.
So get rid of the IAF?
No, they will be first line of defence (rather offence) against China and against Pak in Kashmir/Gujarat areas. Expeditionary attacks would be their scope. Air defence in non-hot areas can be relegated to IANG. Also they will own the anti missile defence systems and ballistic missile deployments.
ks_sachin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2906
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

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

Post by ks_sachin »

^^Can you, please build out that scenario with the asset differentiation between the IAF and IANG?
What kind of air threats do you see in non-hot areas to be handled by the IANG and how will these arise?
ks_sachin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2906
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

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

Post by ks_sachin »

No, they will be first line of defence (rather offence) against China and against Pak in Kashmir/Gujarat areas. Expeditionary attacks would be their scope.
--This is what the IAF does now. OR do you mean that any enemy AC that approaches the border should be allowed to do so and then be handles by the IANG i.e. IAF does not do nay defensive duties i.e no CAPs?
Air defence in non-hot areas can be relegated to IANG.
---How and what kind of threats do we see in the non-hot areas?
Also they will own the anti missile defence systems and ballistic missile deployments.
---This is what the IAF does now. IA missle defence is more mobile and in pursuit of offensive or defensive ops.
yensoy
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2494
Joined: 29 May 2002 11:31
Location: USA

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

Post by yensoy »

ks_sachin wrote:^^Can you, please build out that scenario with the asset differentiation between the IAF and IANG?
What kind of air threats do you see in non-hot areas to be handled by the IANG and how will these arise?
Sir it is way out of my league. IANG would be like an air version of BSF although under MoD to ensure airspace over the country is protected from conventional sub-sonic threats. It will be strength in numbers. They can do regular air patrol with existing rules of non or limited engagement that is already in place. Obviously everything will be networked and they need to function seamlessly.

IAF is retiring Mig-21s and M2ks yet if they are not considering Tejas/Mk2 replacement in numbers it appears that they are not looking at the role played by these capable platforms. IANG/IA split isn't going to add any assets in itself; but at least it will let IAF focus on what they seem to want to do. IAF chief in his deep sleep has a better idea of what is needed than I will have in my entire life, however we all share the frustration of IAF not pushing hard for indigenous platforms here which is why we are making up such plans.
yensoy
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2494
Joined: 29 May 2002 11:31
Location: USA

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

Post by yensoy »

ks_sachin wrote:
No, they will be first line of defence (rather offence) against China and against Pak in Kashmir/Gujarat areas. Expeditionary attacks would be their scope.
--This is what the IAF does now. OR do you mean that any enemy AC that approaches the border should be allowed to do so and then be handles by the IANG i.e. IAF does not do nay defensive duties i.e no CAPs?
Air defence in non-hot areas can be relegated to IANG.
---How and what kind of threats do we see in the non-hot areas?
Also they will own the anti missile defence systems and ballistic missile deployments.
---This is what the IAF does now. IA missle defence is more mobile and in pursuit of offensive or defensive ops.
CAPs will continue as usual, but borders/airspace which are "peaceful" or settled can be done by IANG with the "lower tier" platforms. Yes no difference to missile defence ownership from today. Threats in non-hot areas are limited which is why they are "non-hot" :)
ks_sachin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2906
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

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

Post by ks_sachin »

Thanks, Yensoy.
I see where you are going.
But I fear the problem is structural and systemic.
What you will find is another set of turf wars.
What you need is for Govt of the day to bring about reforms like to name just two;

1) CDS
2) Deeper linkage between India's strategic interests/defence policy and defence procurement policy.

But more than anything else get a bloody minister who is involved and hands-on can cross-question our senior military leadership...
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

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

Post by ramana »

The 2018 plan for Tejas was 40 Mk1, 83 Mk1A, and 200 Mk2.

ACM VRC has cut the Mk2 squadrons from 12 to 6 so he can get his 114 MRFA.
Now Rafale was to answer the 126 M2K-based MRCA.
For various reasons not germane here 36 Rafale were chosen.

That would mean 126-36= 90 planes would be the difference.
Rafale is much more capable than the M2Ks is lost in the arguments.

These 90 planes have escalated to 114 MRFA with the name change and no competition for no one wants to let IAF fly around for two years of evaluation and get used up birds.
The logical thing would be to get two more tranches of Rafales and an option for another trance.
However, VRC wants to bring in another US bird to add to logistics so he can have his name in the Hall of Fame as having piloted another acquisition. Not all chiefs get that feather to their caps.
To get this he is doing his utmost to be a noisy wheel to get the oil- opposing theater commands, push for 114 MRFA, and downplay the Mk2. Very clear he wants MRFA and not Mk2.

Lets see how it develops.
NaMo is bent on transformation and suburban and rural India wants that as they keep voting him to power.
However Urban folk with little understanding of the world as its shaping up and confined to golf clubs, Xmas dances, beauty pageants, bada khanas are not getting it.
PLAAF has 2000 planes. So getting a few MRFA will be like Abhimanyu in a slugfest.
If it were not for the Govt IAF had no intention of buying adequate BVR inventory or stand-off weapons.
Anyway carry on.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

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

Post by ramana »

csaurabh wrote:To add my 2 cents to the brouhaha, I would say that such kind of news is highly disappointing to the entire indigenization efforts in the country, whether it is DRDO, DPSUs, pvt sector, startups, MSME, etc. Many (including myself) have put a lot on the line and become involved in the technology development in this sector based on promises and policies made by the present govt. But now it looks like the end user has no strategic thinking at all.

I am trying to wrap my head around the recent comments of the ACM and the only thing I can think of is that he is like a kid who wants to try a spoonful of icecream before trying more of it. A kid is not concerned about how the icecream is made or the logistics of transporting it. They have tasted an icecream (Rafale) which they liked, so they want more of the same (MRFA) . So they want to taste the new icecream (Tejas Mark 2) and then take a call on whether they want more of it or not. This is what passes for Armed forces strategic thinking in the country!
No. They want another ice cream called MRFA.
To get that they don't want kulfi (Mk2) or rather reduce it.
Logically they would say we want more of Rafale.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

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

Post by ramana »

ks_sachin wrote:Thanks, Yensoy.
I see where you are going.
But I fear the problem is structural and systemic.
What you will find is another set of turf wars.
What you need is for Govt of the day to bring about reforms like to name just two;

1) CDS
2) Deeper linkage between India's strategic interests/defence policy and defence procurement policy.

But more than anything else get a bloody minister who is involved and hands-on can cross-question our senior military leadership...

That's what is being done and sadly it's one service that is the hurdle.
And more than a minister, a group of ministers is working on this.
Lets see.
ks_sachin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2906
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

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

Post by ks_sachin »

Ramanaji

You stated
Rafale is much more capable than the M2Ks is lost in the arguments.
That riled me till I read it again and realised it is M2K and MK2.

So now no cause for rilement!!

Plus also who is this group of ministers. If the head of the portfolio is ineffective how can the meddling by other ministers be effective. Don''t they have their own portfolios to manage or is Kadi Ninda actually managing some other portfolio and the actual def min is someone in the shadows?
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 »

For now this is what GOI can do (given all the constraint)
1. Fund Lca mk2 r&d and lsp fully and quickly, monitor and budget it out of PMO/MOd. If the funding for r&d and lsp is to come even partially from iaf, it will not be timely. A delay here opens room for foreign exports down the line. A 500 Carore investment here now has a potential to state 20,000 carore down the line.
2. Monitor staff requirement for lca mk1a, mk 2, Amca for signs of sabotage. Let have IN air wing or retired IAF personnel (the right kind of people) be a second group who Officially vets all of these changes (drdo and Hal and industry leader can be another group of people who keep an eye on this - from history Tata saved lca from Suresh Kalmadi)
3. Nothing gives confidence more than something physical - means that lca mk2 prototype should not delayed, roll it out early, fly when ready. If extra money is needed and more prototype needed to make process faster, let the fund flow. Same goes for amca, please roll it soon, even if flying cannot be sooner.
4. Lca mk1a only rolling from 2024 is bankim. The plane is ready or almost ready now. With private player fee of them can be rolled out in 2022 and 2023, we should go for it. Give IAF a taste of Lcamk1a. If it is a good plane (and it is), it will win sizable IAF personnel, making it harder for other IAf personnel to sabotage it.
5. I believe We buy requisite number of Rafale and close this mrfa circus. I don’t see which us plane other than f-35 is better than it, and with f-35 the issue of India giving up strategic autonomy still remains.
ks_sachin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2906
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

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

Post by ks_sachin »

Ramana sir it is not one service that is the hurdle.

This kind of attitude is across the board.

Acquisition and platform development are very personality driven.

Someone here asked why GSQRs can change - well, the problem is that every DG (Inf, Mech, Art, Armr) etc. wants to make his mark.

And this is not even at the AHQ level. Every Div Cdr / Corps CDR wants to make his mark. Question yourself as to how this can be brought about and what happens on the ground.

I was narrated an interesting anecdote about Gen Hanut Singh in this regard.
ks_sachin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2906
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

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

Post by ks_sachin »

fanne - can do vs will do.

Where is your money?
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 »

This money is not big, this is r&d money, in few thousand Carores across all 3/4 programs. It is not lakhs of carore like it will be for mfra.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

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

Post by ramana »

fanne no point in talking as it riles up folks.
It's all being done.
So let's move on.
ks_sachin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2906
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

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

Post by ks_sachin »

fanne I meant what would you bet on..
VishnuS
BRFite
Posts: 129
Joined: 19 May 2022 09:42

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

Post by VishnuS »

yensoy wrote:
Tanaji wrote: Indian Air National Guard under the IA, as I suggested earlier. Nothing like free market competition to make people and entities fall in line. IANG to be second line of defence (defence in numbers) in north/central India, and possibly even first line of defence over much of the Pak border. Maritime cover (Thanjavur) to be moved to IN. IA's mission should be to push into enemy territory only and yes for that they can have whatever gold plated platform they need.
Sir, I am sure you already know about the feud between IAF and IA about operating the helicopters...

IA firmly believes it needs it's independence while IAF believes anything that flies should be part of IAF. Except for feud between the forces, it hasn't done any good to LCH. $1B was spent on 6 Apache but no order for LCH. Neither IAF nor IA ordered LCHs
Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4218
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

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

Post by Prem Kumar »

ramana wrote:No. They want another ice cream called MRFA.
To get that they don't want kulfi (Mk2) or rather reduce it.
Logically they would say we want more of Rafale.
Ramana Ji: I think you are spot on. *Even if* the IAF wanted an MMRCA type bird, it's no-brainer that it has to be Rafale. So, the Chief's insistence on a competitive MRFA is bizarre. So, he wants to bring the US birds in (perhaps its his personal preference or there is a lobby at work).

The question is: why didn't the previous chiefs just ask for Rafales and be done with it?

Is there a tacit understanding down the chain of command on what bird they specifically want (which is non-Rafale and non-Tejas), which they are couching under the name of MRFA?
Post Reply