Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 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.
ashbhee
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 97
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 07:05

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby ashbhee » 04 Oct 2019 04:53

nachiket wrote: The primary job of the -29 even after upgrade will remain be air-superiority for which it is well-suited.


So why was it not used to take on F16s after Balakot ? Was it just because it was not deployed to forward bases at that time? I wonder how they would had fared if Abinandan or his colleagues were flying a Mig29 that that

Y I Patel
BRFite
Posts: 597
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby Y I Patel » 04 Oct 2019 05:04

^^
MiG-29s were previously based in Jamnagar and are now based in Adampur, two of the most important air bases for operating air defense fighters. Jamnagar protects refineries and the overland air approaches towards Mumbai. Adampur provides the same for industries in Punjab and air approaches to New Delhi.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7227
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby nachiket » 04 Oct 2019 05:21

ashbhee wrote:
nachiket wrote: The primary job of the -29 even after upgrade will remain be air-superiority for which it is well-suited.


So why was it not used to take on F16s after Balakot ? Was it just because it was not deployed to forward bases at that time? I wonder how they would had fared if Abinandan or his colleagues were flying a Mig29 that that

I can only guess why there were no Mig-29's on CAP on Feb 27. We have a long border to protect and perhaps they were patrolling other areas. Or maybe they were part of the rotation and it just happened that when the pakis attacked there were M2k's and Su-30's in the air.

As for Abhinandan, he belonged to 51 Squadron which is based in Srinagar. It makes perfect sense for a Mig-21 squadron to be based there considering the Mig-21's strengths (rapid scramble and intercept time) and weaknesses (very short range). It allowed the IAF to quickly bring extra assets into play when the attack was detected and surprise the pakis.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7227
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby nachiket » 04 Oct 2019 05:33

Vivek K wrote:But that is not the point I started out with - you are parrying because you don't want to answer -what additional capabilities does the Rafale offer over the MKI. Going by the report of the exchange with PAF, 2 MKIs handled a large number of F-16s. What if there had been 6-10 MKIs, locgically the MKIs would have then wiped the floor with the F-16s? Why then introduce another aircraft type? Why not do an MLU of the MKI to get the additional capability?

Because the MKI can be upgraded to offer additional capabilities, this investment in the Rafale is puzzling - unless there is a problem with the MKIs that is being hidden

The question of why the IAF does not want additional MKI's was discussed recently in another thread. I forget which one. Maybe the MKI thread. Long story short is that the MKI, while very capable also is expensive to operate and requires double the number of pilots as well. So the IAF might believe that the currently ordered numbers of 270 is a reasonable number of heavy fighters to operate and increasing that is not feasible.

Secondly, there are some technologies which are still not available on the MKI even if we did an MLU today. An AESA radar, sensor fusion, an internal jammer/EW system, the Meteor missile are examples. An MLU cannot fix the MKI's huge RCS either. Having smaller numbers of a new aircraft type like the Rafale which plugs these gaps is not a bad idea. Mirages were available in fewer numbers than other types during Kargil, but they proved their worth as we know and performed the role that no other aircraft (including our ostensible frontline strike aircraft the Jaguar) could reliably perform.

Nikhil T
BRFite
Posts: 1159
Joined: 09 Nov 2008 06:48
Location: RAW HQ, Lodhi Road

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby Nikhil T » 04 Oct 2019 06:03

Rakesh wrote:....

Again, respectfully saar, you deflected my earlier question about "why Brahmos is insufficient to target radar stations, a typical SEAD target" to talk about firing Brahmos from submarines, C17s, P-8Is etc. Just to recap what we're hopefully aligned on by now - Brahmos is cheaper than SCALP, it's more localized, can be deployed in greater numbers, and from cheaper platforms.

Rakesh wrote:I am surprised you would consider invading Chinese airspace as fantasy. IAF pilots consistently train for this. Why would that be a fantasy? How do you expect the IAF to defeat the PLAAF otherwise? The entire goal of the IAF is to take the fight to the enemy and not the other way around.

That they practice for it, doesn't mean that it should be our war strategy. If our strategy is, as your posts imply, to outspend and gain tech superiority over a neighbor that has 5X greater military budget, then yes it is a fantasy. Sending 27 Rafales against hundreds of waiting 4th gen planes backed by strong AD network will still result in a bad outcome for the Rafales. It is not a silver bullet as you seem to think. That's why I call this a fantasy scenario.

Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2325
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby Prem Kumar » 04 Oct 2019 10:32

Bangalore to Jaisalmer is 2000Km.

Don't know if Tejas carried drop tanks. But it did it without refueling. Then its combat radius must be in the ballpark of 1000Km.

When Gripen claims that its C/D/E versions have a 1300 Km combat radius, I'd assume a very similar number for Tejas. Same engine, similar class fighter. HAL/ADA must not give ammunition to the dalals by quoting crappy numbers like 500 or 800 Km.

sajaym
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 72
Joined: 04 Feb 2019 09:11

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby sajaym » 04 Oct 2019 11:42

nachiket wrote:It makes perfect sense for a Mig-21 squadron to be based there considering the Mig-21's strengths (rapid scramble and intercept time) and weaknesses (very short range). It allowed the IAF to quickly bring extra assets into play when the attack was detected and surprise the pakis.


True.

A little OT here.. Many years ago I spent many frustrating hours on Microsoft Flight Simulator trying to land a Mig-21 onto the runway in Srinagar airport. It was difficult to manouvre into the correct approach, with all the mountains around and the Mig-21 model I had was not programmed with a brake parachute. What I understood from that experience is that it is hard to move around in a fast plane in an area with mountains.

Now add to it the real world complexities of the vague boundaries and you realise that over & around Srinagar you need a small single engine fighter. So the Mig-21 was at the right place at the right time. And moving forward, I hope the next LCA Mk1 squadron is based in Srinagar for this exact same reason -- small, light, single engined. The rapid scramble feature of the Mig-21 is taken care of in the LCA with the 'Zoom-climb' mode anyways.

I personally hope that the No.18 squadron of the LCA is based in Srinagar as a tribute to Flying Officer Nirmal Jit Singh Sekhon (PVC) who was martyred in Srinagar while being based with the same squadron which was then operating a small, light, single-engined indigenous fighter. 8)

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18685
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby Karan M » 04 Oct 2019 11:47

nachiket wrote:I can only guess why there were no Mig-29's on CAP on Feb 27. We have a long border to protect and perhaps they were patrolling other areas. Or maybe they were part of the rotation and it just happened that when the pakis attacked there were M2k's and Su-30's in the air.


MiG-29s were rotated with Su-30 MKIs and Mirage 2000s. They were brought in thereafter even as the air battle was ending.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18685
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby Karan M » 04 Oct 2019 11:59

nachiket wrote:Secondly, there are some technologies which are still not available on the MKI even if we did an MLU today. An AESA radar, sensor fusion, an internal jammer/EW system, the Meteor missile are examples. An MLU cannot fix the MKI's huge RCS either.


A few points if I may. Will number them so that it reads easier.

You don't necessarily need an AESA on the Su-30 MKI. An Irbis style radar, provided it is sufficiently different from the Su-35s sold to PRC would be quite lethal. Reason being that not only would it offer many of the same capabilities, but its radar gimbal has huge scan limits. That combined with a long pickup, can be very very dangerous in BVR.
In fact, with this, even in the presence of jamming & its large RCS, a MKI would have long range pick-up ability and ability to cue long range BVRs. I would fully expect that with and without the MLU, the Su-30s and Rafales would act in a pack, with post MLU Su-30s acting as the long range eyes for the Rafales.

Second, sensor fusion is already there on the Su-35 and is being done for our Tejas Mk1A, has been implemented on CABS AEW&CS. Both we, and the Russians now have the gist of it. Moi had posted it on BRF, but its now in trash can and nowhere else on the net.

Big Fighter, Big Glass
Posted by Bill Sweetman at 6/20/2007 3:14 AM

Sukhoi's Su-35, to be unveiled in August at the MAKS air show in Moscow, is the biggest revision yet of the company's heavyweight fighter. On show at Paris is a demonstration simulator of the fighter's redesigned cockpit, dominated by two 15-inch diagonal LCDs - more glass area than any other fighter cockpit, including that of the JSF. There are no mechanical displays in the cockpit, and the pilot interacts with the displays using a cursor control device on the stick and soft-key pushbuttons surrounding the glass.

The two screens are each split into four sub-windows, which are normally managed automatically according to the mission plan. Primary flight instruments are carried on the left side of the right-hand screen, with the left-hand screen being the primary display for maps and targeting information - so that the pilot can operate the screen with his left hand with the right hand on the stick.

According to Sukhoi engineer Alexey Mukhin, the Su-35 has a sensor-fusion avionics system which assigns each target a single identity - Sukhoi calls it a "passport" - and indicates which sensor or sensors have tracked it. The fighter also has an intra-flight datalink that can support four groups of four fighters simultaneously and share targeting information between them.

The Su-35 introduces integrated flight and propulsion control using three-dimensional thrust vectoring, providing full-envelope carefree handling with any combination of loads. It has electronic throttle controls and the system also manages the fuel load. One novel feature: when the pilot extends the refuelling probe, the aircraft automatically switches to a more stable flight control mode.

Missing from the new fighter is the big dorsal speedbrake of previous versions. Different combinations of control surface movements are used for deceleration, and the jet can make a 60-degree descent at a stabilized speed. Removing the speedbrake (plus some other changes) bumps the fighter's already impressive internal fuel capacity from 22,000 pounds to 25,300 pounds. The Su-35 should be ready for delivery in 2010.



Third, you don't need an internal EW system when the Su30 has so many pylons. The only real issue with the SAP-518s is their size & the fact they have interface issues with our "desi" RWRs. If this is resolved and ideally with lighter jammers, they would more than hold their own. These automatically compensate for the MKIs large RCS. Note, the Israelis used the EL/L-8222 SPJ to degrade OpFor FCRs to have their F-15s radar & WCS retain an edge. The SAP-518s are far more powerful. In fact, it is the reason why the Russians chose to trade off maneuverability (in high payload strike configs) with putting these huge pods. They are far more powerful than most common systems. If you have the long range pick-up and fire first capability with RVV-BD, you really dont need to worry.

Fourth, the Su-30/35 don't have Meteor, but they do have RVV-BD. This is a follow on to the K-37, the Russians Phoenix equivalent, and capable of handling targets maneuvering up to 8G. While also advertised for large sized, non maneuvering targets like the Phoenix, its worthwhile remarking that the Phoenix was used very effectively against fighters in the Iran Iraq conflict and decimated the Iraqi fleet before they got new French fighters and started changing their tactics heavily.

I think the biggest issue is not of "capability" but the fact that integrating all the above, plus new alternators, engines, testing etc on our Su-30s would take time. Easily 3-4 years post the contract being signed. In contrast, the Rafale is ready today.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18685
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby Karan M » 04 Oct 2019 12:12

nachiket wrote:Mig-29 is a suboptimal strike platform even after UPG. The upgrade did not contain Litening pod integration for example. Nor is the SPICE-2000/1000 integrated with it. The M2k was the right aircraft to be used. The primary job of the -29 even after upgrade will remain be air-superiority for which it is well-suited.


We could likely add them on our own if a 1553 DB has been added and likely that's the plan.
Am not sure the MiG-29 will be ASF only post upgrade. We have added Kh-29L/T, Kh-31A/P, KAB-500 Kr, Kh-35 on the upgrades. Similarly, we will be adding other items like LGBs, Astra, DRDO munitions on our own without informing or asking permission from the Russians.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7874
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby Rakesh » 04 Oct 2019 22:06

https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/1180067528204120064 ---> Let me make this prediction. I see more Tejas Mk1As beyond the 83 currently projected joining the Air Force in the 2020s. Perhaps, it may even end up being called Mk1B or C.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4622
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby Kartik » 04 Oct 2019 22:40

Was this missed out by others? A clear endorsement of the Tejas Mk1's performance as being better than the Mirage-2000. Performance, not just user interface, cockpit design or avionics.

The IAF's opinion of the Tejas is undergoing a transformation as more and more of its pilots and officers are exposed to the type's capabilities.

link


The IAF currently has 132 operational MiG-21s, across seven squadrons. Senior test pilots and HAL officials praised LCA Tejas as being the “iPhone” of fighter aircraft during Defence Minister Rajnath Singh’s visit to the Tejas testing centre in Bengaluru on Thursday. “It is a pilot’s aircraft. You can actually describe it as the “iPhone,” said a senior test pilot, who described the aircraft’s performance as being better than that of the Mirage 2000.


The allusion to the iPhone is to emphasize its ease of use and the ease with which a new pilot user can become familiar with the type. And also the fact that adding new capabilities to it is significantly easier because of its avionics architecture and because the entire code is in our hands.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7874
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby Rakesh » 04 Oct 2019 22:44

The news article was posted on the previous page.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4622
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby Kartik » 04 Oct 2019 23:10

Indian military aviation news with Shiv Aroor

While he's gotten a few things wrong in his interview, note Shiv Aroor's impression of the Tejas based on his interviews with Tejas pilots and his own flight on board the aircraft.

- Better maintainability than the IAF anticipated earlier
- Nimble jet
- Very capable in its class
- "Excellent jet"..this view couldn't have been shaped by anything else than by interaction with the No.45 pilots and engineers. He never said this about the Tejas earlier.
- It is now the delivery timelines that is the key. The faster the better.



What is Tejas’ status?

“As you probably know, the Tejas began squadron service a few years ago, and the Flying Daggers squadron that flies it is breaking the jets in quite gamely. For all the anticipation and bad blood over years of delays, the squadron has been very pleasantly surprised with the jet. I spent some time with the squadron pilots when I did a back-seat sortie in a Tejas in February. HAL is currently trying to ramp up production to meet the initial order of 40 on the Mk.1. An order for 83 the improved Mk.1A is in the wings, though an actual specimen will likely only begin being tested next year.”

What still needs fixing?
“The Tejas is a nimble, very capable little jet in its class. The thrust, if you will, of the improved Mk.1A will be vastly better (as will) squadron-level maintainability. Even though the baseline Tejas has proven to be far more serviceable than the IAF suspected, the Mk.1A fully addresses the niggles. Several requirements the IAF needs on the Mk.1A have begun being tested. The Mk.1A will be mid-air refuellable, sport an updated internal Radar Warning Receiver (RWR), an external Self Protection Jammer (SPJ) pod and an AESA radar. The IAF has also stipulated that the Tejas Mk.1A needs to be able to fire different types of BVR and close combat air to air missiles. The Tejas has so far fired Vympel R-73 CCMs and a Derby BVR missile. It’ll need to prove itself using the R-77, Python-5 and DRDO Astra too.”

As it stand, is it any good?
“It’s an excellent jet. Apart from the journey to where it is now, I’d believe the men operating it day and night at the squadron in Sulur, and who’ve been tamely taking them abroad and keeping them almost 100% serviceable away from base. The key now is for larger numbers to be inducted faster. HAL has to ramp its production rate up to at least 18-20 a year.”

...

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36394
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby SaiK » 04 Oct 2019 23:20

IAF strongly pitches for desi fighters, from Tejas to 5 generation jets
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/ind ... 445334.cms

IAF has managed to reduce the price of each Tejas Mark-IA jet to Rs 309 crore in hard-nosed negotiations with HAL, which had earlier held that the overall deal with infrastructure and maintenance would cost Rs 49,797 crore.

There is, of course, also the project to build 114 new fighter jets for over $20 billion (Rs 1.4 lakh crore) under the “strategic partnership” policy in a joint venture between a selected foreign aviation major and its Indian partner.
:oops:
“After these 83, we hope to order 200 Tejas Mark-II,” said ACM Bhadauria.
8)

Ganesh_S
BRFite
Posts: 192
Joined: 09 Mar 2010 06:40
Location: united kingdom

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby Ganesh_S » 04 Oct 2019 23:34

Ot. One thing we fail to consider while making a case against additional rafale procirement is future peace time attrition rates over the next couple of decades.

Both rafale as well as tejas is a reality (albeit with different level of capabilities) and we should move on with the procurement of both in adequate numbers. Don't see why we need an argument on this front.

Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2325
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby Prem Kumar » 05 Oct 2019 00:19

Based on the interview, it looked like the 36 additional Rafales is sought to be channeled towards the purchase of 114 MMRCA fighters ... pssst ....Gripen E. Methinks that the playing-up of the indigenous capability, while certainly honest & welcome, is to also squeeze in budget for MMRCA.

Hope the IAF is told, sooner rather than late, that they got to put their eggs in the MKI, Rafale, Tejas basket
Last edited by Prem Kumar on 05 Oct 2019 00:24, edited 1 time in total.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7227
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby nachiket » 05 Oct 2019 00:22

Prem Kumar wrote:Hope the IAF is told, sooner rather than late, that they got to put their eggs in the MKI, Rafale, Tejas basket

I am sure the IAF would like nothing more than getting more Rafales. I am sure this 10000 step multi-vendor procurement is more woolly headed nonsense from MoD, just like the original MMRCA disaster. This too will end up having the same fate 10 years down the line. I don't think the IAF is fascinated by having the evaluate the same set of aircraft again and again.

Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2325
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby Prem Kumar » 05 Oct 2019 00:34

If initial reports are to be believed, MMRCA 2.0's contenders are the same as the previous ones, plus F-21 and SU-35.

Same weirdness as before: there are 2 single engine contenders and the rest are twin engined.

This has got to be a joke! If Rajnath Singh permits this crap under his watch, shame on him.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7874
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby Rakesh » 05 Oct 2019 00:47

Prem Kumar: Read the MMRCA thread :) You will get it.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7874
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby Rakesh » 05 Oct 2019 01:53

Vivek K wrote:- a)when will India be able to trust and use its own weapons?

Answer to your question ---> viewtopic.php?f=3&t=7634&p=2385544#p2385544

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4336
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby srai » 05 Oct 2019 04:41

There isn’t enough money for 114 MMRCA and 200 MWF. India will need to fork out over $40 billion for both between 2025 and 2035. It’s one or the other.

SaiK wrote:IAF strongly pitches for desi fighters, from Tejas to 5 generation jets
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/ind ... 445334.cms

IAF has managed to reduce the price of each Tejas Mark-IA jet to Rs 309 crore in hard-nosed negotiations with HAL, which had earlier held that the overall deal with infrastructure and maintenance would cost Rs 49,797 crore.

There is, of course, also the project to build 114 new fighter jets for over $20 billion (Rs 1.4 lakh crore) under the “strategic partnership” policy in a joint venture between a selected foreign aviation major and its Indian partner.
:oops:
“After these 83, we hope to order 200 Tejas Mark-II,” said ACM Bhadauria.
8)

rajsunder
BRFite
Posts: 597
Joined: 01 Jul 2006 02:38
Location: MASA Land

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby rajsunder » 05 Oct 2019 06:11

srai wrote:There isn’t enough money for 114 MMRCA and 200 MWF. India will need to fork out over $40 billion for both between 2025 and 2035. It’s one or the other.

SaiK wrote:IAF strongly pitches for desi fighters, from Tejas to 5 generation jets
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/ind ... 445334.cms

IAF has managed to reduce the price of each Tejas Mark-IA jet to Rs 309 crore in hard-nosed negotiations with HAL, which had earlier held that the overall deal with infrastructure and maintenance would cost Rs 49,797 crore.

:oops:
8)

Remember that it is about $4 billion per year and also do remember that between 2025 and 2035 our defence budget might grow 3 to 5 times the present defence budget.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4336
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby srai » 05 Oct 2019 07:57

^^^
Let’s see how your optimism goes 8)

Past experience hasn’t been that kind.

Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4225
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby Manish_Sharma » 05 Oct 2019 09:25

ChampakBhumia e Kashmir writes:

"TEJAS IS iPhone OF FIGHTER" ~Test Pilots.
@rajnathsingh
@DefenceMinIndia
Please ORDER 360 Tejas Mk1, 450 Tejas Mk1A & 720 Tejas Mk.2 + 99 Tejas TRAINERS. Change Bharat forever _/\_ you've already made history by FLYING IN TEJAS. With big numbers industry has incentives 2 indiginise


https://twitter.com/ChampakbhumiaE/stat ... 47937?s=20

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3864
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby Cain Marko » 05 Oct 2019 10:14

Rakesh wrote:https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/1180067528204120064 ---> Let me make this prediction. I see more Tejas Mk1As beyond the 83 currently projected joining the Air Force in the 2020s. Perhaps, it may even end up being called Mk1B or C.

Yes. The noises are in the right direction. Good willing this will be procured in 100s

Atmavik
BRFite
Posts: 664
Joined: 24 Aug 2016 04:43

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby Atmavik » 05 Oct 2019 11:54

Cain Marko wrote:
Rakesh wrote:https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/1180067528204120064 ---> Let me make this prediction. I see more Tejas Mk1As beyond the 83 currently projected joining the Air Force in the 2020s. Perhaps, it may even end up being called Mk1B or C.

Yes. The noises are in the right direction. Good willing this will be procured in 100s


we need to replace the jags now that the re engine project is scrapped. LCA MK1A may not be ideal replacement but it can be done.

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11331
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby Aditya_V » 05 Oct 2019 12:32

Quite frankly with advent of manpads, improvement in range of fighters, reliable CMs. There is no real requirement for underpowered low level flying strike aircraft.Jags never had the Mig 27/Su25/A 10 capability. But given our numbers scenario these will be useful when the balloon goes up and much better than combat hawk etc.. As each aircraft will have a limit to the number of sorties it can do per day. As long it has other type of aircraft to give fighter cover it can free up many aircraft for strike missions. Hopefully we should equip MK1A and I think Su 30 has the capability for maritime strike to replace the 8-10 Jaguar IM's which use EL 2032/Harpoon II for these at present. At least the Navy can induct MK1/1A for shore based maritime strikes

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4336
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby srai » 05 Oct 2019 16:22

^^^
You can’t put MiG-27 in the same league as Su-25 or A-10. Just because MiG-27 had some bolt on armor to the side of the cockpit doesn’t make it as survivable as Su-25 and A-10 which were designed from ground up to soak up heavy punishment.

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11331
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby Aditya_V » 05 Oct 2019 17:00

True but Jaguar are not even as good as Mig 27 in CAS role , DPSA role in early 80' s was ok but today is obsolete. It's only IAF lack of sufficiently good fighters is making it keep the Jaguar.

fanne
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3102
Joined: 11 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby fanne » 05 Oct 2019 17:07

We sorely lack a plane that can go in dirty, take heavy punishment and survive and kick the enemy. There could be many sceneries like that in actual war. None of the high flying, super expensive, limited number planes can do that.
As for jags replacement, at least the IM can be replaced by at least 10 times more effective su30mki. Some more can take up early model jags replacement. Buy another 50 (or by lca- not sure how a light fighter would respond to battle field damages)

SidSoma
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 61
Joined: 16 Feb 2018 15:09

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby SidSoma » 05 Oct 2019 22:43

If not already posted

https://idrw.org/srinagar-airbase-to-get-lca-tejas-squadron-in-2022/

SP-21 which is Final operational clearance (FOC) configuration LCA-Tejas Mk1 aircraft under development at HAL facility in Bangalore will have its first flight in next two months


No. 45 Squadron (Flying Daggers) which operates 16 IOC-II LCA-Tejas Mk1 aircraft moves to forward air force base in Rajasthan near Pakistan border by early 2021


No. 18 Squadron (Flying Bullets) will initially be based in Sulur Air Force Station after its formation post-March 2020 with four aircraft and will move to Srinagar AFS by mid or end of 2022 when all 16 aircraft are handed over to them


Placement of two squadrons both closer to the Pakistani border shows immense trust in the combat capabilities of the indigenously developed LCA-Tejas Mk1

Y I Patel
BRFite
Posts: 597
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby Y I Patel » 05 Oct 2019 23:17

^^
This is the strongest confirmation so far on how IAF views the worth of Tejas. Words are easy but entrusting the defense of vital sectors to Tejas sends a message no amount of press releases can

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4336
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby srai » 06 Oct 2019 03:26

When are the IOC-II getting upgraded to FOC?

sajaym
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 72
Joined: 04 Feb 2019 09:11

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby sajaym » 06 Oct 2019 03:34

SidSoma wrote:
No. 45 Squadron (Flying Daggers) which operates 16 IOC-II LCA-Tejas Mk1 aircraft moves to forward air force base in Rajasthan near Pakistan border by early 2021


No. 18 Squadron (Flying Bullets) will initially be based in Sulur Air Force Station after its formation post-March 2020 with four aircraft and will move to Srinagar AFS by mid or end of 2022 when all 16 aircraft are handed over to them


Awesome news!

The next important deployments should be one Tejas squadron alongside each of the Rafale squadrons. There could be 3 benefits of such an arrangement:

1. Having a comparatively low cost indigenous platform like the Tejas alongside the Rafale squadron can ensure that the Rafale pilots keep up their flying skills ( I forget the exact term) on the Tejas instead of eating up valuable frame life of the Rafale.
2. The line pilots of the Rafale who fly the Tejas can suggest improvements in the Tejas based on their experience in the Rafale. This will help in regular improvements in the Tejas which can also flow to the other desi projects like MWF, AMCA.
3. Mission profile wise also, the Tejas and Rafale could be operated in a Wild Weasel type technique wherein the Tejas (either piloted or pilotless) is sent in first to assess the battle space ahead of the Rafale before the Rafale enters the battle. This would again help to preserve the Rafales from needless risk and damage.

Kakkaji
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3246
Joined: 23 Oct 2002 11:31

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby Kakkaji » 06 Oct 2019 05:08

Any news on adding SPJ to the Mk1 (20 IOC and the 20 FOC) aircraft.

IMHO if the 2 squadrons of Mk1 are deployed without SPJ, they will be vulnerable in battle.

Mort Walker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7920
Joined: 31 May 2004 11:31
Location: The rings around Uranus.

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby Mort Walker » 06 Oct 2019 07:46

Dileep wrote:
Mort Walker wrote:
GaN should not have this problem unless they operate it at saturation.


Actually, the Power Added Efficiency of GaN is not really better than that of GaAs. The benefit of GaN is in higher power density. You still waste power as heat, and you still need to remove it.


Just saw this post after some time. Sorry for the late reply. I understand the power density issues. The advantage of GaAs is lower noise.

The problem here is having heat sinks, or space for heat dissipation, which adds weight to the GaAs T/R modules? Is this correct? Assuming 10W output power at the 1-dB compression point, why not use a GaN design unless noise is a concern that would impact receiver sensitivity? Newer GaN power amplifier devices are available specifically for radar and EW and would be less of a load on the power supply. I would think the limiting factor is finding a 10W, or whatever power rating, GaN device performing comparably to a GaAs device.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4336
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby srai » 06 Oct 2019 12:12

Kakkaji wrote:Any news on adding SPJ to the Mk1 (20 IOC and the 20 FOC) aircraft.

IMHO if the 2 squadrons of Mk1 are deployed without SPJ, they will be vulnerable in battle.


Given that these types of research are taking place (for Mk1A), from aerodynamics it would also be applicable to the LCA Mk1s. So the question would be how much extra internal integration effort and qualification are required between Mk1A and Mk1?

I don’t think it would be that much more given Mk1A is Mk1 plus AESA Radar and some internal maintenance friendly rearrangement. One of the main challenge with EW/Jammer is how it impacts other electronics in the aircraft. The computers, avionics, EW, etc fit difference are not all that much between Mk1A and Mk1. Expect SPJ in Mk1 to be available around the same time as Mk1A ... within a year or two of each other.

Image

darshhan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2505
Joined: 12 Dec 2008 11:52

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby darshhan » 06 Oct 2019 20:37

Vivek K wrote:......
But that is not the point I started out with - you are parrying because you don't want to answer -what additional capabilities does the Rafale offer over the MKI. Going by the report of the exchange with PAF, 2 MKIs handled a large number of F-16s. What if there had been 6-10 MKIs, locgically the MKIs would have then wiped the floor with the F-16s? Why then introduce another aircraft type? Why not do an MLU of the MKI to get the additional capability?

Because the MKI can be upgraded to offer additional capabilities, this investment in the Rafale is puzzling - unless there is a problem with the MKIs that is being hidden


RCS for one. And it is not even being hidden. Everyone knows it. Su 30 MKI might be a lot of things but if you want to launch a sneaky attack, it is not the right tool for the job.

Mort Walker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7920
Joined: 31 May 2004 11:31
Location: The rings around Uranus.

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Postby Mort Walker » 06 Oct 2019 20:47

^^^In which case the right tool would be the Tejas Mk. II. The Rafale won’t be in any significant numbers until 2022, but the same amount of money or less on the Tejas development would not only bring numbers, but the production capacity up to make at least 25-30 Tejas Mk. II per year.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], sum and 54 guests