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.
Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4907
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

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

Postby Kartik » 29 Jan 2020 01:38

JTull wrote:
ashishvikas wrote:Columbians have been checking on the Tejas quite intently.

https://twitter.com/hvtiaf/status/12218 ... 10080?s=19


Do you really believe Colombians will be able to buy a fighter with American engines?


Colombian Kfirs have even gone to Red Flag to exercise with the USAF. I think you're confusing them with Venezuela.

Dileep
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5792
Joined: 04 Apr 2005 08:17
Location: Dera Mahab Ali धरा महाबलिस्याः درا مهاب الي

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

Postby Dileep » 29 Jan 2020 07:25

JTull wrote:IR/JayS and Rakesh bhai, can you please add a summary of Mk1A differences to the 1st post. I always wonder whether there's an engine upgrade or not.

1. The airframe remains the same. AFAIK, the flight system will be the same too. Maybe an upgraded computer. That's it.
2. New Radar
3. New mission computer and display avionics. The MFDs are same size. The equipment layout might change a bit.
4. New HUD in all likelyhood.
5. Total re-layout of the innards. Much more orderly and interchangeability/maintenance friendly. LRUs move. Cable loom organized. Piping is order of magnitude better.

The software always changes, even for Mk1. So, that goes unsaid.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7310
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

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

Postby nachiket » 29 Jan 2020 07:35

Did they finalize on the 2052 for the radar Dileep saar?

Dileep
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5792
Joined: 04 Apr 2005 08:17
Location: Dera Mahab Ali धरा महाबलिस्याः درا مهاب الي

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

Postby Dileep » 29 Jan 2020 08:28

Not sure if they signed the nuptial, but definitely living together :twisted:

Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2590
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

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

Postby Cybaru » 29 Jan 2020 10:39

Dileep wrote:Not sure if they signed the nuptial, but definitely living together :twisted:


:rotfl: That's hilarious!!

Roop
BRFite
Posts: 275
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

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

Postby Roop » 29 Jan 2020 12:36

Isn't it also true that the Mk1A will be plumbed/equipped for in-flight refueling, whereas the Mk1 is not?

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11561
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

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

Postby Aditya_V » 29 Jan 2020 13:13

I think Mk1 FOC aircraft have AAR

mody
BRFite
Posts: 588
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Mumbai, India

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

Postby mody » 29 Jan 2020 15:06

Any idea about possible reduction in weight of the MK1A over the MK1-FOC? HAL had made claims of possible weight reduction of upto 800 Kgs, when they had pitched the MK1A concept. 800Kgs is obviously a pipe dream. However even 100-300Kgs reduction in the empty weight, will be great.

fanne
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3263
Joined: 11 Feb 1999 12:31

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

Postby fanne » 29 Jan 2020 18:05

I will take shri @hvtiaf input that HAL is going full speed with LCAMK1A (even though, if you rely on public info, it would seam that it is not so - no order for 83 mk1a, no news on 2052 on any air frame etc etc).
HAL took it's own initiative and developed 15 LCH, apparently (not sure about correctness of info), it is lying at HAL and has not been accepted by IAF. Similarly it looks like 2 IOC LCA is at HAL and not inducted by IAF (the order was for 16 IOC, how did HAL produce 18?, or are the 2 part of 16 and they have some teething issue? The first aircraft from the first line had some issues).
There is an element of risk (all based on public info). I would not be surprised if info flow has dried up (which is the right thing to do) and we all are just speculating. At least from political level, this govt will be pushing the hardest to have max LCA in IAF. Of course Modi ji cannot be the worker, manager, technician, test pilot, etc., he would be doing his max by pushing it from executive level. But all the other pieces have to work, and it is still the old leaky system, with some break India group trying all their trick to fail it so that some xxx planes can be imported and LCA aborts.

Zynda
BRFite
Posts: 1734
Joined: 07 Jan 2006 00:37
Location: J4

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

Postby Zynda » 29 Jan 2020 18:47

I think most of the weight savings in Mk.1A will be in secondary structures like E-Bay racks redesign and/or elimination of a few...probably savings from better conduit & looming design (from support clips & such) as well as probably newer & lighter LRUs. Provided there is no weight creep, around 200-250 Kgs should be realistic. Certainly no primary structures will be touched.

Per one chaiwallah's cousin, our indigenous actuators cost around 40% of what imported ones from Moog costs. And product improvement is continuing...
Last edited by Zynda on 29 Jan 2020 19:34, edited 1 time in total.

Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2590
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

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

Postby Cybaru » 29 Jan 2020 19:10

https://twitter.com/hvtiaf/status/1222487233002790912?s=21

Some Experts says that it's 59 Minutes where as Saab Grippen Has 3 Hour endurance time and F16 Has 4 Hours...
Is it true


Hvtiaf says this about mk1 imagine mk2

No no! Endurance is slightly lesser than Gripen-E. Not the figures you've quoted.

There are no other experts. All are working here with us, in Bangalore. Don't trust hearsay
.

Raghunathgb
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 93
Joined: 23 Apr 2019 18:16

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

Postby Raghunathgb » 29 Jan 2020 20:08

Zynda wrote:
Per one chaiwallah's cousin, our indigenous actuators cost around 40% of what imported ones from Moog costs. And product improvement is continuing...


Which Indian company is entrusted to manufacture actuator ? Hoping they go on to make it big and enter global stage in some years.

pushkar.bhat
BRFite
Posts: 291
Joined: 29 Mar 2008 19:27
Location: prêt à monter dans le Arihant
Contact:

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

Postby pushkar.bhat » 29 Jan 2020 20:10

Which Indian company is entrusted to manufacture actuator ? Hoping they go on to make it big and enter global stage in some years.


No need to expose the name right now. First we need to get them the Nazar ka tika and the Kala thread. :)

fanne
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3263
Joined: 11 Feb 1999 12:31

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

Postby fanne » 29 Jan 2020 20:21

If range is not an issue, then nlca should be considered

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2871
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

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

Postby nam » 29 Jan 2020 20:56

Raghunathgb wrote:
Zynda wrote:
Per one chaiwallah's cousin, our indigenous actuators cost around 40% of what imported ones from Moog costs. And product improvement is continuing...


Which Indian company is entrusted to manufacture actuator ? Hoping they go on to make it big and enter global stage in some years.


Godrej.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7310
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

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

Postby nachiket » 30 Jan 2020 00:15

Dileep wrote:Not sure if they signed the nuptial, but definitely living together :twisted:

Thank you :rotfl:

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4907
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

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

Postby Kartik » 30 Jan 2020 00:45

nachiket wrote:Did they finalize on the 2052 for the radar Dileep saar?


Confirmed by Grp Cpt HV Thakur that they did.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4907
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

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

Postby Kartik » 30 Jan 2020 00:47

Dileep wrote:Not sure if they signed the nuptial, but definitely living together :twisted:


:lol:

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4907
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

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

Postby Kartik » 30 Jan 2020 00:48

Roop wrote:Isn't it also true that the Mk1A will be plumbed/equipped for in-flight refueling, whereas the Mk1 is not?

All the Tejas Mk1 FOC aircraft are coming with AAR probe and the plumbing. All the Tejas MK1 IOC jets will be upgraded to the same standard when they go in for MLU.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4907
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

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

Postby Kartik » 30 Jan 2020 00:52

mody wrote:Any idea about possible reduction in weight of the MK1A over the MK1-FOC? HAL had made claims of possible weight reduction of upto 800 Kgs, when they had pitched the MK1A concept. 800Kgs is obviously a pipe dream. However even 100-300Kgs reduction in the empty weight, will be great.

Source for your claim that HAL made such claims? I have not yet seen a single authoritative article that claims such weight reductions.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3689
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

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

Postby kit » 30 Jan 2020 03:56

Kartik wrote:
JTull wrote:
Do you really believe Colombians will be able to buy a fighter with American engines?


Colombian Kfirs have even gone to Red Flag to exercise with the USAF. I think you're confusing them with Venezuela.


Does HAL have the production capacity to generate export sales ? ., guess its a chicken and egg question !

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4907
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

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

Postby Kartik » 30 Jan 2020 04:14

kit wrote:
Kartik wrote:
Colombian Kfirs have even gone to Red Flag to exercise with the USAF. I think you're confusing them with Venezuela.


Does HAL have the production capacity to generate export sales ? ., guess its a chicken and egg question !


That's a secondary question. Orders dictate the assembly line's production rate, not the other way around. First let them get an export order. I'm sure with private suppliers involved, HAL could scale up the rate. So much will depend on the customer's requirements too- what numbers do they want, starting when and what is the date by when they want all delivered, etc. This may just be preliminary interest and isn't really a problem to worry about for now. IAF is the customer for now and their needs need to be met.

fanne
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3263
Joined: 11 Feb 1999 12:31

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

Postby fanne » 30 Jan 2020 05:32

will we export the same version as IAF? Or will there be an export version, that if compromised, will not compromise IAF's LCA

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2597
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

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

Postby abhik » 30 Jan 2020 10:04

IMO partnering with Isreal might make exports viable, they already have a good foot hold on the market, Mk1A on any day would be better platform than decades old mirage airframes.

Avinandan
BRFite
Posts: 212
Joined: 12 Jun 2005 12:29
Location: Pune

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

Postby Avinandan » 30 Jan 2020 14:09

abhik wrote:IMO partnering with Isreal might make exports viable, they already have a good foot hold on the market, Mk1A on any day would be better platform than decades old mirage airframes.

Israel is already bidding for Kfir NG, i guess they won't oblige.
On another note, Colombia is already evaluating Gripen since June 2019. So it is not an easy task.

mody
BRFite
Posts: 588
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Mumbai, India

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

Postby mody » 30 Jan 2020 14:40

Kartik wrote:
mody wrote:Any idea about possible reduction in weight of the MK1A over the MK1-FOC? HAL had made claims of possible weight reduction of upto 800 Kgs, when they had pitched the MK1A concept. 800Kgs is obviously a pipe dream. However even 100-300Kgs reduction in the empty weight, will be great.

Source for your claim that HAL made such claims? I have not yet seen a single authoritative article that claims such weight reductions.


Here is link from same thread from 2016. The proposed 800 Kg weight reduction is being discussed. This was in the original HAL proposal, when they pitched the MK1A concept. They had claimed that a weight reduction of upto 800 Kgs might be possible.

viewtopic.php?t=7112&start=680

maitya
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 482
Joined: 02 Feb 2001 12:31

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

Postby maitya » 30 Jan 2020 16:23

mody wrote:
Kartik wrote:Source for your claim that HAL made such claims? I have not yet seen a single authoritative article that claims such weight reductions.


Here is link from same thread from 2016. The proposed 800 Kg weight reduction is being discussed. This was in the original HAL proposal, when they pitched the MK1A concept. They had claimed that a weight reduction of upto 800 Kgs might be possible.

viewtopic.php?t=7112&start=680

Yep this was discussed in great detail in 2016(?) or thereabouts ... but without any direct links etc.

However here are some of them - see how wildly the numbers vary from each other:
In Avitioan defence Universe
In addition to the LCA mK1 the additions in Tejas MK I-A are the AESA Radar co-developed with Israel’s ELTA corp, a reduced weight by 1000 kg from its initial weight of 6500 kg, made maintenance friendly by re-configuring some of its LRUs and proper distribution of the dead weight in the aircraft, adding an In-flight refueling capability and an integrated electro-optic Electronic Warfare (EW) sensor.


In Indiastrategic
The new LCA-MkI-P variant with the EW Package will also add some 50 kilos of more weight, but then, Mr Raju explained, the capability of the aircraft increases significantly, offsetting the disadvantage of a smaller engine.

The current LCA-MkI version uses 210 kilos with ballast in the nose to stabilize the aircraft. This will be removed, and the AESA and EW suite weighing about 250 kilos will be added. The net weight gain will be of about 50 kilos.


In Defensenews
HAL has also promised to reduce the weight of the LCA-Mark-1A so that the General Electric F404 engine can power the upgraded LCA-Mark-1A, the official said.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4907
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

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

Postby Kartik » 30 Jan 2020 23:20

mody wrote:
Kartik wrote:Source for your claim that HAL made such claims? I have not yet seen a single authoritative article that claims such weight reductions.


Here is link from same thread from 2016. The proposed 800 Kg weight reduction is being discussed. This was in the original HAL proposal, when they pitched the MK1A concept. They had claimed that a weight reduction of upto 800 Kgs might be possible.

viewtopic.php?t=7112&start=680


Grp Cpt HV Thakur confirmed that there'll be some minor reduction of weight thanks to removal of ballast with the new AESA radar coming in. But nothing like 800 kg of weight reduction. Some refinements being planned, but we can finally put this whole major weight reduction myth to bed. It's not true.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4907
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

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

Postby Kartik » 30 Jan 2020 23:43

Another very interesting thing that Grp Cpt HV Thakur confirmed on Twitter- the Tejas Mk1 carries 8 hours worth of Liquid Oxygen in tanks onboard. That is what will define the endurance or the amount of time that a Tejas Mk1 can stay flying.

So, with Air to Air refueling becoming possible with FOC jets, a Tejas Mk1 could tank up multiple times and fly non-stop without having to return to base, for 6-7 hours!

agupta
BRFite
Posts: 265
Joined: 13 Oct 1999 11:31

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

Postby agupta » 30 Jan 2020 23:59

Kartik wrote:
mody wrote:
Here is link from same thread from 2016. The proposed 800 Kg weight reduction is being discussed. This was in the original HAL proposal, when they pitched the MK1A concept. They had claimed that a weight reduction of upto 800 Kgs might be possible.

viewtopic.php?t=7112&start=680


Grp Cpt HV Thakur confirmed that there'll be some minor reduction of weight thanks to removal of ballast with the new AESA radar coming in. But nothing like 800 kg of weight reduction. Some refinements being planned, but we can finally put this whole major weight reduction myth to bed. It's not true.


Well put, Kartik

The distinction between goals/proposals/discussions/possibilities vs. ACHIEVED RESULTS often gets lost here in BRF - in the absence of concrete data and open-ness from the Programs.

Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2197
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

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

Postby Vivek K » 31 Jan 2020 00:06

Do we know the amount of weight reduction (if any) due to any remaining sensors carried on-board for structural health monitoring - that will not be a part of the IOC MK1 normal pacakge? What would be the weight reduction with the 2052/Uttam in place of the current plug?

Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2590
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

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

Postby Cybaru » 31 Jan 2020 00:07

Vivek, I think there isn't much from the twitter chatter.

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2871
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

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

Postby nam » 31 Jan 2020 01:11

fanne wrote:will we export the same version as IAF? Or will there be an export version, that if compromised, will not compromise IAF's LCA


More than tech compromises, we should be more worried about the product support mess that HAL will invariably create.

We all know what happened with Ecuador. We can live with not selling LCA, than recreate Ecuador.

If we sell LCA, I would prefer IAF provide the spares and product support from it's stock and base workshop. It would be horrible to watch a Columbian LCA crash, because the jokers at HAL did not bother to send the spares on time.

fanne
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3263
Joined: 11 Feb 1999 12:31

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

Postby fanne » 31 Jan 2020 03:03

product support is a different problem, that has to be tackled, but LCA secrets remaining secrets should be higher priority. We should create a different version (same engine and plane lay out, but electronics and 'other' things should be different, and even if compromised, should not effect IAF LCA one bit.

Vamsee
BRFite
Posts: 555
Joined: 16 Mar 2001 12:31

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

Postby Vamsee » 31 Jan 2020 04:07

January is almost finished & we are still waiting for the first flight of Mark1 FOC :(

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4907
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

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

Postby Kartik » 31 Jan 2020 04:13

Series of tweets by Grp Cpt HV Thakur on the Tejas Mk1 and Mk1A.

Blasts the myths that have been propagated about the range and endurance of the type. Both endurance and payload as good as that of a Jaguar. Which implies that it can take over the Jaguar's roles as well.

Twitter link

Endurance is same as Jaguar. Which is quite good.



Twitter link

8 hours of oxygen is there. Su-30 has done 10 hour sorties with 2 pilots on regular oxygen.



Twitter link
Both range & endurance get enhanced with in-flight refueling. The comparison made is between unrefueled aircraft.

OBOGS is planned on Mk-2 (MWF)


Twitter link
On deck (for Naval version) & in forward areas (for AF version), OBOGS is required. Liquid Oxygen & Cylinders etc are difficult to manage logistically (supplies etc to reach location).


On weight reduction

Ballast reduction yes, with AESA coming in. Some refinements.


Question:So the AESA is heavier than the MSA on Mk1 and hence ballast in the rear can be reduced? Are those refinements you mentioned likely to yield any drag count reduction or weight reduction?

Answer:
little bit

sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9989
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

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

Postby sum » 31 Jan 2020 04:47

OBOGS is planned on Mk-2 (MWF)

Huh? Wasnt OBOGS supposed to be done and ready to go after decade of toil?
We still couldnt crack it?

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4907
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

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

Postby Kartik » 31 Jan 2020 05:56

OBOGS was meant come with the Mk2, AFAIR. And I mean the earlier 15 ton MTOW version of the Tejas Mk2. Now it'll be on the MWF.

But anyway, with 8 hours worth of LOX onboard, it isn't a critical requirement for the Mk1 and Mk1A as yet. If there is a lack of real estate on board to allow for fitment of the OBOGS, it may have been de-prioritised as a result rather than waste time and resources trying to fit it onboard.

AAR is the critical requirement and thankfully that's coming with the FOC fighters. Hopefully all of the IOC jets will be retrofitted with AAR probes without having to wait for it to be done during MLU.

raghuk
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 41
Joined: 16 Aug 2016 00:38

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

Postby raghuk » 31 Jan 2020 07:00

nam wrote:
fanne wrote:will we export the same version as IAF? Or will there be an export version, that if compromised, will not compromise IAF's LCA


More than tech compromises, we should be more worried about the product support mess that HAL will invariably create.

We all know what happened with Ecuador. We can live with not selling LCA, than recreate Ecuador.

If we sell LCA, I would prefer IAF provide the spares and product support from it's stock and base workshop. It would be horrible to watch a Columbian LCA crash, because the jokers at HAL did not bother to send the spares on time.

The jokers at HAL sent all spares ordered by the Ecuadorians. The reason for crash is very different. The support for a product depends on what the customer pays for. I'm very sure you have no idea about the Ecuadorian crash and i would request you to stop assuming things.

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2909
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

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

Postby tsarkar » 31 Jan 2020 10:53

Indranil wrote:
Kartik wrote:As a strike platform, it had the best scores at Exercise Gagan Shakti, as per AM Nambiar in an article.

Saurav Jha had also mentioned this on Twitter

Twitter link


They have swept everything since then. Why do you think IAF is ready to let the Jaguars slip away with just the Darin III updates? Mk1 can do everything that a Jaguar can do and better. IAF knows this now.

A2A is equivalent to Mirage 2000, with both Derby and R-73E.

Tejas always faced a mindset problem. At the onset of development, the then crop of pilots grew up on Gnats/MiG-21s and wanted Mirage 2000 capabilities in the size of a MiG-21. With the present set of pilots growing up on Su-30MKI, they want a Sukhoi sized fighter, hence ORCA/AMCA scope creep.

Ergonomics of Tejas is better than everything else other than Rafale & Mirage 2000, so we should see Mk1A orders exceeding 83.

Dileep wrote:5.Total re-layout of the innards. Much more orderly and interchangeability/maintenance friendly. LRUs move. Cable loom organized. Piping is order of magnitude better.


This is the most important change in Mk1A and what IAF wanted for years. Lack of this was basis for the 3 legged cheetah statement.

This is extremely important operationally for faster turn around between sorties and ease of maintenance.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: brar_w, Google [Bot] and 57 guests