Naval Tejas Mk1: News & Discussion - 03 January 2020

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.
shaun
BRFite
Posts: 1201
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Naval Tejas Mk1: News & Discussion - 03 January 2020

Postby shaun » 29 Mar 2020 15:19

"Carrier Integration has been proven with successful operations from the flight deck of INS Vikramaditya, a total of 18 arrested landings and 18 ski-ramp take off carried out from INS Vikramaditya in 5 days. "

Good number of sorties

Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2611
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Naval Tejas Mk1: News & Discussion - 03 January 2020

Postby Vivek K » 29 Mar 2020 23:19

Great accomplishment. The sortie rate is for two aircraft, right? How does it compare with say the Migs or the Harriers?

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3263
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Naval Tejas Mk1: News & Discussion - 03 January 2020

Postby tsarkar » 30 Mar 2020 18:30

Vivek K wrote:Great accomplishment. The sortie rate is for two aircraft, right? How does it compare with say the Migs or the Harriers?

The Harrier sea trials were held onboard INS Vikrant in June/July 1972. Speaking from memory the pilot made 20+ sorties in 1/2 days using a single two seater.

A more comprehensive document is here but dont have access to open it.

https://www.scribd.com/document/2650121 ... r-in-India

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9624
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Naval Tejas Mk1: News & Discussion - 03 January 2020

Postby brar_w » 30 Mar 2020 19:37

That's good though a little unfair given that the Naval Tejas team was integrating the platform on a carrier for the very first time ever as opposed to taking a more mature naval aircraft and running sea trials with it.

Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2611
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Naval Tejas Mk1: News & Discussion - 03 January 2020

Postby Vivek K » 30 Mar 2020 21:46

tsarkar wrote:
Vivek K wrote:Great accomplishment. The sortie rate is for two aircraft, right? How does it compare with say the Migs or the Harriers?

The Harrier sea trials were held onboard INS Vikrant in June/July 1972. Speaking from memory the pilot made 20+ sorties in 1/2 days using a single two seater.

A more comprehensive document is here but dont have access to open it.

https://www.scribd.com/document/2650121 ... r-in-India

Ok. Well - that is the difference between a "first ever" carrier flight and buying an off the shelf carrier accepted aircraft. Some time was perhaps spent in checking telemetry and being risk averse. I bet the sortie rate for future missions to the carrier would be higher.

shaun
BRFite
Posts: 1201
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Naval Tejas Mk1: News & Discussion - 03 January 2020

Postby shaun » 30 Mar 2020 22:11

tsarkar wrote:The Harrier sea trials were held onboard INS Vikrant in June/July 1972. Speaking from memory the pilot made 20+ sorties in 1/2 days using a single two seater.

A more comprehensive document is here but dont have access to open it.

https://www.scribd.com/document/2650121 ... r-in-India


sir scribd is free for 1 month Scribd is giving away 1 month of unlimited access for free. Reading subscription service Scribd is offering free access to its library of over one million ebooks, audiobooks, magazines and more for the next 30 days (no commitment or credit card information required)

Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2641
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: Naval Tejas Mk1: News & Discussion - 03 January 2020

Postby Cybaru » 30 Mar 2020 23:14

Good points Brar and Vivek. The cost of operating Harrier Gr9 was in excess of £15,000 an hour by the way for those who are comparing.

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 1553
Joined: 26 Aug 2016 19:14

Re: Naval Tejas Mk1: News & Discussion - 03 January 2020

Postby Gyan » 31 Mar 2020 00:57

Apart from NP1 & NP2, are we going to manufacture additional Naval LCA MK1? There used to talk of 1-2 more prototypes and 6 LSP aircraft to provide experience & knowledge to develop and manufacture next series of Naval aircraft.

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3263
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Naval Tejas Mk1: News & Discussion - 03 January 2020

Postby tsarkar » 31 Mar 2020 16:55

Vivek K wrote:
tsarkar wrote:The Harrier sea trials were held onboard INS Vikrant in June/July 1972. Speaking from memory the pilot made 20+ sorties in 1/2 days using a single two seater.

A more comprehensive document is here but dont have access to open it.

https://www.scribd.com/document/2650121 ... r-in-India

Ok. Well - that is the difference between a "first ever" carrier flight and buying an off the shelf carrier accepted aircraft. Some time was perhaps spent in checking telemetry and being risk averse. I bet the sortie rate for future missions to the carrier would be higher.


It was a Harrier prototype in 1972 and not "off the shelf carrier accepted aircraft". Sea Harrier entered RN service in 1980.

We wanted a close look and wanted to check carrier compatibility in hot and humid conditions, hence the 1972 trials in June and July. The Harrier prototype in those trials was far from production standards.

Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2611
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Naval Tejas Mk1: News & Discussion - 03 January 2020

Postby Vivek K » 31 Mar 2020 17:40

Great to know. It was still an aircraft that had the benefit of years of data. This is India’s first effort ever to attempt carrier integration. They probably had set objectives that were qualified during the trials.
For example - NLCA future prototypes will benefit from the first set of landings and could expand the envelope as needed.

basant
BRFite
Posts: 384
Joined: 20 Mar 2020 20:58

Re: Naval Tejas Mk1: News & Discussion - 03 January 2020

Postby basant » 10 Apr 2020 02:29

Please check BRF FB page for a nice pic of Naval Tejas posted by Harshal Pal, it's beautiful! Armed with 3x ASRAAM, 2x Harpoon AShM, 2x 1200L drop tanks and GSh-23 canon.

BTW, did the previous carrier trains involve sorties with (dummy) weapons? I remember reading about difficulty in doing so.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 10633
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Naval Tejas Mk1: News & Discussion - 03 January 2020

Postby Rakesh » 10 Apr 2020 04:23

The proportions in the picture (from the post above) are not correct.

Image

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5418
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Naval Tejas Mk1: News & Discussion - 03 January 2020

Postby Kartik » 19 May 2020 03:17

US Navy is looking for a jet trainer to replace the T-45 Goshawk that it operates off it's carriers.

The IN has a trainer available in the Naval LCA Mk1 that SURPASSES the US Navy's trainer requirements in most areas except the airframe total life. And while the US Navy wants to teach landings and touch-and-go on carriers to rookies, the IN prefers to use Hawks for advanced jet training and then move them directly onto MiG-29KUB trainers.

A much smarter approach would be to have the N-LCA Mk1 trainers as part of a 2 stage jet training process, with Hawk graduates moving to the N-LCA Mk1 trainers and practicing carrier traps and take offs before graduating to the combat squadrons. Would free up the INAS squadrons from a host of training related duties and sorties.

US Navy begins search for next jet trainer to replace T-45 Goshawk

The US Navy (USN) has begun its search for a new jet trainer to replace its Boeing T-45 Goshawk fleet.

As part of its new Undergraduate Jet Training System programme, the service wants a nondevelopmental, land-based jet trainer capable of field carrier landing practice and nuclear aircraft carrier touch-and-go landings by 2028 or sooner, according to a request for information posted online on 14 May.

The service wants a two-pilot aircraft with ejection seats. The jet should be able to be flown from either cockpit.

The USN is interested in knowing what aircraft can integrate advanced technologies, such as Precision Landing Mode, which is used to help land the Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet on aircraft carriers. It also wants the trainer to have an automatic ground collision avoidance system.

The service wants an assessment of how certain aircraft would handle the forces of high sink rate landings, the hallmark of training for landing on the short deck of an aircraft carrier.

Each example of the next-generation trainer is expected to fly 400h per year. The USN wants to conduct field carrier landing practices at an annual rate of 1,200 per aircraft. It also wants each trainer to perform carrier touch-and-go landings 45 times per year.

Candidate aircraft should have a flight life of at least 14,400h, and be able to sustain 43,200 landings.

The service does not plan to conduct arrested landings or catapult launches from aircraft carriers using the jet trainer. That approach differs from its current T-45 fleet, which conducts carrier landings and launches.

The aircraft should have an operational ceiling of 41,000ft, and be capable of speeds greater than 600kt (1,110km/h).

..


and China's new naval trainer JL-9 lacks an arresting hook as of now. Speculation is that it won't be used for carrier landing training, but land based training of naval pilots.

Once again, the IN has a superior product than the PLAN as well. I can bet my bottom dollar that the IN wouldn't even touch something like the JL-9 with a 100 foot pole. Imagine HAL offering a MiG-21 derivative with a MiG-21 derivative turbojet engine to the IN for entry into service in 2022 or so.. what kind of criticism would we see? :roll:

Yet, the IN sleeps on a proposal to buy 8-10 Naval LCA Mk1 trainers solely for the purpose of training it's naval rookies in the extremely difficult art of landing on an aircraft carrier. A naval trainer that exceeds every other dedicated naval trainer anywhere in the world in specs and capabilities and is extremely affordable.

Image

New naval JL-9 trainer takes flight in China

Visually there is little to set the aircraft apart from the baseline JL-9, apart from extensions to its wingtips and modest changes at the base of the tail.

Notably for a model designed to train aircraft carrier pilots, the new JL-9 lacks a tailhook. Online speculation suggests that the aircraft will never be developed to land on an aircraft carrier, but be used solely for the land-based training of naval pilots.


In an image released of the first flight activity on Chinese state television, a patch on a pilot’s uniform suggests the name of the new variant is “Sword Fish.”

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8290
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Naval Tejas Mk1: News & Discussion - 03 January 2020

Postby Indranil » 19 May 2020 03:35

US will look no further than its T-7 derivatives.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5065
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Naval Tejas Mk1: News & Discussion - 03 January 2020

Postby chola » 19 May 2020 04:08

The NLCA has trapped on an operational carrier. How many aircraft anywhere in the world has done that? As Kartik observes, it passes the specs of what the US and Cheen are using.

It wouldn't make sense not to use it at least as a trainer even if the IN is dead set on a twin-engine onlee for the carriers.

That said, if the Navy trusts the NLCA enough to have trapped the thing twice on an operational carrier then I have to trust their judgement. It is not like they are avoiding the aircraft. But I find no reason why it can't be inducted as a naval trainer at least.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5418
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Naval Tejas Mk1: News & Discussion - 03 January 2020

Postby Kartik » 19 May 2020 04:36

Indranil wrote:US will look no further than its T-7 derivatives.


And rightly so. But what about our IN? When will it start looking at the N-LCA Mk1 for it's trainer needs?

arvin
BRFite
Posts: 407
Joined: 17 Aug 2016 21:26

Re: Naval Tejas Mk1: News & Discussion - 03 January 2020

Postby arvin » 20 May 2020 20:51

NLCA is the perfect product which can be squarely aimed at T-7 Red hawK. T-7 doesnt have the thunder thighs required for carrier landings.
We should be pulling all diplomatic levers to promote this bird. It would have definetly helped if the navy had ordered a squadron worth of this
aircraft. An operational aircraft would be far easier to sell and to iron out minor issues. IMO, govt should push down a squadron worth of NLCA down the navy's throat whether they like it or not.
If the navy was ok with the piddly payload the harrier was able to cart around, NLCA is definetly able to lug around more. Its is a serious error of judgement from Navy's side for not ordering this bird.

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12605
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Naval Tejas Mk1: News & Discussion - 03 January 2020

Postby Aditya_V » 20 May 2020 21:28

Whatever it is US will import from country like India which is not considered as a close ally. Its stupid for us to waste our energy, rather get our Navy to order

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4814
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Naval Tejas Mk1: News & Discussion - 03 January 2020

Postby srai » 21 May 2020 03:22

...

If the navy was ok with the piddly payload the harrier was able to cart around, NLCA is definetly able to lug around more. Its is a serious error of judgement from Navy's side for not ordering this bird.

...


I’ve been thinking along similar lines. NLCA Mk.1 should do well comparatively against Sea Harrier.

Bala Vignesh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2017
Joined: 30 Apr 2009 02:02
Location: Standing at the edge of the cliff
Contact:

Re: Naval Tejas Mk1: News & Discussion - 03 January 2020

Postby Bala Vignesh » 21 May 2020 11:51

Just came back after many a moons to this thread and Jingo bahut khush hua!! Now all that remains is for the khayali biryani that most of us are cooking(NLCA Mk1 in Navy service) becomes reality.
Indranil ji, would you be able to share if there is a tentive timeline on when the next set of tests are supposed to happen for the NLCA and If this pandemic has had any impact on it??

Rsatchi
BRFite
Posts: 978
Joined: 04 Aug 2019 22:03

Re: Naval Tejas Mk1: News & Discussion - 03 January 2020

Postby Rsatchi » 21 May 2020 13:21

srai wrote:
...

If the navy was ok with the piddly payload the harrier was able to cart around, NLCA is definetly able to lug around more. Its is a serious error of judgement from Navy's side for not ordering this bird.

...


I’ve been thinking along similar lines. NLCA Mk.1 should do well comparatively against Sea Harrier.

SraiJi
The main issue with our armed forces is : If U can have 'Gori Mainm' then why are U asking to go for 'Dehati Aurat' :D
If IAF has Rafales and Army gets Apaches why should Navy buy NLCA!!! :roll:
creating of CDS notwithstanding, this probably will go on
But COVID-19 is a golden opportunity to knock few heads together and get them all to support desi stuff

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3263
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Naval Tejas Mk1: News & Discussion - 03 January 2020

Postby tsarkar » 21 May 2020 18:05

Kartik wrote:US Navy is looking for a jet trainer to replace the T-45 Goshawk that it operates off it's carriers.

This is a wonderful export opportunity for the NLCAT for the Minister of Commerce Piyush Goyal to pursue along with the India US trade deal under discussion. NLCAT already uses GE F-404 engine and Litening and other parts can be Americanised.

Indranil wrote:US will look no further than its T-7 derivatives.

We all know the pains of navalizing a land based fighter. The US too failed navalising the F-16. The NLCAT offers a neat solution. If only GoI/HAL took aggressive sales efforts here!

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3263
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Naval Tejas Mk1: News & Discussion - 03 January 2020

Postby tsarkar » 21 May 2020 18:32

srai wrote:
...If the navy was ok with the piddly payload the harrier was able to cart around, NLCA is definetly able to lug around more. Its is a serious error of judgement from Navy's side for not ordering this bird....
I’ve been thinking along similar lines. NLCA Mk.1 should do well comparatively against Sea Harrier.

In a Air Defence Role, yes.

But NLCA's competition is the Klub family and BrahMos family deployed on 3 Kolkata 3 Shivalik 6 Talwar and 9 Sindhu 1 Chakra 1 Arihant submarines.

roe.ru/eng/catalog/naval-systems/shipborne-weapons/kalibr-nke/

Unless NLCA delivers a payload at range greater than these weapons, the whole economic rationale for an aircraft carrier is lost. Which is why GoI isnt approving the next aircraft carrier.

Hence the requirement for a Rafale/F-18/TEDBF that offers more payload at greater range in addition to Air Defence Role. That will justify investing in an aircraft carrier.

Also the logic of NLCAT for combat and carrier training is very sound as proposed by Kartik. Especially given the landing gear issues of the MiG-29KUB.

arvin
BRFite
Posts: 407
Joined: 17 Aug 2016 21:26

Re: Naval Tejas Mk1: News & Discussion - 03 January 2020

Postby arvin » 21 May 2020 20:05

tsarkar wrote:
srai wrote:I’ve been thinking along similar lines. NLCA Mk.1 should do well comparatively against Sea Harrier.

Also the logic of NLCAT for combat and carrier training is very sound as proposed by Kartik. Especially given the landing gear issues of the MiG-29KUB.

Exactly sir.
Its a rare instance where we have a superior product (NLCA: Thrust 53 kN) over anything that the west has yet to field regards trainers. Boeing realized this since the talon has only 18 kN dry thrust and there exists a huge gap regards avionics and thrust if pilot are moved to F-16 (79 kN).

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9624
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Naval Tejas Mk1: News & Discussion - 03 January 2020

Postby brar_w » 21 May 2020 20:44

Kartik wrote:US Navy is looking for a jet trainer to replace the T-45 Goshawk that it operates off it's carriers.

The IN has a trainer available in the Naval LCA Mk1 that SURPASSES the US Navy's trainer requirements in most areas except the airframe total life. And while the US Navy wants to teach landings and touch-and-go on carriers to rookies, the IN prefers to use Hawks for advanced jet training and then move them directly onto MiG-29KUB trainers.

A much smarter approach would be to have the N-LCA Mk1 trainers as part of a 2 stage jet training process, with Hawk graduates moving to the N-LCA Mk1 trainers and practicing carrier traps and take offs before graduating to the combat squadrons. Would free up the INAS squadrons from a host of training related duties and sorties.


The US Navy is looking at an off-the-shelf training solution that can replace a subset of its T-45 syllabus. The approach seems to be to get something in quickly that can relieve majority of the T-45 flight hours by this decade. This will extend T-45 remaining flight hours even further. Then they'll ask the OEM to propose a suitable variant that can fully replace the T-45 once that fleet is completely gone. They are looking for a non-developmental, next generation training system paired with a high airframe life aircraft that they don't have to develop. The Boeing T-7A meets that pretty much 100%. That's pretty much what it has been designed for The USAF picked it as the most superior pilot training option very recently so the USN has enough basis to issue a sole source contract. Boeing has experience integrating JPALS et al and pretty much anything the USN has fielded on carrier aviation over the last 20 years since most of that stuff has been developed for or tested on Boeing's product (including anything unmanned mode related - MQ-25).

Long term, I don't think the USN is going to be much concerned about the ability of the T-7 program to deliver a trainer that can completely meet the service's needs to replace T-45's. What they'll be closely watching is the 3-5 decade cost of buying, and sustaining the entire system (aircraft and training portion). Commonality with the USAF, particularly on the training portion (which is like 30-40% by contract value) of the program. This is a huge advantage for Boeing even compared to other US OEM's. The combined USAF and USN production quantities will likely exceed 500 aircraft. The Navy is the most conservative of US military branches and is almost obsessed with working with what they know and can model with some degree of certainty. Right now, Boeing sustains 100% of the USN's fighter portion of the carrier air wing (at least until the F-35 deploys next year) and this number will continue to remain at high levels as MQ-25 comes online. Given its T-45 involvement it has a huge leg up over pretty much anyone else.

tsarkar wrote:We all know the pains of navalizing a land based fighter. The US too failed navalising the F-16. The NLCAT offers a neat solution. If only GoI/HAL took aggressive sales efforts here!


The prospects of a couple of hundred of USN orders wouldn't have been lost on Boeing when it closed a very questionable financial case on the T-7 by underbidding its competitors. It would be highly surprising, given Boeing's connections with naval aviation, that they hadn't performed internal studies or design work related to that requirement when it designed the original aircraft. It is also highly unlikely that the USN is not aware of this work. The T-45 is itself an adaptation of a land based trainer aircraft.
Last edited by brar_w on 22 May 2020 00:02, edited 5 times in total.

arvin
BRFite
Posts: 407
Joined: 17 Aug 2016 21:26

Re: Naval Tejas Mk1: News & Discussion - 03 January 2020

Postby arvin » 21 May 2020 21:33

Its a feb 2020 article. Did not see it posted here.
https://www.flightglobal.com/singapore- ... 97.article

Boeing believes there is a global market for 2,600 T-7s, both as trainers and light-attack or aggressor aircraft.

“Some statistics say one in four and advanced fighters in the world’s air forces today are being used for training missions,” says Thomas Breckenridge, vice-president of international sales in Boeing’s strike, surveillance and mobility business unit.


Export of Tejas will be the test case for all the big defence reforms undertaken last week. We have a mature product and how much will we be able to bag out of 2600.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9624
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Naval Tejas Mk1: News & Discussion - 03 January 2020

Postby brar_w » 21 May 2020 22:49

arvin wrote:Its a feb 2020 article. Did not see it posted here.
https://www.flightglobal.com/singapore- ... 97.article

Boeing believes there is a global market for 2,600 T-7s, both as trainers and light-attack or aggressor aircraft.

“Some statistics say one in four and advanced fighters in the world’s air forces today are being used for training missions,” says Thomas Breckenridge, vice-president of international sales in Boeing’s strike, surveillance and mobility business unit.


Export of Tejas will be the test case for all the big defence reforms undertaken last week. We have a mature product and how much will we be able to bag out of 2600.


Once the IAF fields a couple of hundred LCA's then it will be a lot easier to market it because there is less of a historic precedent when it comes to the IAF supporting an indigenous program over its multi-decade life. Therefore interested buyers would take a cautious approach which will ease as the aircraft is inducted in large numbers. But all that is for the future. Right now, HAL's capacity and investment is just adequate to meet IAF demand so the question of having surplus production capacity that can be marketed does not arise. Once they have the capacity or a serious enough buyer to build it then that situation will change. Production process and supply chain needs to be built around a maximum sustained production level so that you can ramp up within a reasonable time-frame and cost. Usually you operate at 70-80% of that level. Lockheed's current F-35 production max capacity is 190 aircraft a year (30 aircraft more than the current projected FRP volumes) so they'll be able to quickly ramp up production by 20-30 aircraft a year over their currently prodjected FRP volumes if there is a commercial sale or increased FMS demand. Above that 190 will be very expensive. Similarly, HAL needs to first have adequate capacity to meet IAF demands over the next decade and then see what it would cost to efficiently increase that affordably based on export success. Otherwise this will always be a chicken and egg problem.
Last edited by brar_w on 21 May 2020 23:21, edited 1 time in total.

Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2611
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Naval Tejas Mk1: News & Discussion - 03 January 2020

Postby Vivek K » 21 May 2020 23:17

If our own forces will not operate our weapons, then no one will buy them.

basant
BRFite
Posts: 384
Joined: 20 Mar 2020 20:58

Re: Naval Tejas Mk1: News & Discussion - 03 January 2020

Postby basant » 08 Jun 2020 09:54

HVT Tweet
Why is there so much duff-gen on Tejas, everywhere you look on internet?

The aircraft takes-off from a carrier without catapult, and within two markers on a runway. Not underpowered by any yardstick in the world.
7:26 AM · Jun 8, 2020·Twitter for Android

This reminds me of discussion on the same observation made by some on several years back on BRF, don't remember who, albeit on IAF version. :)

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12605
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Naval Tejas Mk1: News & Discussion - 03 January 2020

Postby Aditya_V » 08 Jun 2020 10:46

It is not underpowered but space to fit large ASM's etc is a problem. I would highly recommend Navy order a low rate production of 48 aircraft of around 4-6 aircraft per year so that the eco system is in place when TEDBF arrives on the scene.

They can definitely provide training, can provide air cover armed with AAM's while the Mig 29K's are being fitted for strike sorties, and they can take Land based aircraft doing any shipping role freeing up IAF fighters, provide Land based air cover for coastal cities, Defend important Naval airbases like Dabolim, INS Rajali etc.

A Deshmukh
BRFite
Posts: 312
Joined: 05 Dec 2008 14:24

Re: Naval Tejas Mk1: News & Discussion - 03 January 2020

Postby A Deshmukh » 08 Jun 2020 12:33

Rather than just export LCA based trainer, can we export the Training course?
US Pilots can come over to Indian base for training and pay for it.
Trainer planes will be Tejas variants.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5065
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Naval Tejas Mk1: News & Discussion - 03 January 2020

Postby chola » 08 Jun 2020 13:33

A Deshmukh wrote:Rather than just export LCA based trainer, can we export the Training course?
US Pilots can come over to Indian base for training and pay for it.
Trainer planes will be Tejas variants.


The USN will never do that based on optics alone. Maverick and Goose will never come to India for basic carrier training.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9624
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Naval Tejas Mk1: News & Discussion - 03 January 2020

Postby brar_w » 08 Jun 2020 18:12

Optics aside, they wouldn't do that out of logistical need alone. The training footprint of the USN is sizable and probably more than all other carrier navies combined (and them some). They have their own trainers, instructors and courses to achieve that goal. Maintaining a particular training program, of a given quality and quantity, is one of the vital missions as far as the USN's aviation community is concerned.
Last edited by brar_w on 08 Jun 2020 19:12, edited 1 time in total.

srin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2074
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: Naval Tejas Mk1: News & Discussion - 03 January 2020

Postby srin » 08 Jun 2020 19:06

Which Indian base has catapult for training on CATOBAR ?

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 10633
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Naval Tejas Mk1: News & Discussion - 03 January 2020

Postby Rakesh » 31 Aug 2020 00:57

https://twitter.com/Maverick_bharat/sta ... 66082?s=20 ---> INS Vikramaditya seen from Naval LCA.

Image

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5065
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Naval Tejas Mk1: News & Discussion - 03 January 2020

Postby chola » 31 Aug 2020 01:11

Rakesh wrote:https://twitter.com/Maverick_bharat/status/1299996696449966082?s=20 ---> INS Vikramaditya seen from Naval LCA.


Wow! Filmed, it looks like, from a pod mounted camera!

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 10633
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Naval Tejas Mk1: News & Discussion - 03 January 2020

Postby Rakesh » 31 Aug 2020 18:53

https://twitter.com/singhshwetabh71/sta ... 34880?s=20 ---> When Hesja came to India (I think in 2016) he clicked some of the best pics of our equipment. Here's N-LCA 3002.

Image

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21227
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Naval Tejas Mk1: News & Discussion - 03 January 2020

Postby Philip » 01 Sep 2020 04:15

In recent reports,the govt. is supposedly fast tracking military infra development on several island sites in the A&N and Lakshadweep, to turn them into " unsinkable carriers". From these bases,aircraft and warships will be in forward positioning to attack the enemy preventing him from ingress into the IOR. Approval has also been obtained for relaxation of environmental controls for purposes of defence infra. If so, it reinforces and endorses my thoughts on the same for aeons. Remember Malta in WW2.It played a pivotal role in the N.African campaign ,serving as a base for RAF aircraft which took a large toll on Axis shipping
supplying Rommel. His defeat in N.Africa was in large part due to
insufficient war material.

The 3rd. CV is unlikely to be approved anytime soon ,what with the immediate critical requirements of the IA in the Himalayan crisis and IAF fighter needs .The two existing CVs can only operate 29K size aircraft due to lift dimensions,but the NLCA,even with a limited range ,etc. if a sqd. is built,could add to the numbers of carrier aircraft in the inventory,plus operate from any future light CV/ amphib with a regular flight deck.

SoKo is abandoning its amphib plans and is to build a ski-jump 30,000t light CV instead operating F-35Bs. This is what I've been saying for ages,to turn the 4 amphib req. of similar tonnage into vessels with flight decks similar to the VikA and Vikrant. The NLCAs can then operate from them and switch from air defence/ strike to amphib support as well when required.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4700
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Naval Tejas Mk1: News & Discussion - 03 January 2020

Postby Cain Marko » 01 Sep 2020 08:30

Philip wrote:
SoKo is abandoning its amphib plans and is to build a ski-jump 30,000t light CV instead operating F-35Bs. This is what I've been saying for ages,to turn the 4 amphib req. of similar tonnage into vessels with flight decks similar to the VikA and Vikrant. The NLCAs can then operate from them and switch from air defence/ strike to amphib support as well when required.

This is an absolutely brilliant idea. With f35s especially.

ManuJ
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 374
Joined: 20 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Naval Tejas Mk1: News & Discussion - 03 January 2020

Postby ManuJ » 01 Sep 2020 12:17

Philip wrote:SoKo is abandoning its amphib plans and is to build a ski-jump 30,000t light CV instead operating F-35Bs.

Japan has started converting its Izumo class helicopter destroyers into aircraft carriers.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Anshuman.Kumar, AshishA, kumarn and 77 guests