Air Force Tejas Mk1A: News & Discussions: 02 January 2022

[ArjunPandit]

a quick read of brf posts during 17-18 period would be instructive..tejas had just got backing by MP, and there were frequent articles on why tejas bad..rafale, f16 good or why jf17 better..uttam was there on scene but no one knew..people, including us jingos on brf, preferred to have a dual option of EL 2052M. IIRC at that time no IAF fighter had AESA or AESA jaguar had just started arriving (17-18)..people were writing here that may be Uttam could replace later ones at best or MLU or for Mk2..there were some posts of initial success of look down mode (or some other mode dredging memory) but largely unsubstantiated..so those posters were correct indeed..long story short..it's a success indeed..either one is good for us

[fanne]

What is also said (and let’s mot dwell too long on that), we had help. Overall today we are at cutting edge, maybe only slightly behind the best.

[Barath]

India is not at the cutting edge, let's be honest. With help and lots of imported components, we are able to make one competent platform. With plans to build upon it. And reason to be somewhat optimistic.

The real cutting edge will be not just when multiple platforms or local systems exist or the ecosystem is fleshed out, are capable and continue, but when you have world beating capabilities or unique differentiators that yield advantage as Cmdre Malgaonkar said

That is not in sight yet, but 'rome wasn't built in a day'. Unless one buckles down to it, you won't get there. But treading in the world's path alone won't get you there either. It's not just domestic design or industrial capabilities, but operating at a higher level in services doctrine, experimentation, openness to failure, and procurement evolution that will be needed. Build the people and they can help build those other things

[SinghS]

India is not at the cutting edge, let's be honest.

I did a quick simple arithmetic yesterday just for the sake of it, as I was too bored and work was getting too monotonous.

I concluded that India is behind by minimum 45 years than USA when it comes to aerospace. Take FWIF.

[Karan M]

India is not at the cutting edge, let's be honest.

I did a quick simple arithmetic yesterday just for the sake of it, as I was too bored and work was getting too monotonous.

I concluded that India is behind by minimum 45 years than USA when it comes to aerospace. Take FWIF.

This conclusion is so airy fairy so as to be meaningless.

[Karan M]

India is not at the cutting edge, let's be honest. With help and lots of imported components, we are able to make one competent platform. With plans to build upon it. And reason to be somewhat optimistic.

We may not be at the bleeding edge, but we have certainly approached the cutting edge in several areas, despite a very frugal budget. As far as imported components go, even the US is more and more reliant on imported items, despite their near infinite budget and print away approach to the dollar. Give it a decade or more, and despite vested interests and chalta hain attitude from the services, we will be right at the top.

[SinghS]

I just did a quick comparison on two parameters. We can think of it as airy fairy, as data is not presented and just a number is cited out of thin air. I am sure the gap is in double digits. But is it half a century?...we need a detailed analysis.

I feel this area is more appropriate for the government and planning commissions to delve into. If such a comparison serves any purpose, a detailed analysis can be done, and we can reach a fairly accurate number.

[SinghS]

We may not be at the bleeding edge, but we have certainly approached the cutting edge in several areas, despite a very frugal budget.

You have nailed it - "frugal budget". There is no substitute for that, if we ever wish to leapfrog.

The difference between US wrt others is that they have the luxury, means, society, determination and mindset to look into the future. Others just keep trying to catch-up.

just for an example: how far away are we even to start looking into variable Cycle Engine in practical terms? Metallurgy...again trying to just catch-up? Composites--- not there yet. Situation is more or less same everywhere.

[Karan M]

I just did a quick comparison on two parameters. We can think of it as airy fairy, as data is not presented and just a number is cited out of thin air. I am sure the gap is in double digits. But is it half a century?...we need a detailed analysis.

I feel this area is more appropriate for the government and planning commissions to delve into. If such a comparison serves any purpose, a detailed analysis can be done, and we can reach a fairly accurate number.

Precisely my point - there are a million things that can be used to define "aerospace" - materials, propulsion, avionics, you name it, the list goes on and on. In some we are approaching what the west would worry about as peer competitors, i.e. we have begun to run. In some we are struggling, i.e. the crawl phase. In some, we are in the walk phase, by itself quite a substantial achievement.

However, IMHO - in none are we behind by half a century. Simple point - take what was available in the west fifty years back, and can we, with what we have today build something similar? In most, we can. Our weak point remains propulsion, even here we are far ahead of what was there fifty years back, but we aren't where we need to be.

[SinghS]

B2 flew 1989, Swift flew 2022. Gap 33 years. It will be foolish for us to think that for 32 years USA was sitting and twiddling its thumbs.

B2 was in service in 1997. A completely developed stealth platform with a competent fly-by-wire, RAM Coatings, IR-Suppression, Contrail management system and much more. Add to that 32 years of air force experience of using and managing stealth.

Let's be realistic, we are catching up, but it matters only if west takes its feet away from the gas pedal or we make money as a country and allocate it to leapfrog. China is trying the same.

There is another big problem with India, our political class is mostly technologically and martially illiterate. This lead to us getting satisfied easily as a country. This is another area which is hindering our growth.

For example take the case of AGNI-VI and MIRV. Our need if fulfilled with AGNI-5, why to invest in AGNI-VI. Rail Gun - why to chase it as tomorrow we can buy from the USA.

EMALS - politicians are being shown a small table-top working prototype today.
Reason - The political class is illiterate and suspicious. So will believe a tech only when it first comes into existence in the west.

[Barath]

We may not be at the bleeding edge, but we have certainly approached the cutting edge in several areas, despite a very frugal budget. As far as imported components go, even the US is more and more reliant on imported items, despite their near infinite budget and print away approach to the dollar. .

Hope my definition of cutting edge was clear. There's not much point arguing about definitions ought to be, Imho. BTW I love Cdre Malgaonkar's attitude towards standards/excellence and support while working towards that.

Frugal budget currently is arguably due to india's lack of economic development and delivery. India spends 15-16% of union budget on defence . The US spends about 14-15% of the federal budget on the DoD, though %ages are not quite comparable due to VA, public sector and DoE work. (Or BARC or indian nuclear military work for that matter.)

Effect and ambition/goals are also important. Context is certainly important, too many brag about the constraints of having a small budget. [Aside : one of the worst offenders here is mangalyaan]

The US has not just money but also industrial experience and expertise of having developed world beating weapons over and over. The next generation of Indians will look at the US and say why not India.

There is reason for hope, but hope must always be tempered with skepticism

[Karan M]

We may not be at the bleeding edge, but we have certainly approached the cutting edge in several areas, despite a very frugal budget.

You have nailed it - "frugal budget". There is no substitute for that, if we ever wish to leapfrog.

The difference between US wrt others is that they have the luxury, means, society, determination and mindset to look into the future. Others just keep trying to catch-up.

just for an example: how far away are we even to start looking into variable Cycle Engine in practical terms? Situation is more or less same everywhere.

The frugal budget part also means that we do more with less. We haven't as of yet priced ourselves into a corner as the US, western MIC increasingly have. As a result, bar the US, which prints and still scales, the rest of the west is struggling. You can see that in the current Ukraine conflict, where despite being asked to, most Euro firms cant provide any military gear in

The portion in italics has occurred simply because post WW2, the western world chose to elect the US as it's de-facto economic, war and cultural leading light and things proceeded from there. Will the situation remain the same another two decades from now? It's doubtful. The bipartisan compact the US political establishment had on many issues is breaking apart.

So if the economy is unable to generate the heft required by what an overpriced cost structure demands, well, interesting times. Especially as other countries scale up to match.

[Barath]

B2 flew 1989, ... SWIFT

Incidentally, the Carter administration's (Sec Brown) 1980 announcement disclosing the B-2 program also disclosed work on unmanned stealth planes. That particular initiative didn't result in a VLO UAV afaik.

The D-21, an unmanned drone with some RCS reduction features flew in 1964. But it wasn't VLO.

The US is ahead for legitimate reasons., as is China. Just me-too developments will not suffice. Innovative and asymmetric thinking and execution will be required, appropriate to Indian environ. But the base must be built first. The programs that build the base build the people, and while a project may fail, ultimately people will build the next success.

@karan : claiming frugality as a virtue depends on overall effect as well as context. India definitely has less and does not do more (in absolute terms) than the US. Lower indian salaries and ppp help, but lack of industrial base hurts. Does it help meet goals and sustainable military spending ? Possibly yes. Does it increase effect and effectiveness ? No.

[Karan M]

B2 flew 1989, Swift flew 2022. Gap 33 years. It will be foolish for us to think that for 32 years USA was sitting and twiddling its thumbs.

B2 was in service in 1997. A completely developed stealth platform with a competent fly-by-wire, RAM Coatings, IR-Suppression, Contrail management system and much more. Add to that 32 years of air force experience of using and managing stealth.

What is actually foolish IMHO is to claim a random 45 year figure without even looking into the details.
Take your above comparison now, at least you are starting to get into some detail - of something 33 years back. Is the FBW something India can't do today? Is it's IR suppression or RAM as it was in 1997 superior to what India can do today or has been incubating in its labs?
These sort of comparisons are meaningless without getting into granular details. You haven't presented them, but the larger point is countries like India, Japan, South Korea, China etc can all develop systems only the "west" could a few decades back.
The ATAGS is every bit as capable as any western howitzer out there. The much complained about (with justification) OFB is exporting 155mm shells in the tens of thousands. Point being many countries have started figuring out the correlation between technology development, mass manufacture and automation, plus QA, QC. And at the right cost. The much ballyhooed western countries are now procuring ATGMs and systems from Israel (which was once beneath them) and howitzers from South Korea. And in a few years, India will also be on the table.

Let's be realistic, we are catching up, but it matters only if west takes its feet away from the gas pedal or we make money as a country and allocate it to leapfrog. China is trying the same.

The west, in case you haven't noticed, has already taken its feet away from the gas pedal. That's the problem with many of these high-level comparisons, they don't look at the granular details and get caught up in the glitz and glamor of a system that enjoyed its privileges without equivalent competition. That competition from China is being noticed now in the west and causing panic. But their weaknesses are also apparent. For instance, when Ukraine wanted arms and ammunition urgently, most top end western firms couldn't even supply the systems post refurbishment. Only the US has been raiding its larder. They can't build at scale, fast, not without breaking the bank.

Take a look at the Tejas Mk1A, it offers Gripen NG type capability packed into a Gripen C/D airframe, accomplished in a fraction of the time, the Swedes took vis a vis creating an entire A&D complex with NATO support.

The DRDO's current missile lineup alone is approaching what was previously only available from Russia, US, or MBDA/France. All accomplished with a fraction of the resources former threw at the problem. Obviously a public forum isn't the place to discuss what they've been achieving above and beyond what is commonly known as versus what can be discerned from more detailed digging.

Even so, the Tejas Mk2 will match the Gripen NG & the AMCA will surpass it. Even if it's no F-35, there will be an AMCA Mk2, a Mk3 and more variants. All these accomplished at a fraction of the cost the much vaunted west throws at problems. They have literally painted themselves into a corner when it comes to gilding the lily and inflating their margins.

[Karan M]

Hope my definition of cutting edge was clear.

No, it wasn't, you didn't define it at all. I define cutting edge to be the most modern systems that are already inducted or operational. The bleeding edge is usually the set of systems that are still in incubation or are rushed into service when need be.

There's not much point arguing about definitions ought to be, Imho.

There absolutely is a point. Going by the definition I posted above, India has already inducted many "cutting edge" systems and its local systems if they have to be inducted have to match or exceed those. The truly bleeding edge systems are what we are aspiring to, as many are either export denied or unaffordable or political restrictions come into play.

Many of the systems on the Tejas Mk1A will be cutting edge - similar to what's on the Rafale and match what is available for export and is already inducted in the nations that can afford the same. We are developing other cutting edge systems, like the Meteor equivalent AAMs.

The stuff that would be incubated at NG, LM for their 6th gen platform is what's bleeding edge. My point is we have come a long way and are already moving quite fast on accomplishing the rest.

Yes, first gen business folks, or people who want "tomorrow" now will continue to crib about how much more could be done, but if we look at the big picture, we aren't doing that badly.

BTW I love Cdre Malgaonkar's attitude towards standards/excellence and support while working towards that.

Frugal budget currently is arguably due to india's lack of economic development and delivery. India spends 15-16% of union budget on defence . The US spends about 14-15% of the federal budget on the DoD, though %ages are not quite comparable due to VA, public sector and DoE work. (Or BARC or indian nuclear military work for that matter.)

It's not about the raw numbers alone as you'd well know but how the relative economies stack up. While a lot of the expenditure is indeed in capex in the first iteration, with a significant import component, the subsequent iterations cost us lesser, as the PPP effect comes into play for the manpower resource allocation. This HRD is our hidden secret and we have to exploit this advantage to the hilt by scaling it up.

Effect and ambition/goals are also important. Context is certainly important, too many brag about the constraints of having a small budget. [Aside : one of the worst offenders here is mangalyaan] The US has not just money but also industrial experience and expertise of having developed world beating weapons over and over. The next generation of Indians will look at the US and say why not India. There is reason for hope, but hope must always be tempered with skepticism

The point here is very straightforward - is there a track record in India of developing system after system at a reduced budget and meeting requirements? The answer, is increasingly yes. If you wish to believe that western systems are the be-all and end-all, by all means do so, but I doubt the next generation of Indian's will fall for this setup.

In fact many of them are looking through the brochure claims advertised by western manufacturers of developing "world beating weapons" and are increasingly realizing the desi dal chawal Tejas or ALH or LCH may not look as fancy or come with so many claimed bells and whistles but perform better per our requirements.

The bigger issue is the attitude change in the general public, or even the services procurement - as typified by your comment about "hope must always be tempered with skepticism" - funnily enough that skepticism isn't extended to the west or their systems, whether it is Javelins failing in combat in the Ukraine or one wonder weapon after wonder weapon failing to make a dent in the conflict.

It is that mindset change which is now being enforced by the positive indigenization lists and the current Govt, wherein the perennial wait and watch rubbish of "show us this, and this, and this, and this" whereas we gladly accept subpar imports and parade them on Republic Day is being changed, and changed for the better. Whether it be actual orders or enforcing accountability on the manufacturers to deliver quality systems and more importantly sustain them better.

[Karan M]

@karan : claiming frugality as a virtue depends on overall effect as well as context. India definitely has less and does not do more (in absolute terms) than the US. Lower indian salaries and ppp help, but lack of industrial base hurts. Does it help meet goals and sustainable military spending ? Possibly yes. Does it increase effect and effectiveness ? No.

What you guys need to look into, is that our system is building up that industrial base in the first iteration and then every iteration thence. For every new aircraft program you don't need a new wind tunnel. That's the key thing the west was ahead in. The sheer empty checkbook approach to infra and manpower which they then took to absurd levels - to the point their own services can't afford the items they develop in number, forcing them to cancel production slots if export orders aren't met. The US has been the one exception, the other western countries bar France have gladly outsourced a lot of the expensive back-end stuff to the US, but the US managed to do so by dominating the WW economic ecosystem, wherein everyone wanted dollars and the US printed away, inflation be darned. Now in an era of restarted great power rivalry and inner turmoil, can the US again be the arsenal of democracy as it was in WW2, and at WW2 cost levels? You know the answer. It can't. That's where India's frugality matters. That's the context.

There is a very high degree of hubris and arrogance baked into the west and their "we are superior and will remain so" attitude. For instance, the clown-ish policy decisions and near complete absence of second order thinking as evidenced here.

https://www.firstpost.com/opinion/drive ... 87831.html

What was and is missing to a degree in our system, was actual orders and an intent to operationalize and make a virtuous cycle of consistent domestic orders. That's what the current Govt is engaged in fixing. If you looked at the details - you'd realize the context I was referring to is clear. We make things cheap, iterate, make newer versions.

What needs to be fixed is still a higher budget cap, it will come, if not with this admin, then the next, as spending on social services as the first priority alone, becomes less important or alternatively, as steps like Agniveer open up the capex pipeline.

[SinghS]

What is actually foolish IMHO is to claim a random 45 year figure without even looking into the details.
Take your above comparison now, at least you are starting to get into some detail - of something 33 years back. Is the FBW something India can't do today? Is it's IR suppression or RAM as it was in 1997 superior to what India can do today or has been incubating in its labs?

How many years of FBW experience do we have for a flying wing? How many years of experience we have maintaining stealth coating in various environments? IR suppression - we have just started and to talk about it is meaningless without having control over rear section of your engine. Today's variable cycle engine takes IR suppression to an entirely different level.

I quoted a number based upon a rudimentary calculation, but it was based upon guess-estimate of many figures; I have been silently tracking for at least 18 years as a hobby. I can confidently tell that we are behind by a good double digit years. Take FWIF.

[Karan M]

How many years of FBW experience do we have for a flying wing?

What is so unique about a flying wing, please tell me, that it's FBW is something special? You are actually referring to the aerodynamics of a flying wing as being something we lack experience with. Again, this isn't magic. We have the infrastructure to research the aerodynamics of a subsonic flying wing, competent researchers to translate functional rules out of them so as to control an aircraft built around it, and world class aerodynamicists and engineers to translate those rules into safe codes, and architect the hardware, in short, the competence, institutional knowledge to go through the whole process.

Figuring out the building blocks, and setting up the infra - physical, human, this is what is tough and what we didn't have when we began the Tejas. We can do that now. We are now developing FBW for multiple programs. Even critical hardware has been indigenized. There is nothing like 4-5 decades of effort here as you seem to think there is.

How many years of experience we have maintaining stealth coating in various environments? IR suppression - we have just started and to talk about it is meaningless without having control over real section of your engine.

Stealth coating - nobody on BRF is going to talk these specifics in public, they have more sense then that. But FYI - we didn't start on all this yesterday. Think your assumptions through by looking at other points though. India has been making RF emitters for over four decades now. Sword, shield. Next, why is it that for IR suppression we need to "own" the engine? Ok, if you wish to get to the point that IR suppression is at the highest level possible, sure bake that into your design, but there are other ways to address it & still get a meaningful combat ready solution, which is to rely on a mix of speed, maneuverability, and weapons that enable you to avoid getting targeted in the first place. Point being you don't need to do what the west did and break your bank, chasing exotic edge cases that give you marginal utility.

I quoted a number based upon a rudimentary calculation, but it was based upon guess-estimate of many figures; I have been silently tracking for at least 18 years as a hobby. I can confidently tell that we are behind by a good double digit years. Take FWIF.

That guess-estimate, thankfully, is mistaken. Nobody in the US for instance would be as sanguine for instance about how ahead their technological lead is. Much of what they used for their systems two generation back is now available in the open market as commercial off the shelf units, which they spent billions on, as being first developers. Technology has also broad-based beyond the US. World leaders in semiconductor process tech for instance are now also sitting in Asia.
The problem cuts both ways. For instance, China has advanced by leaps and bounds based on wholesale transfer of commercial tech and though their QA/QC is still very slip-shod, based on rushed induction cycles, the numbers they field are truly worrisome.

[SinghS]

Man-hours of implementing and testing the FBW can't be leapfrogged without investing money and giving time to our scientists. What is in the lab doesn't matter much in projecting your strength, what matters is what is fielded. The gap lies in a fieldable system and owning it.

If I said gap of 45 years, I was very clear that you won't see initial Ghatak deployment for at least next 12-15 years. A B-2 type bomber may be 20-25 years, if there is a will. USA won't keep sitting there - B-21 is out of the door.

Tech maybe in the lab, but to convert tech into a product requires much-much larger effort, money, vision and willpower. You know how will you do it, but when you start converting it into a product, you find that much more distance requires to be traversed. There lies the Gap.

[SinghS]

Nobody in the US for instance would be as sanguine for instance about how ahead their technological lead is. Much of what they used for their systems two generation back is now available in the open market as commercial off the shelf units, which they spent billions on, as being first developers.

The gap is exactly the reason that they offer us F-21(a second generation system) not F-35/F-22.

[Rakesh]

The gap is exactly the reason that they offer us F-21 (a second generation system) not F-35/F-22.

The F-22 cannot be exported by US law. GOTUS would be contravening their own law, if they exported the F-22 to India.

The F-35 will not be sold to India because of the S-400. Even if there was no S-400, we will still not get the F-35. And our "perceived" gap or "assumed" lack of technological knowledge has nothing to do with it. That is your bias clouding your judgement

The RFI for 114 MRFA is for a fourth generation fighter, of which the F-35 will not qualify. Thus the reason for the offering of the F-21 from Lockheed Martin, and the F-15EX and F-18SH from Boeing.

In the past, the IAF has stated that they do not want the F-35. All announcements to date indicates that view has not changed. The IAF wants a state-of-the-art, phoren, fourth generation, multi-role fighter aircraft. And if Air HQ had their way, they would acquire 114 Rafale F4s. The MoD's archaic rules are in the way.

[skumar]

Man-hours of implementing and testing the FBW can't be leapfrogged without investing money and giving time to our scientists. What is in the lab doesn't matter much in projecting your strength, what matters is what is fielded. The gap lies in a fieldable system and owning it.

If I said gap of 45 years, I was very clear that you won't see initial Ghatak deployment for at least next 12-15 years. A B-2 type bomber may be 20-25 years, if there is a will. USA won't keep sitting there - B-21 is out of the door.
....

IMHO, the big gap that India has is wrt a jet engine that meets our requirements and that gap is not 40+ years. If previous regimes and current regime had not kept doodling for 2-3 decades, we may have had it today.

India does not need B2s bombers, our mission envelope does not cover it and we cannot afford it. We have better means to deal with China or Pakistan than to send B2s or B52s.

[konaseema]

The past has been bleak for sure but the future is definitely better and turning to be brighter by every passing year. A democratic India is not as nimble as it is expected to be but all the lethargy is being slowly replaced. Can be we better, yes we can and should. Other than the jet engine, there is not a technology that India hasn't mastered, ignoring those technologies like ejection seat etc, where importing makes logical sense. All the different efforts in R&D are going to bear fruits of its labor within this decade and Indian defense industry will be far more mature, self sufficient and a net exporter of defense platforms at the beginning of the next decade. 8 more years to the end of the tunnel and we will be mostly on par with both the western and eastern world. As India and Indians have finally started believing in Make In India (retooled as Atmanirbar Bharat), soon enough our defense forces will come around (on their own or by compulsions) and embrace Make In India in its true spirit!!! We will see the day when Tejas Mk1A, Mk2, AMCA MK1, TEDBF, Rustom & Ghatak's doing the elephant walks across the airfields and mobile airfield (in the seas) of our great nation!

[Pratyush]

The problem used to be the lack of wind tunnel facilities to simulate different configurations. IIRC, we were in need of facilities to run 8000 configurations per annum and had the facilities available to run 1500 configurations only. This was stated in 2012-13.

I am not sure what is the domestic wind tunnel capacity as of today. But unless it's increased tremendously. We are going to be facing similar bottleneck in our future programs as well.

[ramana]

Guys where is all this discussion germane to Tejas Mk1A?
After a couple of posts do exercise restraint and check if we are derailing the thread?
Not just mindless arguments at the corner pan shop.

[Kartik]

HAL's CMD R Madhavan has confirmed that all 32 Tejas Mk1 single seat fighters have been produced and 30 have been collected by the IAF. 2 were remaining of which 1 was in the process of being collected by the IAF and the other will be collected soon as well.

With that, HAL has wrapped up all Tejas Mk1 single seat fighter production activities. Now they are targeting to deliver the 4+4 trainers to the IAF starting from this year and going into next year as the new trainer production line ramps up. HAL's focus is firmly on the Tejas Mk1A now, to get all certifications and testing done prior to the start of delivery from 2024-25.

[Karan M]

Man-hours of implementing and testing the FBW can't be leapfrogged without investing money and giving time to our scientists. What is in the lab doesn't matter much in projecting your strength, what matters is what is fielded. The gap lies in a fieldable system and owning it.

Please don't make generic statements when you can't get into specifics. First, you made a generic statement about FBW, now you are giving gyaan about "fielding" and "projecting your strength" and similar stuff. What can you confidently state based on open source of what is going on say vis a vis Ghatak and its FBW - which has to be autonomous & versus what flew in the B-2 or other programs? Your statements are getting more and more high-level. The Germans made the Horten Flying wing way back in WW2, now will you state that because they had that, they were decades ahead of the Americans? Do you think the SoKo stealth fighter or AMCA or PAK-FA as they emerge will be behind in every respect from the F-117 and not come out with any specific mission specific improvements or taking advantage of the vast revolution in technology access that has accrued to all three nations post the emergence of the first platform?

If I said gap of 45 years, I was very clear that you won't see initial Ghatak deployment for at least next 12-15 years. A B-2 type bomber may be 20-25 years, if there is a will. USA won't keep sitting there - B-21 is out of the door.

First, define what is in the Ghatak, and then check what was in the B-2, and then see the differences between an autonomous UCAV which has to accomplish its missions on its own, and a manned platform, and which target set each is going for, etc and then go from there. Don't make these pointless comparisons based on a mere aerodynamic profile. Next you will be telling us because the French made the Mirage 2000-V in the 1980s, or the strategic bomber that was the Mirage-IV, today's Tejas is merely the same as those two and has no specific improvements under the hood.

Tech maybe in the lab, but to convert tech into a product requires much-much larger effort, money, vision and willpower. You know how will you do it, but when you start converting it into a product, you find that much more distance requires to be traversed. There lies the Gap.

Again, more generic stuff. Nothing specific and nothing really that backs up your initial assessment either.

[Karan M]

Nobody in the US for instance would be as sanguine for instance about how ahead their technological lead is. Much of what they used for their systems two generation back is now available in the open market as commercial off the shelf units, which they spent billions on, as being first developers.

The gap is exactly the reason that they offer us F-21(a second generation system) not F-35/F-22.

India has procured the S-400 and the US is completely against exporting its aircraft to a country that has the same. Next, the F-22 is out of production. No country will ever get the F-22 as an export unit, period. At best, the US will remanufacture some structural components and upgrade limited amounts of avionics in its F-22s.
Right now they have the NGAD program, and they are yet to standardize on what they want from it, having made a total performance and budgetary mess of the F-35 itself.
And much of what is in the F-21, which you so easily dismiss as a second generation system, is derived from the investment in the F-35 and F-22 programs. I wish you guys did more research before jumping into discussion on BRF, if you had, you'd realize the radar, the avionics architecture, many of the weapons and enabling systems are all benefiting from the investment amortized over the prior programs. If the PAF were to get the F-21 or the US itself were to go up against such a system, they wouldnt be so dismissive as you are. The Taiwanese, SoKo are taking similar F-16 upgrades while planning a counter to the PLAAF.

[Karan M]

Guys where is all this discussion germane to Tejas Mk1A?
After a couple of posts do exercise restraint and check if we are derailing the thread?
Not just mindless arguments at the corner pan shop.

The problem Ramana sir, is if these claims aren't addressed, we will go on with far worse. One person has declared we are behind by 45 years. Another individual will inform us its 60 years. Another gentleman will inform us why do we even bother with the Tejas Mk1A when we can import the F-35, or F-22 or F-21? That's how these discussions will end up and the caterwauling will continue.

[Rakesh]

And then Ramana-ji the calls will begin. Since America is 45 years ahead of India in terms of aviation design and know-how, we should shut down our aviation industry and buy American. The first drive-by shooting is to cement the idea that India is behind, way behind. Once that foundation is laid, then you can lay the bricks ---> Just continue importing (preferably and always) American. If you don't kill that asinine idea now, it grows into something else.

This was the same thing that NRao said in the Single Engine thread when he was peddling the F-16 Block 70/72 for the IAF. These folks thrive on the idea that people are largely unaware and will gullibly believe everything they say. Throw around some credentials (I-was-a-risk-assessor-for-X-years-in-my-career and I-have-been-trained-to-see-data-points and I-know-all-about-Tier 1-and-Tier 2-suppliers, etc). And to that, sprinkle some claims that are near impossible to verify (i.e. Manohar Parrikar and Ashton Carter had a secret understanding and SE fighter contract is payment for engine technology from GE) and you have a recipe for importing fighters, preferably American.

Nip this nonsense in the bud and then they will shut up.

[SinghS]

And then Ramana-ji the calls will begin. Since America is 45 years ahead of India in terms of aviation design and know-how, we should shut down our aviation industry and buy American.

Rakesh-Ji, I am still in Jai Shri Ram mode not Assalam alaikum mode.

What I said was not to diss our efforts, but to point out that we have to go a long way. We have just started walking in area of aerospace engineering. India is well poised to march ahead and be at forefront, but it would take another generation of scientists and national effort to reach the top.

[Rakesh]

What I said was not to diss our efforts, but to point out that we have to go a long way. We have just started walking in aerospace. India is well poised to march ahead and be at forefront, but it would take another generation of scientists and national effort to reach the top.

It better serves the readers of this thread and the forum for you to reply to the counter points that KaranM has made.

Please do not make generic statements like above, without any evidence to back them up.

[SinghS]

The gap is exactly the reason that they offer us F-21(a second generation system) not F-35/F-22.

India has procured the S-400 and the US is completely against exporting its aircraft to a country that has the same. Next, the F-22 is out of production.
Right now they have the NGAD program, and they are yet to standardize on what they want from it, having made a total performance and budgetary mess of the F-35 itself.
And much of what is in the F-21, which you so easily dismiss as a second generation system, is derived from the investment in the F-35 and F-22 programs. .

S-400 and F-35 relation is well understood. USA has some concerns regarding radar signature espionage. F-35 is anyways a tier-2 affordable product by uncle for everyone. Still indigenous integration in F-35 is not allowed. What Israel did was with special blessings of Uncle.

F-22 is out of production, yet it is the best out there. Not for exports - agreed. I am not getting into merits of why it is out of production. But it doesn't take away the fact that no-one in the world has anything even close to F-22. What is the GAP here? Yes India doesn't need it, but has Russia, France, UK anyone got anything comparable? You can very well see the gap here. The day something equivalent is out, uncle would be ready with something similar to export.

F-21 is derived from F-35 and F-22. Do we really believe it to be true?

Uncle SAM who blocked Israeli AESA, downgraded P8-I radar, removed communication equipment from the P8-I all in recent years. ( You can see the Gap here). Still we believe he is gracious enough to provide us with F-35 level sensor fusion in F-16 mod. Its all hogwash.

I am not going to post anymore on this topic to avoid derailing the thread.

[Rakesh]

What is the GAP here? Yes India doesn't need it, but has Russia, France, UK anyone got anything comparable? You can very well see the gap here. The day something equivalent is out, uncle would be ready with something similar to export.

France (5.5 gen) and UK (6th gen) are working on their programs. But both will be seriously delayed. Turkey and South Korea also have 5th gen programs. The latter country has just completed taxi trails of their 5th gen platform. But there will be a technological impasse. But the more pressing issue is that China has (or so they claim) multiple 5th gen platforms (J-20 and J-31 are two that are publicly known) in the works. But here lies the disconnect.

The IAF is running - at present - a contest to acquire a fourth generation, foreign, multi-role fighter. For outsiders that is puzzling. Because a fifth generation platform will prevail over a fourth generation one. So what does the IAF know about China's prowess in 5th gen platforms? The IAF is claiming that the Rafale is more than a match for the J-20. So what is amiss here?

The gap lies in your understanding. Think about that for a moment. India is not playing a game of catch up with anyone. Get that notion out of your head. We are acquiring capabilities that we believe will be valuable for us in the long term. We are not interested in childish games of my-sandbox-is-bigger-than-yours. Don't shoot off terms like GAP without even understanding the nuances of how aviation development actually works. Don't think like a Pakistani because it will only limit what your brain is actually capable of achieving.

F-21 is derived from F-35 and F-22. Do we really believe it to be true?

This is what Lockheed Martin claims. They are in the business of selling planes. They will say any marketing gobbledegook for the gullible public to believe. Why does that matter to you?

Uncle SAM who blocked Israeli AESA, downgraded P8-I radar, removed communication equipment from the P8-I all in recent years. (You can see the Gap here). Still we believe he is gracious enough to provide us with F-35 level sensor fusion in F-16 mod. Its all hogwash.

Sigh...where do I begin?

Please understand why the P-8I radar was downgraded and why secure communication equipment was removed from the P-8I. Please also realize that the batch of six P-8Is (currently on hold) were to feature that very secure communication equipment that is not present on the 12 P-8Is that are in the service right now with the Indian Navy.

I am not going to post anymore on this topic to avoid derailing the thread.

You started this, so now you finish it.

[fanne]

Back to MK1A -

We know through the official releases - 30 LCA have been delivered, 2 are being used for LCA mk1a verification - and they will be handed over to IAF soon (1 as soon as IAF wants to receive it). Few questions and speculation -
1. Since 2 LCA MK1 was being used for LCA MK1A validation and they are now being handed over to IAF, LCA MK1A testing is complete? 180 degree change from just few weeks that LCAMK1A planes are not even ready for testing (of course wrong, these planes were handed last year by IAF to ADA/HAL for LCA MK1A).
2.If the above is true then can it be assumed that the few 6-8 delayed LCA (where they were awaiting 'radars' from Israel), are actually MK1A config. Could be the radar that they were waiting was last minute order of 2052. 2032 I would assume would have ordered well before these planes went up the rig. Now I assume these 2032 set will be used on the trainers if they are already in the country.
3. If the above is not true then maybe a LSP has been taken up for mk1a validation?
4. If we make all the 18 trainers by 2023-2024, what is the 'other' dedicated trainer line for - LIFT? Export? or maybe faster LCAMK1A?

[SinghS]

The gap lies in your understanding. Think about that for a moment. India is not playing a game of catch up with anyone. Get that notion out of your head. We are acquiring capabilities that we believe will be valuable for us in the long term. We are not interested in childish games of my-sandbox-is-bigger-than-yours. Don't shoot off terms like GAP without even understanding the nuances or how aviation development actually works. Don't think like a Pakistani because it will only limit what your brain is actually capable of achieving.

You started this, so now you finish it.

India is building what it requires, no question about it.

The original question was about a gap in aerospace capabilities. It does exists. We can very well tell that we have everything that we need. That was not the original question, which started this discussion.

We have miles to go before we can catch-up with the best in the industry. LCA,Mk-2, AMCA, Trainer and copters are just the beginning.

In 1947 we had almost 50 years of GAP, which was covered quickly with the Marut program. Then everything went cold till 80s, in the meantime game changed. LCA, ALH, IMGDP and ISRO programs has again brought us in the contention. But it will take a generation without any letup, before we can say that we have truly arrived on the scene.

[Karan M]

S-400 and F-35 relation is well understood. USA has some concerns regarding radar signature espionage. F-35 is anyways a tier-2 affordable product by uncle for everyone.

You are making more and more erroneous claims now. If F-35 was a tier-2 product, then US would not bother about espionage etc to whatever degree. The F-35 is the US's frontline tactical fighter. It is replacing huge numbers of F-16s and even F-15s.

Still indigenous integration in F-35 is not allowed. What Israel did was with special blessings of Uncle.

What has Israel integrated and how is it germane to the topic? Of course, Israel, and any other countries won't be allowed to add their stuff to the F-35. Do you have an idea of how complex signature management on the F-35 is, and the fact that its avionics systems aren't federated but run out of a CIP? If some random supplier messes up, it can affect a whole host of downstream systems and compromise other critical functions. The whole aircraft is such a maintenance boondoggle, that they are struggling to patch it and keep it going, and you want them to open it up for everyone else? Who takes ownership of this? A F-35 formation, one with an unsecured datalink from a third party supplier, linked to all the other F-35s and brings down the entire formation's stealth by broadcasting it's location?

F-22 is out of production, yet it is the best out there. Not for exports - agreed. I am not getting into merits of why it is out of production. But it doesn't take away the fact that no-one in the world has anything even close to F-22. What is the GAP here? Yes India doesn't need it, but has Russia, France, UK anyone got anything comparable? You can very well see the gap here. The day something equivalent is out, uncle would be ready with something similar to export.

You are all over the place here. You claimed first that the F-22 was available for export. You said: The gap is exactly the reason that they offer us F-21(a second generation system) not F-35/F-22.

Where is the F-22 available for export to *anyone*, gap or no gap? There are a limited number of F-22s available, and several are not even capable of being upgraded, because of their age, their avionics architecture, the costs involved in trying to add todays black boxes to what is a bespoke design which needs significant re-manufacturing.

And then you say it is the best out there- best in what? Signature management? There are likely areas where the F-35 is better, it has a generation plus to add on easier maintenance. Avionics? Lockmart is on record stating the F-35 is more modern architecturally and has capabilities the F-22 does not. Weapons? The F-22 has several limitations there.
It is ahead on aerodynamic performance. Now think it through as to whether that is the only criteria to judge any system by, and whether Europe or Russia cant make systems that can match or exceed the parameters of an aircraft made decades back.
If you think they can't, then you clearly haven't done your research regarding any of these countries and the systems they are deploying today, let alone the US itself. If the F-22 was so dominant, the US wouldn't be looking into an all new NGAD but just be happy with a new F-22 type design itself.

F-21 is derived from F-35 and F-22. Do we really believe it to be true?

Have you even taken a cursory look at the topic? The F-21 radar options, its avionics, obviously all benefit from the technology developed via the F-22 and F-35 programs! That's how the US has managed to churn out generation after generation of AESA systems, each with significant advances in miniaturizing the hardware, managing the thermal issues and adding additional modes to the baseline system. And it goes both ways. The huge cost advantage of deploying hundreds of Sniper targeting pods allows the manufacturer to make EOTS class systems. So, F-35 is benefiting from something developed for the F-16/F-15 as well.

Fully capable of being embedded or podded, Sniper technology is incorporated into Lockheed Martin's Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) design. The JSF Electro-Optical Targeting System (EOTS) is highly common with Sniper.

https://www.globalsecurity.org/military ... ns/atp.htm

Obviously depending on your budget, and the level of ally-tier closeness you enjoy, you get access to more export restricted gear. That;s how technology flows. What about this is so hard to accept?

Northrop Grumman was the lead supplier for the F-16 IN radar. What else has NG made? The AN/APG-77 on your F-22 and the radar on the JSF/F-35 as well. Will it have all the F-22 relevant modes, of course not. But it may well have several strike and other options the AS oriented F-22 never planned to have, and modes derived from and implemented on the F-35, and it will have TRM's sourced from the same line with many of the same capabilities the last upgrade on the APG-77/APG-85 did. Common sense!

Guess what, the latest upgrade option available for legacy F-16s is also the SABR from NG. Its designation is the APG-83 and over 370 have been ordered by the USAF itself!

Uncle SAM who blocked Israeli AESA, downgraded P8-I radar, removed communication equipment from the P8-I all in recent years. ( You can see the Gap here). Still we believe he is gracious enough to provide us with F-35 level sensor fusion in F-16 mod. Its all hogwash.

The problem is you make such sweeping assumptions about a topic you haven't looked into in any clear detail whatsoever. Obviously the US blocked its rivals from supplying us capabilities that could scupper our desire for the F-16 or the F-15 and F-18. When they saw we had our own programs on the cusp of success, they withdrew that opposition or the Israelis went ahead nonetheless. The P-8I stuff isn't even relevant. If they do the same with the F-16, we will go for the Rafale or some other platform. Their loss. If multiple vendors, not all of whom the US can control, offer better capabilities than their offering, they will have to raise their game. Once we signed CISMOA etc, the comms eqpt is now available for us. It was us who didnt want to get caught up in the US ecosystem. We've added our own comms on the P-8I including our own Link-2 datalink. But if we want to talk to US P-8s or their other systems, we need compatible comms.

Second, what makes you think sensor fusion is the only thing that can be grafted from the F-35 into the F-16? Have you taken a look at how many systems constitute a modern fighter aircraft and how many would be automatically derived from existing systems in production for other platforms? Obviously two different platforms won't have everything the same.

And what gap are you going on about now? Is it sensor fusion now? India cracked that on the Netra, another first gen version is due on the Tejas Mk1A, and Tejas Mk2, AMCA will undoubtedly take it ahead.

https://www.globalsecurity.org/military ... 5-aewc.htm

The Mission System Controller (MSC) is the nerve centre of the AEW&C system offering the command and control facility, sensor data fusion, identification and classification, and threat evaluation to arrive at the air situation picture, advanced threat assessment, interception control and guidance along with data storage by using compression techniques. MSC interfaces with the DHDS system for all operator control and display features.

And Gripen, EF, Rafale, Su-35 all feature sensor fusion, implemented per their own OEM/pilot/national preferences. What's so great about this one thing that you mark it as something incredible?

The F-16 can well incorporate a similar fusion engine. Its nothing earth shattering.

The marketing apart, the real innovation the F-35 brings in its UX is the see-through cockpit stuff. And there is a reason most OEMs havent gone that path. There are significant processing lags and development issues and the F-35 is still fixing them.

I am not going to post anymore on this topic to avoid derailing the thread.

Thanks.

[KSingh]

HAL's CMD R Madhavan has confirmed that all 32 Tejas Mk1 single seat fighters have been produced and 30 have been collected by the IAF. 2 were remaining of which 1 was in the process of being collected by the IAF and the other will be collected soon as well.

With that, HAL has wrapped up all Tejas Mk1 single seat fighter production activities. Now they are targeting to deliver the 4+4 trainers to the IAF starting from this year and going into next year as the new trainer production line ramps up. HAL's focus is firmly on the Tejas Mk1A now, to get all certifications and testing done prior to the start of delivery from 2024-25.

Don’t they have to deliver 4+4+10 SPT by March 2024 (when first single seat MK1A will be ready for delivery)? The 10 being from the MK1A order

[Karan M]

We have miles to go before we can catch-up with the best in the industry. LCA,Mk-2, AMCA, Trainer and copters are just the beginning.

Yet you can't provide any specifics whatsoever, beyond generics and random 40-50 year claims.

The copters you mention, tailored to Indian requirements are arguably world-leading in payload vs hot-high performance today. That's why they are being inducted. They are receiving avionics and other systems which are every bit as sophisticated as those on western aircraft, and weapons to match, devpt delays apart. We are even adding NLOS Spikes to Mi-17s.

Nothing like the Tejas Mk1A exists anywhere else in the world either. It's a Gripen C/D class airframe packed with Gripen NG class avionics, and is constantly receiving weapons and upgrades no other fighter in its class has.

Please show me one light fighter the world over with the mix of Indian, Israeli, Russian, American and French weapons the Tejas can easily integrate and has added to it's repertoire. It's architecture allows for this. The US, Russia, even European fighters either restrict third party systems or the cost is profligate. Tejas - IAF wants something, it's added. And the DRDO now has a ton of systems in development and headed into user trials, that dwarf the systems available ex-import. Even Israel or France have nothing like the NGARM.

The JF-17 Block 3, as and when it comes may have some of the capabilities, but is still going to face the low reliability Chinese gear factor, plus its baseline platform is firmly a half generation behind the Tejas.

Again, details matter, not just high level assumptions.

[SinghS]

I made a point. Obviously you and few others don't agree with that. It is ok.

I am not getting into any specifics, word-play or debate over it, as it will not add any value to the thread. You can take it or leave it.

Lets move past it.