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

[Karan M]

IAF didn't bulk order SDRs. The 1st batch was for a different set of aircraft and ground based units. A second batch order was "reportedly" placed. The MiG29s and MiG21s were modified later. The 1st batch Mk1A getting BNET SDR late is hence quite plausible. The Tejas also has a DRDO SDR from DEAL in trials. It can be used for the 2nd batch and Mk2. Plus we needed to crack SDRs for AMCA which will need datalinks with LPI waveforms.

[JTull]

No one seems to have the 53 enhancement requirements list. I have not seen any evidence that SDR was a last minute requirement. I believe that 2021 order suggests that it may always have been planned. I generally have an ick seeing conjectures stated as facts.
Happy to leave it at that.

[basant]

No one seems to have the 53 enhancement requirements list. I have not seen any evidence that SDR was a last minute requirement. I believe that 2021 order suggests that it may always have been planned. I generally have an ick seeing conjectures stated as facts.
Happy to leave it at that.

Not 53 but 43 out of 57 meant for Mk2.

As per various sources, including sps-aviation.com, it includes SDR as well.

As the performance of the LCA Tejas Mk 1 failed to meet with the expectations and requirements, the IAF suggested 43 improvements on the LCA Tejas Mk 1 most of which were pertaining avionics and weapon systems. Amongst the improvements suggested, some of the major ones included upgrade to Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) Radar, installation of Self Protection Jammer, Software Defined Radio (SDR), enhancement of Software capability and Computing Power, incorporation of Radar Warning Receiver (RWR), integration of Advanced Short Range Air-to-Air Missile (ASRAAM) weapon system for close combat role procured from European missile maker MBDA and capability of in-flight refuelling and improved maintainability.

[Rakesh]

https://x.com/ang3lkenny/status/1793936271221362940 ---> Tejas Mk1A related, fingers crossed for full batch of 83+97 by 2032-33.

[Aditya_V]

If 97 orders come in a few months, we will deliver this before time as MK2 will start to come online. A cottage supplier ecosystem will start generating the momentum from the volume of orders.

[ashishvikas]

Revamped Tejas Mark 1A fighters ready for take-off: First batch of 16 to enter IAF service this year
https://www.ajaishukla.com/2024/05/reva ... ready.html
28 May 2024

[Rakesh]

Revamped Tejas Mark 1A fighters ready for take-off: First batch of 16 to enter IAF service this year
https://www.ajaishukla.com/2024/05/reva ... ready.html
28 May 2024

https://x.com/VishnuNDTV/status/1795298624894833070 ---> Firing of twin ASRAAM missiles referred to in @ajaishukla's piece, presumably means the twin missile adaptor for close combat missiles may be close to being ready. With 2 Astra plus 4 ASRAAM onboard, the Tejas may finally field 6 air-to-air missiles, albeit only two long range ones.

https://x.com/somnath1978/status/1795315654117208512 ---> IAF's existing CAPs - MiG-21, Mirage 2000 or MiG-29 - have 4 missiles only, 2 BVR + 2 WVR. with 40 - 50 minutes on station per sortie. Why does a fighter need 6 AAMs? Each round hooked up starts depreciating rapidly...

https://x.com/VishnuNDTV/status/1795319821480948142 ---> Nope - the Mirage 2000 and MiG-29 go into combat with 6 air-to-air missiles. 6 Mica IR and radar guided for the Mirage 2000 and 4 R-77s plus 2 R-73s for the MiG-29. Or two R-27s, two R-77s and two R-73s. Bison manages with 4 missiles. You won't see too many pics of fully armed IAF jets during peacetime. But this is the standard layout.

https://x.com/DivyanshuS98370/status/17 ... 0304853445 ---> You should avoid disclosing specific CAP configuration into open source @VishnuNDTV.


https://x.com/VishnuNDTV/status/1795342428087705853 --->

[ashishvikas]

Revamped Tejas Mark 1A fighters ready for take-off: First batch of 16 to enter IAF service this year
https://www.ajaishukla.com/2024/05/reva ... ready.html
28 May 2024

Tejas Part 2: HAL’s Nashik assembly line boosts Tejas production capacity to 24 aircraft annually

https://www.ajaishukla.com/2024/05/teja ... e.html?m=1

[Tanaji]

Interesting that IAF specified a light fighter but expects a loadout in Mig 29 class and M2K class, and happily call it a 3 legged cheetah…

[fanne]

Words are cheap. Let them first deliver even 8 aircraft a year, then we will talk about 16 and 24.

[ernest]

HVT has clarified in the past that the standard loadout for IAF fighters is 4 AAMs. The larger platforms may be called to carry more for specific missions (rarely during peacetime), but 4 is sufficient and standard practice. Also, Tejas will also be able to carry >4 if required by the mission, but not likely in operation, as it fits in the light fighter role.

As pointed out above, missiles deteriorate with each sortie. So, we need Astra mk1/2/3/IR to enter mass production, and drive down costs, if we want to see more missiles per fighter. Right now, that would break the bank.

[basant]

Words are cheap. Let them first deliver even 8 aircraft a year, then we will talk about 16 and 24.

Sir, I respectfully disagree with the sentiment. The focus should be on finding and rectifying any production issue rather than to run down the system. For the most part, HAL is just an integrator and needs the entire eco-system to catch up and stabilize. This happens over time and only with bulk orders. With ALH series of helos, HAL left no doubs about its capabilityto do so. It will take a little time, and I would be happy with some delay rather than opting for imports.

[fanne]

What bulk order is needed? Who ensures eco-system working? - HAL or MOD or IAF or PMO or monsoon or covid or ww3 or world economic slowdown (I think I have listed most of the reason HAL has cited before. I hope HAL is in good terms with PLA and PA, they can request to delay the fight till they figure out all reasons that is making the ecosystem stuck.

[basant]

The projected time line for completion of Mk1A orders is about 2032. It's less than what IAF spent on either AJT or MRCA selection to receiving the jets. I don't see why HAL cannot accomplish their claims. If I have to throw aspersions on being in cahoots PLAAF, it won't be HAL.

If Mk1A does face challenge in manufacturing, we will have to resolve it for obvious reasons. For our own good. Like how PLAAF does.

[Kartik]

Interesting that IAF specified a light fighter but expects a loadout in Mig 29 class and M2K class, and happily call it a 3 legged cheetah…

First of all- the MiG-29 is not the gold standard when it comes to number of pylons or weapons it can carry. Second, the Mirage-2000-5 can carry more weapons as well as higher payload than the Tejas Mk1, so there is no direct comparison there. That is where the Tejas Mk2 will come in.

The IAF was right to require that the Tejas Mk1 have 6 hardpoints that could carry missiles. That is the basic requirement of a multi-role fighter. Gripen C, JF-17, even the F-20 Tigershark from another earlier gen, all light fighters are expected to be able to carry 6 missiles when required. Plus a drop tank.

The 3 legged Cheetah is from a long time ago. It's high time people on BRF got over it and stop using the same term that 1 particular person called it. Not the IAF, but one particular person.

As of today, the IAF is committed to 220 Tejas Mk1/Mk1As. Plus over 100 Tejas Mk2s. Now the ball is in HAL's court firmly to deliver without delays.

[Kartik]

HVT has clarified in the past that the standard loadout for IAF fighters is 4 AAMs. The larger platforms may be called to carry more for specific missions (rarely during peacetime), but 4 is sufficient and standard practice. Also, Tejas will also be able to carry >4 if required by the mission, but not likely in operation, as it fits in the light fighter role.

As pointed out above, missiles deteriorate with each sortie. So, we need Astra mk1/2/3/IR to enter mass production, and drive down costs, if we want to see more missiles per fighter. Right now, that would break the bank.

4 missiles is neither going to be sufficient nor is there any such thing as standard practice. It all depends on the mission. If you're on a standard CAP patrol then 4 may be sufficient. But if you're gonna be escorting a group of Jaguars on a bombing run, it is always prudent to carry more missiles.

Plus the new set of missions that we will see more and more as drones, kamikaze drones, cruise missiles, etc. become more and more common will be to defend air bases or vital targets from them. That will require plenty of missiles. Even more so than 6 in the future.

[srai]

Tejas Part 2: HAL’s Nashik assembly line boosts Tejas production capacity to 24 aircraft annually

https://www.ajaishukla.com/2024/05/teja ... e.html?m=1

…
“If, for any reason, we are unable to build these numbers in HAL we have a back-up plan involving the private industry. Private industry will also feed into these three main lines by building major assemblies, such as front fuselage, centre fuselage, rear fuselage, wings, etc. This adds to HAL’s capacity to make up for any shortfall that may arise,” says HAL’s chief.

This will amount to a back-up production line for four full structures, he says.
…

It would be great to see a major percentage of assemblies being made by Tier-1 private vendors. This would lead nicely to a mature private production ecosystem for Mk2.

https://twitter.com/DefenceDecode/statu ... 1096316930

[srai]

Also, seriously pursue ToT license production

• F-404 engine
• MB ejection seat
• Radar Radome
• IFR probe

[Karan M]

No one seems to have the 53 enhancement requirements list. I have not seen any evidence that SDR was a last minute requirement. I believe that 2021 order suggests that it may always have been planned. I generally have an ick seeing conjectures stated as facts.
Happy to leave it at that.

You can believe whatever you want. It is not our prerogative to spoonfeed you information either. If you have feelings of ick whatever suggest you take gripe water and calm your tummy upset.

[Karan M]

No one seems to have the 53 enhancement requirements list. I have not seen any evidence that SDR was a last minute requirement. I believe that 2021 order suggests that it may always have been planned. I generally have an ick seeing conjectures stated as facts.
Happy to leave it at that.

Not 53 but 43 out of 57 meant for Mk2.

As per various sources, including sps-aviation.com, it includes SDR as well.

As the performance of the LCA Tejas Mk 1 failed to meet with the expectations and requirements, the IAF suggested 43 improvements on the LCA Tejas Mk 1 most of which were pertaining avionics and weapon systems. Amongst the improvements suggested, some of the major ones included upgrade to Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) Radar, installation of Self Protection Jammer, Software Defined Radio (SDR), enhancement of Software capability and Computing Power, incorporation of Radar Warning Receiver (RWR), integration of Advanced Short Range Air-to-Air Missile (ASRAAM) weapon system for close combat role procured from European missile maker MBDA and capability of in-flight refuelling and improved maintainability.

Suggestion is all very well. Final choice of which system to include has often been up for debate and finalised post multi- way discussion between HAL, IAF, ADA and system vendors. The 41st Tejas to receive a domestic sensor fitment was also decided quite late. And depending on circumstances might change as well. The foreign import was driven in part by HAL which then got the IAF on board.

[Karan M]

Interesting that IAF specified a light fighter but expects a loadout in Mig 29 class and M2K class, and happily call it a 3 legged cheetah…

This was always an issue with IAF specifications and glad that people realise how ludicrous some of these expectations were for a fighter that was to replace the MiG21 yet had specifications cobbled together from both the Mirage and MiG-29. CAG as can be expected glosses over this part entirely. The last person to pick this up was the late RM Shri Parrikar. After that CAG went to town attacking this & other DRDO programs for delays etc without having the capability to understand how unrealistic or demanding the SQRs were to begin with.

Another example is the provision of an internal EW suite. No IAF fighter bar the Mirage 2000 had this from day one, yet the Tejas was somehow to squeeze this in in a MiG21 sized airframe when SQRs were set in the 1980s. And yet IAF didn't even approach the ADA to add a pod mounted SPJ (which approach they took on multiple other platforms) and disingenuous complained to the CAG that Tejas didn't have an EW suite. When they didn't ask for a podded one or specified which one they wished for, knowing perfectly well that the ADA could not integrate any unit on their own without CAG censure. Finally a SPJ was added to the Mk1 and now Mk1A. Consider when Mk1 IOC and FOC were decided upon and how ad hoc the SPJ decision was, late in the day. It speaks volumes of some of the folks involved in all these shenanigans. And now post change of Govt they've reinvented themselves as great supporters of the Tejas program, pro-indigenisation etc. As if.

These were all the tricks used to delay & divert the Tejas induction. Even now with Mk1A cleared several vested interests continue to push the need for MMRCA and cancelling Tejas Mk2, and cutting ADA away from DRDO, ensuring DRDO can't take up programs on its own are also on the proposal list and may even go through. Constant vigilance is the only answer versus the import lobby.

[JTull]

@KaranM thanks for pointing this out.

IAF and MoD didn't expect LCA Tejas to ever make it to squadron service. Neither did they expect a push from Parrikar ji and Modi govt to force large domestic orders instead of unaffordable imports of 100s of fighters. (I could even go so far as to claim that IAF shirked its responsibilities to the nation and keeping its security hostage to the sqn strength and Chandigarh dalals).

This is also the first time HAL is being forced to build a supply chain of Tier 1/2/3 suppliers. So far, HAL had initiated assembly of any new fighter with SKD kits sourced from a single vendor. They are realising what "keeping IAF happy" means for their delivery schedule. Smallest changes will have a cascade effect on the deliveries from its own suppliers, eventually impacting their own contracted schedules.

This is not a bad thing!

Culture takes time to change, and HAL will become more responsible and nimble in how it handles new requirements. It may even learn to say no to some changes.

[Rakesh]

Tejas Mk1A Flaunts Three Close Combat Missiles for Tactical Superiority
https://bharatshakti.in/tejas-mk1a-flau ... periority/
03 June 2024

[nachiket]

Interesting that IAF specified a light fighter but expects a loadout in Mig 29 class and M2K class, and happily call it a 3 legged cheetah…

First of all- the MiG-29 is not the gold standard when it comes to number of pylons or weapons it can carry. Second, the Mirage-2000-5 can carry more weapons as well as higher payload than the Tejas Mk1, so there is no direct comparison there. That is where the Tejas Mk2 will come in.

While I fully agree that the ability to carry 6 AAM's is essential for the Tejas, we must realize that the Tejas already had this ability from the start as long as it carried only one centerline drop tank instead of two underwing ones. So the problem was being able to carry 6 AAM's while also carrying enough fuel for decent combat range. And both the M2k and Mig-29, our "medium" fighters received this capability only recently, after their respective upgrades. Before the upgrades, the M2k could only carry 2 BVR + 2 WVR missiles (Super 530D + Magic II) in air-to-air configuration with one centerline drop tank. And while the Mig-29 could carry six (2BVR + 4WVR) along with a centerline drop tank, it was still notoriously short-ranged in this configuration until the addition of the conformal fuel tank in its spine during the upgrade. So it is not a capability that has existed on IAF fighters for long except for the MKI.

The problem that the Tejas has is due to its low ground clearance beneath its centerline, it is limited to a 725 l drop tank instead of a full sized 1200 l one.

[nachiket]

Another example is the provision of an internal EW suite. No IAF fighter bar the Mirage 2000 had this from day one, yet the Tejas was somehow to squeeze this in in a MiG21 sized airframe when SQRs were set in the 1980s. And yet IAF didn't even approach the ADA to add a pod mounted SPJ (which approach they took on multiple other platforms) and disingenuous complained to the CAG that Tejas didn't have an EW suite. When they didn't ask for a podded one or specified which one they wished for, knowing perfectly well that the ADA could not integrate any unit on their own without CAG censure. Finally a SPJ was added to the Mk1 and now Mk1A. Consider when Mk1 IOC and FOC were decided upon and how ad hoc the SPJ decision was, late in the day. It speaks volumes of some of the folks involved in all these shenanigans. And now post change of Govt they've reinvented themselves as great supporters of the Tejas program, pro-indigenisation etc. As if.

The problem is that there is no one knowledgeable enough in the CAG or anywhere else to recognize these tactics and challenge the argument. In the case of EW it would have been simple enough to ask the IAF why its largest fighter, their much beloved MKI also does not possess an internal EW suite and why the IAF is completely fine with that while complaining about the much smaller Tejas not having the capability. But then they have to be aware of that fact first.

So many of the problems we see in our procurement seem to boil down to people involved in decision making either not having even a cursory level of domain knowledge, or if they do either not having the authority to challenge bad faith arguments and decisions to effect any change or having been bought off by vested interests.

[Shameek]

^^ In addition, I think our media hurts by mostly being clueless. There are seldom any journalists or media houses that will investigate these items and write an insightful article or create a video that questions these decisions. The few journalists that have an idea are content to just report but never question the decisions openly. (maybe due to fear of being cut off from the stories)

[Prem Kumar]

The problem that the Tejas has is due to its low ground clearance beneath its centerline, it is limited to a 725 l drop tank instead of a full sized 1200 l one.

Thanks. Does Tejas-Mk2 have the same limitation? I presume Mk1a will, because structurally its almost identical to Mk1

[pravula]

NLCA has longer legs IIRC. Nothing stopping us from using that gear (optimized for non-carrier landings or have a go at forward landing bases...)

[basant]

The problem is that there is no one knowledgeable enough in the CAG or anywhere else to recognize these tactics and challenge the argument. In the case of EW it would have been simple enough to ask the IAF why its largest fighter, their much beloved MKI also does not possess an internal EW suite and why the IAF is completely fine with that while complaining about the much smaller Tejas not having the capability. But then they have to be aware of that fact first.
...

CAG is for auditing primarily the manufacturing, trading financial aspects but not competent/qualified to judge the specs themselves. Even if they ask off-the-records, IAF could simply respond that the need was not felt then but is necessary under present conditions. However, if official exercises for comparisons are made, they can do a great job. For instance:


Source: https://www.reddit.com/

[Kartik]

The problem that the Tejas has is due to its low ground clearance beneath its centerline, it is limited to a 725 l drop tank instead of a full sized 1200 l one.

Thanks. Does Tejas-Mk2 have the same limitation? I presume Mk1a will, because structurally its almost identical to Mk1

Tejas Mk2's landing gear is substantially longer, giving the Tejas Mk2 a much taller stance, like that of the Mirage-2000.

The reason being the kind of payloads the Mk2 is expected to carry right from it's design stage. SCALP cruise missile on the center line hardpoint.

[nachiket]

Thanks. Does Tejas-Mk2 have the same limitation? I presume Mk1a will, because structurally its almost identical to Mk1

Tejas Mk2's landing gear is substantially longer, giving the Tejas Mk2 a much taller stance, like that of the Mirage-2000.

The reason being the kind of payloads the Mk2 is expected to carry right from it's design stage. SCALP cruise missile on the center line hardpoint.

The Mk2 also has more HP's with 4 under each wing. So it can carry 6 AAMs plus 2 under-wing drop tanks without having to resort to dual-rack pylons. This is in addition to 900kg more internal fuel capacity - that's almost like carrying a full size 1200l drop tank worth of extra fuel internally without the drag penalty of the external tank.

[MeshaVishwas]

Adminullahs to please move this to the right thread if necessary.
I am posting this here because I could note some similarities between the Tejas and F-20.
The F-20 scramble time as per the video is under a minute, so I would hazard a guess that Tejas ORP scramble time would be....nuts!
The climb rate and engine response stats are also very very impressive, considering the powerplant in the Tejas is a vastly improved version of the one fitted to the F-20, I can only imagine how good the numbers are.
"80% of the F-16's capabilities at 50% of its costs"
Happy that numbers are growing for this bird.

[Kartik]

News about No.23 'Panthers' squadron moving it's Bison fighters from Suratgarh AFS to Nal AFS near Bikaner. Consolidating all of the IAF's Bisons with No.3 'Cobras' till No.23 'Panthers' gets all its Tejas Mk1A fighters. After that, No.3 'Cobras' will also retire its Bisons and transition to the Tejas Mk1A.

So it's nearly official. No.23 'Panthers' are going to be the first Tejas Mk1A squadron of the IAF. This is the first squadron that ACM (retd.) RKS Bhadauria joined in the IAF. Quite a fitting tribute to the man who has to be given a lot of credit for pushing the Tejas Mk1A contract through as deputy ACM and ACM.

https://x.com/rahulsinghx/status/1806562689394880718 --->

[Kartik]

No.23 "Panthers" will be stood up with the first Tejas Mk1A fighter and possibly a couple of the new build trainers. And they'll get their second Tejas Mk1A at the end of July. Supply chain issues are plaguing both HAL and GE.

Supply chain issues delay deliveries of Tejas Mk1A

After some delay, the deliveries of the Light Combat Aircraft (LCA)-Mk1A by Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) to the Indian Air Force (IAF) are now expected to begin by end of July with officials stating that the delay is due to supply chain issues, including at HAL and General Electric (GE) in delivering the engines. One jet is now expected to be handed over to IAF by end of July, two officials independently confirmed.

...

There have been significant supply chain delays that have delayed the manufacture and deliveries, HAL and defence officials said while expressing confidence that the process would be speeded up once deliveries begin with plans lined up to scale production rate to 18 aircraft per year and eventually to 24 aircraft per year rolling out of three manufacturing lines.

..

To questions from The Hindu on delay in engine deliveries to HAL, a GE Aerospace spokesperson said: “The aerospace industry continues to experience unprecedented supply chain pressures. GE Aerospace is working with our partner HAL and suppliers to resolve constraints and deliver F404-IN20 engines.”

..

The IAF has two MIG-21 squadrons, No. 3 squadron ‘Cobras’ and No. 23 squadron ‘Panthers’ remaining in service, one of which will be phased out this year and the other next year, and they will convert to LCA-Mk1A aircraft.

[R Charan]

IAF Raises Concerns Over LCA Mk-1A Delays, HAL Assures Timely Delivery

The Indian Air Force (IAF) has expressed its discontent over the delayed induction of the Tejas light combat aircraft (LCA Mk-1A), citing potential risks to its combat effectiveness. The IAF has urged Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL), the manufacturer of the Tejas, to expedite the delivery of the 83 jets under the ₹48,000-crore contract.

https://defence.in/threads/iaf-raises-c ... very.8275/

[Prem Kumar]

The main reason for the delay is the lack of timely deliveries of GE Engines

With Amb Garetti's statements recently, we can connect the dots. The GE delay does not seem innocent

We need a mission-mode National Powerplant Mission, on par with PLI, Supercomputing mission, IGMDP etc

[isubodh]

The main reason for the delay is the lack of timely deliveries of GE Engines

Is HAL doing Just-in-time sourcing of engines to be mated just before they fly off. No one thought that it will be risk if engine is coming just-in-time and planned some risk mitigation ?

Shouldn't some finite number of engines be available or landed at HAL facility before HAL claiming that time-lines will be met.
Even if its delayed HAL should be able to track the that the engine is getting delayed and should take some pre-emptive measures.

[fanne]

I am trying to understand how does delay in GE engine delays the first mk1a that flew March (I suppose with a GE engine, unless it flew on hopes and prayers).

On the topic of engines, if you visit official GE site, it says 120 f404in20 engines have been produced. This was status 2-3 years ago. Now it could be grammatical mistake, they may have meant 120 to be produced or ordered, but the word is produced.

https://www.geaerospace.com/military-de ... gines/f404

[fanne]

How do you square that with the news that ge is facing supply chain issue and can only provide 20 engines? Is that for the 97 fresh order and someone is risk mitigating by ordering it before hand even before formal order are signed?
Or
We in our infinite wisdom ordering just in time and inviting all foreign player to come and fukc us?

[Kartik]

Amid delays, HAL now aiming to deliver first LCA Mk1A by August 15, GE engine supplies to start by September