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.
^^^
People are now nitpicking even minute trivialities!
All the Mk1A subsystems and integration have been proven using LCA PV/LSP test beds.
Mk1A serial production first lot deliveries have just begun. And surely enough now people are out with their toothpicks to try to make a “mountain out of molehill”. Including the IAF chief, the naysayers are now pointing out “late”, “slow”, “not proven”, “not combat ready” angle.
People expect Tejas Mk1A fresh out of production hanger to perform a combat mission to prove its worth … and even if it did then there will still be questions on validity of the combat mission that was displayed
srai wrote: ↑14 Mar 2025 04:24
^^^
People are now nitpicking even minute trivialities!
All the Mk1A subsystems and integration have been proven using LCA PV/LSP test beds.
Mk1A serial production first lot deliveries have just begun. And surely enough now people are out with their toothpicks to try to make a “mountain out of molehill”. Including the IAF chief, the naysayers are now pointing out “late”, “slow”, “not proven”, “not combat ready” angle.
People expect Tejas Mk1A fresh out of production hanger to perform a combat mission to prove its worth … and even if it did then there will still be questions on validity of the combat mission that was displayed
Nice, look at the changes in LRUs, even basic ones like emergency release locations...I wonder which is more efficient, the trainer (and IN version) or the IAF...
Trainer version silhoutte definitely looks sexier. Is there any performance penalty for the trainer version ? If not, I wonder why we didn't opt for a trainer version regular Tejas fighters based with single seater ( like Naval Tejas minus Levcons plus retaining the drooping nose )
Avinandan wrote: ↑20 Mar 2025 23:18
Trainer version silhoutte definitely looks sexier. Is there any performance penalty for the trainer version ? If not, I wonder why we didn't opt for a trainer version regular Tejas fighters based with single seater ( like Naval Tejas minus Levcons plus retaining the drooping nose )
Why? Because it looks better according to you over the single seater?
The trainer has to let go of one fuel tank to accomodate the second cockpit. So lesser range, plus there's the additional weight of the other ejection seat and displays in the rear cockpit.
trainer version looks like beautiful/hot south indian heroine, single seat version looks like beautiful/hot north indian heroine ---- jokes aside I always like the single seater version sleek and contemporary
Kartik Saar, I was alluding to single seater Naval Tejas (minus Levcons, but retaining drooping nose and with regular landing gear). I am assuming the second cockpit area would be reused for fuel and other uses (OBOGS, etc). Benefit would be much more commonality with respect to the panels and components for both trainer and fighter versions for ease of maintenance.
This is far more significant than just 2x ASRAAM and 2x Astra. This is an LSP Tejas equipped with an IRF probe, a new WVR missile, and an indigenous BVR system, a clear indication that all existing LCA variants (IOC/FOC) are likely to be upgraded to Mk1A standards.
Credit : Praneeth Franklin (@Praneethfrank)
Operation Sindoor: LCA-Tejas Mk1 outmaneuvered JF-17, locked BVR-AAM on enemy aircraft https://idrw.org/operation-sindoor-lca- ... -aircraft/
This idrw article reports Tejas Mk1 locking on JF-17 near Uri during op Sindoor. Didn't shoot as the bandaar scooted. Also, mentions Tejas escorting choppers at night in their replenishment sorties to forward army posts while Tejas flew low in "low light" conditions while escorting.
Seems (purely my guess) these Tejas are from 45 sqn which were deployed at Awantipora some times back. What is intriguing is the term "outmaneuvered"...as it was a bvr engagement, it would mean (again my speculation) the Tejas kept out of the bandaar's radar cone while kept it in it's own radar lock. I would give credit for that to the fighter controller who could vector own aircraft like that...not so much to do about maneuverability of Tejas! Open to learning from the forum experts on this!
gchaks
g.chaks wrote: ↑07 Jun 2025 10:03
This idrw article reports Tejas Mk1 locking on JF-17 near Uri during op Sindoor. Didn't shoot as the bandaar scooted. Also, mentions Tejas escorting choppers at night in their replenishment sorties to forward army posts while Tejas flew low in "low light" conditions while escorting.
Great news, if true.
Seems (purely my guess) these Tejas are from 45 sqn which were deployed at Awantipora
I'm sure you're right. In fact, no other possibility exists, as 45 sqn is the only operational Tejas sqn of IAF. So if this story about Tejas in action is true, it absolutely has to be 45 sqn. I am so happy for them (and for Tejas).
While i am equally, if not more, excited to hear about the performance of Tejas in Op Sindoor, I wouldn't take this article seriously considering the source of the article.
pravula wrote: ↑15 Jun 2025 10:26
Clue me this, if Iran can still operate their F14s after 45+ years of sanctions, why is GE 404/414 a problem to maintain?
Iran had a massive fleet of tomcats and it barely operates a few on rare occasions and relatively safe missions like shooting drones. Nor do we know the up-times of the existing fleet. Cannibalization can only take you so far.
pravula wrote: ↑15 Jun 2025 10:26
Clue me this, if Iran can still operate their F14s after 45+ years of sanctions, why is GE 404/414 a problem to maintain?
Here is a quite detailed article on how (and how many) the IRAF manages the F14s
pravula wrote: ↑15 Jun 2025 10:26
Clue me this, if Iran can still operate their F14s after 45+ years of sanctions, why is GE 404/414 a problem to maintain?
Here is a quite detailed article on how (and how many) the IRAF manages the F14s
Thank You! The article does not mention what they needed to do for regular engine maintenance, which I would assume is much higher than airframe or avionics. I personally like the solid reputation of GE 404/414 and would prefer it to play itself out.
They did it by operating it increasingly sparingly as the times neared the MTBF and replacing the components with those cannibalised from other planes. And on rare occasions where they could get it from the leakages in the US spares on the black market (though they are probably rumours).
In fact one theory circulated sometime back was that the Israelis had covertly arranged to get some spares so the Iranians would not buy too many russian Aircraft to replace the Tomcat. 'Better the devil you know'....
I mean we have been the last major operator of several fighters ( Mig 21-23-27) Harriers etc so one would think that keeping an old jet airworthy is in our MRO playbook.
That being said fighter plane maintenance & associated complexity like all other mechanical and electrical systems in applications in the 21st century has started to become more about software, IP, specialized tools than mechanical constraints or part availability.
The airframes from the 50s-70s were complicated but still primarily mechanical like an old Land Rover or Jeep whereas the new ones are like a Formula 1 car.
Still Tejas is our design,our build so we will know a lot more about it than any plane we have operated in the past so I don't see why Mk1As can operate till end of 2040s and beyond
@alpha_defense
