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

[V_Raman]

If IAF/IN is serious about more Mk1A - then this is the time to talk to GE about more engines so they can place orders in their supply chain.

[Vayutuvan]

I wish LCA Tejas was built around a Russian or French engine, but I guess planners got obsessed with tech specs of engines (in which GE engines are the best) and did not consider strategic aspects. That was poor decision making.

Are Russians reliable going forward? They seem to be in a bind in that they have to choose between Sona Bandar or Eleven Jin Pegs. If they make up with Orange-u-tang, their southeastern border with Sugarland might become warm. China might start salami slicing just like they were trying to do in Ladakh.

Chinese need Russian oil. That may prevent China for a few years before they turn on Russia.

That leaves only France. And ofc our own defence labs/private industry.

[Rakesh]

If IAF/IN is serious about more Mk1A - then this is the time to talk to GE about more engines so they can place orders in their supply chain.

Interest in the Tejas (from the services) is equivalent to what is doled out in their "Atmanirbhar Bharat" speeches that they give.

* The follow-on 97 Mk1A order should have been sanctioned a lot earlier
* There is zero movement on talking to GE about a second contract for GE F404 turbofans, for the 97 order.
* Discussions on the GE F414 turbofan is stuck at 99 turbofans and that will translate to only around 5 squadrons (~20 aircraft each)

There is no seriousness whatsoever. The services' track record is this;

1) Let the Su-30MKI fleet languish for upgrades, because their precious CAPEX had to be set aside for the MRFA boondoggle.

2) When the Super Sukhoi upgrade was finally sanctioned, it was for a mere 84 airframes (against 260+ in service) and over a 7 year period.

3) Starved the TEDBF program of funding, because Rafale M had to be inducted at all costs. If not 54 aircraft in one go (the original MRCBF requirement), then do 26 as a first tranche and order the rest later.

But will give gyan on Atmanirbhar Bharat at every Navy Day, Air Force Day, Independence Day, Republic Day, etc.

[Bharadwaj]

Given the present situation, it would make sense for DRDO to at least have a small team looking at the possibility of integrating the m88. I am quite sure if this scenario heads into secondary sanctions we will lose the f404/414 supply. The state department specifically spoke of secondary sanctions(not tariffs) today. The rd93 infused with the same technologies as the 177s can also be a possibility. The Russians are promising 6000hr life for the 177s. Even 4000 hrs would be acceptable rather than letting the Tejas program die. I am not panicking or exaggerating- the situation is heading beyond what any of us foresaw.

[Manish_P]

^^ depressing reading, Admiral sir.

Well GoI can divert all the funds to Missiles. Who needs aircraft when you have missiles hain...

[basant]

I wish LCA Tejas was built around a Russian or French engine, but I guess planners got obsessed with tech specs of engines (in which GE engines are the best) and did not consider strategic aspects. That was poor decision making.

I am dead certain that LCA Mk-1, Mk-2 are not only designed with F-4X4 in mind, but are so well-designed that you can't find a replacement. It does not take much brains to avoid this pitfall, after all LCA was sanctioned already in its infancy by the USA. The fact that it continued, and was extended to Mk-2 and then again to TEDBF to carefully eliminate any possibility of using Kaveri tells you a different story. In designing a strategic weapon such as a/c, you need to have backup plans. That there are none is a testimony to the vision and intent of IAF.

For instance, we could have gone for an equivalent of Mirage 4000 with 2 Kaveri engines. FWIW, it would be sanction-proof and would continue to fly. Imagine the type of leadership we got. For all the patriotism that ex-IAF officers rumble about, I am yet to see a few who strongly criticized IAF for shelving Kaveri. That's the Holy cow ecosystem one needs to take on, and quite predictably, civilian leadership is always apprehensive and hesitant to discipline.

[Cain Marko]

I wish LCA Tejas was built around a Russian or French engine, but I guess planners got obsessed with tech specs of engines (in which GE engines are the best) and did not consider strategic aspects. That was poor decision making.

I am dead certain that LCA Mk-1, Mk-2 are not only designed with F-4X4 in mind, but are so well-designed that you can't find a replacement. It does not take much brains to avoid this pitfall, after all LCA was sanctioned already in its infancy by the USA. The fact that it continued, and was extended to Mk-2 and then again to TEDBF to carefully eliminate any possibility of using Kaveri tells you a different story. In designing a strategic weapon such as a/c, you need to have backup plans. That there are none is a testimony to the vision and intent of IAF.

For instance, we could have gone for an equivalent of Mirage 4000 with 2 Kaveri engines. FWIW, it would be sanction-proof and would continue to fly. Imagine the type of leadership we got. For all the patriotism that ex-IAF officers rumble about, I am yet to see a few who strongly criticized IAF for shelving Kaveri. That's the Holy cow ecosystem one needs to take on, and quite predictably, civilian leadership is always apprehensive and hesitant to discipline.

Agree with most of what you say except what is highlighted. I'm sorry but the engine decision rests largely on BRFs sacred cow, the ADA. And of course, HAL. Their penchant for high tech has again jeopardized the LCA program and the national security equation.

In fact one reason that the iaf was reluctant to support the LCA program was precisely this bias towards US tech, which the iaf had never been comfortable with. From the very beginning they pushed for a simpler design and more effective delivery times. At every stage the iaf was against the use of US tech, even as late as 2018.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.dnaind ... 320196/amp

The Navy was smarter and played along, pretending to be pro desi in it's equipment acquisitions, nevermind the fact that this desi tilt was largely a result of the anemic budget they get vs the iaf and army.

It was obvious to anyone with with half a brain and an iota of common sense that the LCA would never have enough power for carrier ops (when the iaf was complaining about thrust issues). They pushed for the nlca only to finally reject it at the last moment. Trust me, even if the mk2 based on the 414 comes thru, it'll still have thrust issues in stobar carriers.

The one area that I do hold the iaf and navy responsible is the point that they could've pushed harder for an lca built around the al31 or a twin engined design as you suggested, even if it turned out to be just a tad better than the mig29..

What to do wonlee, this is my reading of the situation.

[Kartik]

If IAF/IN is serious about more Mk1A - then this is the time to talk to GE about more engines so they can place orders in their supply chain.

Interest in the Tejas (from the services) is equivalent to what is doled out in their "Atmanirbhar Bharat" speeches that they give.

* The follow-on 97 Mk1A order should have been sanctioned a lot earlier
* There is zero movement on talking to GE about a second contract for GE F404 turbofans, for the 97 order.
* Discussions on the GE F414 turbofan is stuck at 99 turbofans and that will translate to only around 5 squadrons (~20 aircraft each)

There is no seriousness whatsoever. The services' track record is this;

1) Let the Su-30MKI fleet languish for upgrades, because their precious CAPEX had to be set aside for the MRFA boondoggle.

2) When the Super Sukhoi upgrade was finally sanctioned, it was for a mere 84 airframes (against 260+ in service) and over a 7 year period.

3) Starved the TEDBF program of funding, because Rafale M had to be inducted at all costs. If not 54 aircraft in one go (the original MRCBF requirement), then do 26 as a first tranche and order the rest later.

But will give gyan on Atmanirbhar Bharat at every Navy Day, Air Force Day, Independence Day, Republic Day, etc.

Here's my take:

* Follow-on 97 Tejas Mk1A is not stuck due to the IAF. It is with the MoD. There could have been some delays as the IAF sought to replace some of the Tejas Mk1A systems or subsystems with more updated ones. This was something that even Grp Cpt Muthanna (former HAL CTP) had stated must happen for the 97 Tejas Mk1A rather than those having the same SOP as the 83 Tejas Mk1A before it.

* A contract for the new F-404-IN20 engines for the 97 Tejas Mk1A will not take long to sign. The GE assembly line is now working and they'll only be happy to get an additional 120 odd engines on contract. Pretty certain that those will simply follow on from when the F-404s for the 83 Tejas Mk1A are delivered

* I'm almost certain that the agreement with GE includes clauses to allow HAL to build additional F-414 engines at similar prices to the ones that this contract deals with. After all, TEDBF and AMCA Mk1 will fly with F-414 (if TEDBF ever sees light of day) and Tejas Mk2 may get additional orders.

* Super Sukhoi's SOP has been pretty ambitious. A lot of the equipment simply didn't happen to be ready or be at a TRL where it was considered that it would be developed soon. IAF isn't the one driving the timelines- it is the DRDO and other labs that are developing the equipment, integrating, qualifying it, etc. that are doing so.

* The reason for the Super Sukhoi upgrade to be limited to 84 is that HAL may only be able to deliver 12-15 per year after upgrades. That's then 6 to 7 years to deliver all the upgraded MKIs. By then some of these equipment may become obsolescent so a newer upgrade will be developed. Akin to what was done for DARIN 1, 2 and 3.

[drnayar]

I wish LCA Tejas was built around a Russian or French engine, but I guess planners got obsessed with tech specs of engines (in which GE engines are the best) and did not consider strategic aspects. That was poor decision making.

Are Russians reliable going forward? They seem to be in a bind in that they have to choose between Sona Bandar or Eleven Jin Pegs. If they make up with Orange-u-tang, their southeastern border with Sugarland might become warm. China might start salami slicing just like they were trying to do in Ladakh.

Chinese need Russian oil. That may prevent China for a few years before they turn on Russia.

That leaves only France. And ofc our own defence labs/private industry.

Chinese covet the resource rich Russian far east. A recent spy scandal apparently unearthed Chinese "plans" to occupy these regions if Russia comes apart. The only major country in the world Russia can really trust is Bharat., convergence of interests and economies as Bharat industrializes

[Rakesh]

* Follow-on 97 Tejas Mk1A is not stuck due to the IAF. It is with the MoD. There could have been some delays as the IAF sought to replace some of the Tejas Mk1A systems or subsystems with more updated ones. This was something that even Grp Cpt Muthanna (former HAL CTP) had stated must happen for the 97 Tejas Mk1A rather than those having the same SOP as the 83 Tejas Mk1A before it.

This penchant for replacing sub-systems with more modern ones is applicable only to local maal. When the first batch of Rafales landed at Ambala AFS in July 2020, how many of them were of the F3R(I) variant i.e. the one with all the ISE upgrades installed? Not a single one, but yet they were inducted. And obviously they should have. And Air HQ has a demonstrated track record in doing this with imported maal i.e. the first batch of Jaguars, the first batch of Mirage 2000s, the first batch of MiG-29s, the first batch of Su-30s (the K variant), etc. They either had underpowered engines or downgraded radars or something else that was not up to spec (as signed in the contract).

So was the Mk1 variant not better than MiG-21, that it was designed to replace? Because if Air HQ can make exceptions for imported aircraft, they should do the same for local maal as well no? When the RFP (Request for Proposal) for the Mk1A was issued in the latter half of the last decade, the then Air Chief (BS Dhanoa) said the following;

‘Can Make Concessions To HAL But Will Enemy Make Any Concession For Us?’ Indian Air Force Chief B S Dhanoa Slams HAL
https://swarajyamag.com/insta/can-make- ... -slams-hal
01 Feb 2019

“IAF has not shifted any goal posts as alleged. The development has taken such an incredibly long time that armament and technology has gone obsolete… I as the service chief can make concessions to Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL). Will the enemy make concessions to me when I go and meet the enemy?” stated Dhanoa at the 10th Jumbo Majumdar international lecture.

When not-up-to-contract-spec MiG-29s, Mirage 2000s, Jaguars and Su-30s were inducted in the late 1970s, the 1980s and the 1990s, did any Air Chief raise the issue about concessions being given to foreign OEMs, but will the enemy make concessions (if the balloon went up)? Or is the lecture solely reserved for when the IAF acquires local maal?

This first tranche of 83 aircraft - signed during Aero India 2021 - was an order that should have been *MUCH* larger. This is a failure of everyone involved, of which Air HQ takes an equal share of the blame. The existence of the Mk1A itself was because of the late Manohar Parrikar. And the first Mk1A tranche was kept under triple digits, because it would have affected (budget wise) Air HQ's much desired MRFA.

Shoddy coordination delayed Tejas by decade: Parrikar
https://www.onmanorama.com/news/nation/ ... rikar.html
08 July 2016

"In 2001, when Vajpayee was the Prime Minister, the plane (Tejas) took its maiden flight and by 2006-07 it should have been inducted into the Indian Air Force (IAF). No one paid attention to it for eight to 10 years," Parrikar said at a function in Margao town, 35 km from Panaji. He blamed the Aeronautical Development Agency, LCA manufacturer Hindustan Aeronautics Limited and the Indian Air Force for lack of coordination. "This plane was not getting the required support," he said.

The Mk1 itself should have been ordered in triple digits to begin with. But as the late Parrikar-ji mentioned above, there was no coordination from the stakeholders. But Squadron Strength, ORBAT, Air Operations...this all comes under the purview of Air HQ. MoD, HAL, PMO or whoever else takes a back seat at this discussion table. So what was the leadership at Air HQ doing in the first and second decade of the 21st century? Successive Air Chiefs (and all their Senior Air Staff Officers at Air HQ) were concerned primarily with the MRFA acquisition. I still remember Air Chief Marshal PV Naik - when commenting on the MRFA - that Air HQ did such an excellent job on the technical trials of MMRCA 1.0, that he wanted to patent the process!

This follow-on tranche of 97 aircraft came about because squadrons are retiring much quicker than new inductions. And what would have been cheaper (economies of scale) with 180 Mk1As, will now be more expensive because we are now doing a whole separate order for 97 aircraft. It has now reached a stage that to get to 42 squadrons you will need 40 Mk1s + 83(+97) Mk1As + 200 Tejas Mk2s + 114 MRFA + 272 Su-30MKIs + 36 Rafales = 842 aircraft. Divide that number by an average of 20 aircraft per squadron and it comes to a little over 42 squadrons.

But there is no guarantee that the IAF is going to end up with 200 Mk2s, as the F414 assembly contract is only for 99 turbofans and recent estimates put out by Air HQ lists the Mk2 acquisition at around 120 aircraft in total. And the 114 MRFA is like khayali pulao as of now. One can hope that Air HQ will order 200 Mk2s in one go, but that is asking too much for an institution that has invested all its energies - in the last 25 years - in chasing after the mythical unicorn called the MRFA.

Zero lessons have been learnt from the Mk1A "order" debacle. Will order local maal in piecemeal mode, but will chase after foreign maal in triple digits. Atmanirbhar Bharat Ki Jai Ho!

* A contract for the new F-404-IN20 engines for the 97 Tejas Mk1A will not take long to sign. The GE assembly line is now working and they'll only be happy to get an additional 120 odd engines on contract. Pretty certain that those will simply follow on from when the F-404s for the 83 Tejas Mk1A are delivered.

The 83 Mk1 order was signed on 03 February 2021 and the deal for 99 GE F04 turbofans was signed with GE on 17 August 2021. With all the present geopolitical mudslinging going on between India and the United States, one can hope that a follow on order is signed within the same time frame as the first one. But our stakeholders are masterful at delaying and kicking the can down the road. So will wait and see.

* I'm almost certain that the agreement with GE includes clauses to allow HAL to build additional F-414 engines at similar prices to the ones that this contract deals with. After all, TEDBF and AMCA Mk1 will fly with F-414 (if TEDBF ever sees light of day) and Tejas Mk2 may get additional orders.

There is no more TEDBF. The Rafale M acquisition killed the TEBDF. And there is already talk of a second follow on order for the Rafale M.

The TEDBF has now been replaced by a planned naval AMCA ---> viewtopic.php?p=2643087#p2643087

The Air Force AMCA will not come on time (no matter what HAL or ADA says), so good luck with the naval AMCA coming anytime even in the next decade.

* Super Sukhoi's SOP has been pretty ambitious. A lot of the equipment simply didn't happen to be ready or be at a TRL where it was considered that it would be developed soon. IAF isn't the one driving the timelines- it is the DRDO and other labs that are developing the equipment, integrating, qualifying it, etc. that are doing so.

* The reason for the Super Sukhoi upgrade to be limited to 84 is that HAL may only be able to deliver 12-15 per year after upgrades. That's then 6 to 7 years to deliver all the upgraded MKIs. By then some of these equipment may become obsolescent so a newer upgrade will be developed. Akin to what was done for DARIN 1, 2 and 3.

The issue is not with the developmental timeline, but rather with the number of aircraft being upgraded.

Jaguar DARIN I and DARIN II were manufactured by HAL, but not a single DARIN III came fresh off the production line from HAL. Rather, DARIN III is an upgrade program. When HAL churned out 200+ MKIs from its assembly line, how many of them were dramatically different from the first one delivered in 2004 to the last one delivered in 2021? The Super Sukhoi upgrade is the first major and considerable upgrade of the MKI. And the oldest MKI is 23 years old, as No 20 Squadron (the first MKI unit) was raised in Sept 2002 at Lohegaon AFS. Comparatively, the MiG-29 and Mirage 2000 fleets are far older.

If the argument is that equipment may become obsolescent towards the end of the SS upgrade, then the same should apply to the MRFA. So the delivery schedule of the MRFA is expected to be around 12 - 13 aircraft per year. At that rate, it will take anywhere between 8 - 10 years to complete that contract. Using Rafale as an MRFA example, how viable will an F4 variant be in the 9th year of production (late 2030s)?

So let us state the reality and call it for what it is ---> investing precious CAPEX into upgrading the entire MKI fleet (or even a substantial portion i.e. high triple digits), will result in reduced funds for the 114 MRFA acquisition. That is what this is really about.

[Rakesh]

Rajnath Singh, when are you going to say the below?

Mr. Lecornu: "1 euro invested in our defense is on average 1.5 euros of wealth created in the French economy"
https://www.opex360.com/2025/08/06/m-le ... francaise/
06 August 2025

"Our defense effort is necessary to guarantee our ability to be sovereignly free. It is also essential for our economy," stressed Mr. Lecornu, who then drove the point home.

Also, according to him, "1 euro invested in our defense is on average 1.5 euros of wealth created in the French economy."

"A single euro invested in the defense industry represents an economic impact of 2 euros, 3 euros, perhaps more," he declared in a commentary on French exports of military equipment in February 2016. "It is useful for thinking about industrial strategy to reflect on this, at least to highlight it and to note it," he asserted.

[basant]

+10 to the Admiral

[Manish_P]

Rajnath Singh, when are you going to say the below?

Mr. Lecornu: "1 euro invested in our defense is on average 1.5 euros of wealth created in the French economy"
...

With respect, Admiral sir, if I am not wrong, the Raksha Mantri has said words to that effect in some speeches about Atma Nirbharta.

Like for eg here - https://m.economictimes.com/news/defenc ... 065487.cms
And here - https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/defence ... or-2277358

It's walking the talk which is proving to be the tough part. For various reasons highlighted many times in various threads on this forum.

There are baby steps in some areas (artillery), walking in some (ships) and sprinting in some others (missiles)

I do understand the sentiment though and harbour a jingos hope that the efforts will accelerate exponentially now - thanks to Shri Trump trying to play hardball with a cricket crazy country like ours.

[Rakesh]

I hope he walks the talk.

[V_Raman]

I will say this - if HAL can make them - IAF will take them - be it Mk1A, Mk2, Prachand, etc, etc.

We beat MiG-21 to death - we will do the same with Su-30MKI - if HAL can upgrade them, IAF will take them.