LCA Tejas Mk1 & Mk1A - News and discussions
- Thread starter Ashwin
- Start date
-
- Tags
- indian defence forum
Economy is Tanked. So we should Buy Uber Expensive Rafales and F15ex. Wow, that's some extra ordinary Brain. Needs to stored in museum....☺
For every Rafale we buy we can actually buy 4 LCA Mk1a with least forex spending which we now need most and actually boost local economy and provide jobs within our own country which again helps economy.
And we do need numbers. 4 LCA Tejas Mk1a can guard 4 places 1 Rafale can be at 1 place only.
We do need Rafales at least 6sqdns to keep a technological edge over China only (which can be taken care of by upgrading SU30MKIS for the time being) but not at LCA Mk1a expense....
After mk1, every 2 years the next first flight or 3 years?
Formality can become the reason for delay...
Economy is Tanked. So we should Buy Uber Expensive Rafales and F15ex. Wow, that's some extra ordinary Brain. Needs to stored in museum....☺
For every Rafale we buy we can actually buy 4 LCA Mk1a with least forex spending which we now need most and actually boost local economy and provide jobs within our own country which again helps economy.
And we do need numbers. 4 LCA Tejas Mk1a can guard 4 places 1 Rafale can be at 1 place only.
We do need Rafales at least 6sqdns to keep a technological edge over China only (which can be taken care of by upgrading SU30MKIS for the time being) but not at LCA Mk1a expense....
Just by the per aircraft figures
We can buy 2 mk1A for 1 rafale
Think 46 vs 96 million $ a pop.
But not sure what all includes in the Mk1A 46 million$.
Based on life hours, think it ll equate to the forex savings.
While defending yours point may be effective but on offensive tejas won't have the range.. Terrain mapping, avoidance modes.., Spectra, Hard points, hardened frame ,..
If Mk1A is ready, we should really fillup the numbers and retire old jets first.
We need Rafale too when it has more relevance.
That's right. The whole point is We do need both Rafales for technological edge over China and special missions and LCA Mk1a for numbers and for Pakistan which will find it difficult to cope up with even LCA Mk1a. Rafales are equally important that's why I am of the view that we do need a minimum 6sqdns of Rafales but we can stagger procurement of it but saying LCA Mk1a should be scrapped is utter stupidity...
Mk1A itself not sure when it be online..
It skip it , is like losing bird in hand for something in bush...
We ll most likely make it be until MWF gets ready ... Numbers should go more than 83.. For that we have start early..
Price haggling is delaying things of all reasons..
Price negotiations have been concluded.
HAL was charging Su30 MKI money for what is basically a lightweight 4++ gen single engine fighter. Had the price of $68 million for Mk1A remained the same, IAF might not even have ordered 83 in the first place.
The total orders for Mk1A would have looked more like the Tejas Mk1 order of 40.
My guess is that if MWF gets delayed for one reason or another, additional Mk1A will be procured to keep the production line busy.
MK1A is in development stage. Its not going to get speed because of the contract. it need a finite time. It should be signed 1 year before production start so that they can order all the parts.
Yes and no. There is not going to be a change in ac parts wrt mk1. It's the same aircraft. Signing a contract today with HAL doesn't hurt. It will be left to HAL on when to give subcontracts. It's not like GoI is going to pay 15% upfront today. They are even yet to pay for aircrafts already manufactured.
Gripen remains short legs, average load, in direct competition with your Tejas, not so affordable (Brazil, as the first export customer, had very sexy price conditions). So not a good option.
Quality is one thing. Quantity another.
You need fighters able to deep strike and you need also point defense fighters, so a mix of medium and light fighters. The light one is Tejas.
We actually need Rafale in greater numbers than LCA Mk1A. LCA Mk1A is needed in forward bases for QRA, so 6 squadrons along the Pak border are more than enough. Rafale, we need twice the numbers for all sorts of complex missions. Basically, both jets are needed.
MK1A is good enough to replace the remaining Mig21 and retired Mig27 squadrons not yet re raised with MKI.
A couple of squadrons under EAC wont do any harm.
Placing them in the EAC is useless. The LCA doesn't have the range for it and Chinese aircraft are getting more sophisticated every few years. A QRA aircraft requires some amount of staying power or it will become useless if the enemy simply outlasts it in the air without doing anything, which a Flanker can easily do.
At best, in case of war with China, some detachments can be moved there for QRA in FABs. But we need MWF in the EAC. 4 squadrons in Assam and 2 squadrons in UP.
The proposed acquisition for next squadron of refuelers is to he based in WB. And Mk1a with inflight refueling should be able to conduct all normal QRA or occasional CAP duties there with their support. They aren't so short legged that basing them in say Bagdora will not allow them to cover the required spectrum.
Too far. LCA doesn't have the fuel necessary to go for a tanking mission. Even if it does, it will run our of fuel anyway, it's useless. The distance is simply too far. And instead of the jet going to the refueler, the refueler has to come to the jet. That will make the refueler vulnerable. The Chinese are making AAMs which have more range than LCA's combat radius.
Also, nobody does refueling for QRA. When you speak of QRA, you are actually entering a combat zone, so your internal fuel is all you have. What Abhinandan did was QRA. Where's the tanker in such a role? LCA gets 40 mins to an hour, whereas a Flanker gets as much as 3 hours. Refueling is necessary for strike missions like DPS or for extending CAP missions or special missions.
Tanking missions are actually well-planned missions. It's very rare that they need to do unplanned refuelling. Otoh, QRA is entirely dependent on the enemy. All QRA missions, without exception, are unplanned missions. The only time a QRA jet will need tanking is when it needs fuel due to an emergency. But it's more than likely to crash instead.
External fuel tanks are meant to compensate the problem of short range in aircraft’s like LCA,Gripen, F16, J10 etc.
Not for QRA. QRA is all about speed and reaction time. You are going in to fight. So no drop tanks. All you have is 4 missiles.
CAP flights are different from QRA ?
Even in that case IMO Tejas is going to be used for CAP rather than QRT. And CAPs during peacetime forms the bulk of flight hours in any Airforce.
QRA is when aircraft are scrambled or take off from the ground to meet a threat. This could be enemy aircraft or any aircraft behaving out of the norm.
The Mig-21s performed QRA after Balakot while the M-2000 and MKI were on CAP.
Isn’t US and it’s allies use F15 (and F18]for this role,Frances uses Rafale, Eu Typhoon and RuAF uses Su27 SM ?
So why should we use a light fighter for this role?