LCA Tejas Mk1 & Mk1A - News and discussions

photo_2021-02-03_22-36-56.jpg


IMG_20210203_224738_215.jpg

:love:
 
  • Like
Reactions: RISING SUN, Bali78, Gautam and 2 others
hembo said:
Malaysia???

https://twitter.com/x/status/1357208307178553345
Click to expand...

I'm guessing Vietnam, Thailand or Philippines. Muslim countries like Indonesia and Malaysia may face issues with Israeli tech on the LCA. Myanmar's in the middle of inducting JF-17s. Singapore's working on F-35s. Laos and Cambodia are unlikely to buy Indian. Brunei is also unlikely to buy Indian right now.

Philippines is actively looking for a fighter jet right now. Thailand plans to do so in the near future, they plan to upgrade their Gripens for now. Vietnam is in the market for larger fighter jets like the Flanker class, although they are interested in replacing their Mig-21s. Financial pressures may force them to pick something like the LCA in the interim before moving on to a larger jet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Killbot, Sathya, Ironhide and 2 others
hembo said:
Malaysia???

https://twitter.com/x/status/1357208307178553345
Click to expand...
Vietnam looks more obvious choice than Malaysia, they use Israeli and US systems.

Point is, will they spend 40+ million per LCA MK1A when much cheaper options are available ? Vietnam will not buy LCA if they want speed and agility of Mig 21 for strike role, however LCA can be a option if they want superior avionics, superior engine and radar.

Selling MK1A is not going to be an easy task, especially for HAL.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hembo
defence-niti.blogspot.com

Breaking down the Tejas Mk1-A.

Nearly 30 years on after the HF Marut - India's first fighter bomber was retired (and 60 years since its induction, the Indian Air Force f...
defence-niti.blogspot.com defence-niti.blogspot.com

good understanding on the vendor base for Mk 1-A. Though honestly, doesnt the uttam have a lower range when you compare it to the ELM 2052 AESA? Why would the IAF want to go with it on Mk 1-A and not wait out for improvements to then integrate it on Mk-2?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Killbot
raptor_flanker said:
defence-niti.blogspot.com

Breaking down the Tejas Mk1-A.

Nearly 30 years on after the HF Marut - India's first fighter bomber was retired (and 60 years since its induction, the Indian Air Force f...
defence-niti.blogspot.com defence-niti.blogspot.com

good understanding on the vendor base for Mk 1-A. Though honestly, doesnt the uttam have a lower range when you compare it to the ELM 2052 AESA? Why would the IAF want to go with it on Mk 1-A and not wait out for improvements to then integrate it on Mk-2?
Click to expand...
Uttam is superior to the 2052 according to the drdo guys..
 
  • Like
Reactions: Killbot
randomradio said:
All of those are being done, but none of them are the solution to solving the problem of missing LCAs. Also, the LCAs are needed for the Pak border since the time to react is very low as the bases are just 100-150Km away from the border on either side.

The idea behind the LCA's design is to support our CAPs during an enemy attack. So its all about how quickly they can be scrambled. The Mig-21 takes 1.5 min, LCA will take 2.5-3 min, a twin engine jet takes 5 min.

If a JF-17 is 50Km away from the border, it can cross it within 3-4 min. So that's the time you have to scramble your aircraft and meet it in the numbers needed. Pretty much everything you have mentioned doesn't help counter this. Only the Mig-21, LCA and other single engine jets can.

So if a JF-17 is ready to fire 100Km standoff weapons at our bases that are 100Km away from our own border, then by the time the it covers that distance of 50Km and is ready to fire its bomb, the Mig-21 will be engaging it, LCA will be at altitude facing it, while any twin engine jet will still be taxing towards the runway. Nothing beats the Mig-21 in this mission, while the LCA is the minimum necessary to pull this off. Whereas the twin engine jet is a sitting duck.

Based on the points you have brought up, 1 is what we generally need anyway. 2 will still have blindspots. 3 doesn't help with the IAF's neeed for QRA.

We need Mk1A at the Pak border and we need the extra persistence MWF at the Chinese border for QRA. Right now we are using Mig-21s and Mirage 2000s at both borders.

The alternative is to quickly induct second-hand single-engine jets, but there's nothing available that's immediately able to stand up to the brute capabilities of an AESA-equipped JF-17 with a long range BVR missile, the alternatives are all without AESAs and PL-15/Meteor class weapons. The Gripen E, F-16V and LCA Mk1A are what we need in this class, and none of them operationally exist as of today, and the J-10C is not available. Hence there is no immediate solution until 2024-25, even if all three points you mentioned are carried out to a tee.
Click to expand...

Lolol. Where did you get the numbers of 1.5m for Mig and 2 min for Tejas for CAP?

Do you know that atleast 2 fighters on a base is always kept on standby? With fuel and weapons loaded and pilots in their jumpsuits during their shift. When an emergency is declared, the pilot has to be in the jet within 40-60 seconds. And it has to be in the air in less than 2 min. Doesn't matter if it's twin engine or single engine.
 
Vicky said:
Lolol. Where did you get the numbers of 1.5m for Mig and 2 min for Tejas for CAP?

Do you know that atleast 2 fighters on a base is always kept on standby? With fuel and weapons loaded and pilots in their jumpsuits during their shift. When an emergency is declared, the pilot has to be in the jet within 40-60 seconds. And it has to be in the air in less than 2 min. Doesn't matter if it's twin engine or single engine.
Click to expand...

It's the time it takes to start the engines.

Only the Mig-21 can start without a pilot in the cockpit, since its inlets are on the nose. Which is why it's unmatched for interception. All other jets need the pilot inside the cockpit before the engine can be started.

On twin-engine jets, the engines are started sequentially, so by the time the second engine begins spooling up, the single engine jet will have already taken off. And by the time TE takes off, the SE would have already reached altitude. The Mig-21 otoh would have already reached the target of interest.

TE jets don't take to the air in 2 min, their standard reaction time is 4-5 min.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AbRaj, JustCurious, Killbot and 1 other person
lcafanboy said:

How Did India Manage to Build an Advanced Fighter Jet Like the Tejas?​


foreignpolicy.com

How Did India Manage to Build an Advanced Fighter Jet Like the Tejas?

When it comes to sensitive industries like defense, democracy and the rule of law do matter.
foreignpolicy.com foreignpolicy.com

Very good read...😊😊
Click to expand...
The Tejas Mark 1A, which has just entered mass production, is being offered for export at a standard price of approximately $43 million per aircraft, much less than the price of a new F-16, the U.S. export standard😂
 
RISING SUN said:
timesofindia.indiatimes.com

Self reliance: 1-in-2 Tejas fighters to have desi radar | India News - Times of India

India News: In a major boost to indigenous defence technologies, at least 51% of the 123 LCA Tejas fighters that will be inducted into the Indian Air Force will h
timesofindia.indiatimes.com timesofindia.indiatimes.com
Click to expand...

Defence reporting in India is really, really bad.

This means 63 of the 83 will be indigenous Uttam radars developed by LRDE...

It's supposed to be 53, since 10 of the 83 are trainers that are not in the Mk1A configuration.
 
  • Like
Reactions: suryakiran
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom