LCA Tejas Mk1 & Mk1A - News and discussions
- Thread starter Ashwin
- Start date
-
- Tags
- indian defence forum
Gun trials not over yet .
Seemed to be left out of FOC
May be in MK1A they ll have .
Ok got it , Mk1 EW is not there anyway.
@randomradio
2022 Mk1A , 2023 MK2 , 2025 AMCA
Whom are we kidding ?
Let us be happy with MK1 FOC aircraft in 2019 if built on schedule.
MK 1A will be from full scale production line ,AMCA will be TD not sure about MK2 may be start with TD or LSP.
People underestimate the the time it takes to integrate things like a radar and EW suite. They think it's all plug-and-play. It isn't.
That said, if HAL itself estimates 2022, be prepared for at least a 1 year delay.
And if that's how long it takes to mess around with an already proven airframe (Mk-1), imagine the time to integrate things on a new airframe like Mk-2. When Prasun Sengupta said in his last article of Mk-2 (on which I and @randomradio had an argument) that it would take 3 years to integrate all the avionics & equipment on the prototype prior to first flight, he wasn't kidding.
We're taking 3 years just to change the radar & EW suite on an existing airframe.
We should nt be surprised if Next Govt caps the Mk 1 A numbers to some 20 odd
Simply because it is too late
The Timelines indicated for MK1 A
And Mk2 are a clear indication that
MMRCA 2 is absolutely necessary
And that The order size will go beyond 115
Simply because it is too late
The Timelines indicated for MK1 A
And Mk2 are a clear indication that
MMRCA 2 is absolutely necessary
And that The order size will go beyond 115
PSG's assumption is first flight in 2026 for Mk2. That's ridiculous.
The program has been delayed by a year because production has been delayed by a year.
And it will be pushed by another. Then another.
This isn't new for us.
Integrating avionics is not simple plug-and-play business, it takes years.
Exactly. That's why when design is frozen, it's the final design. But it looks like production is delayed, this is not from the configuration side of things.
But if an Mk2 squadron is set up by 2030, all's good. If Mk2 takes as long as AMCA to deliver, then it becomes a pointless program.
This again.
Avionics can always be subject to change, so long as they are within the upper & lower limits wrt weight, dimensions etc. laid down during the detailed design of the airframe. Changing avionics is not easy (as they have to be integrated with engine, weapons, computers, etc.), but it's not designed to be impossible either. That's why changing the radar from slotted-array 2032-derived model to the AESA 2052 is hard, takes many years, but doing so does not require the plane to go back to the drawing board with regard to airframe, the same Mk-1 airframe is retained. Otherwise Mk-1A flight would have been impossible before 2025.
Assembling a couple airframes for integrating the new avionics and testing them does not really concern an issue in the production line. The test airframes can be assembled on any existing jig that builds Mk-1.
The pointless program is Mk-1A. This should never have been pursued, instead, the Mk-2 schedule should have been moved forward as a lot of funds & infrastructure would have been freed up. Only reason we're pursuing Mk-1A is because otherwise all the production infrastructure we built for the Mk-1 would have gone to waste (Mk-2 will require mostly new infra).
The planned 83 order for Mk-1A is nothing but the IAF subsidizing HAL's losses which would have been incurred otherwise. Else, there's no reason to pursue a plane based around the Mk-1 airframe. It's totally inadequate in this day and age.
Much rather hope for M-2000 instead, but I don't think France has unused jets like the Russians have.
It won't be available for the next 5-6 years at the very least.
3 years from now for first flight, and at least 1 year of flight testing with the new avionics. Add an year to accommodate for possible delays (we'd be fools to discount that).
If you're up for spending money & time to procure an inferior plane in an inadequate airframe just for sake of replacing old MiGs, could have ordered more Mk-1 above the 40.
It won't have an AESA, but it's the same plane otherwise, the slotted array FCR isn't that bad (probably better than JF-17's radar) and its still capable of BVR combat.
The irony:
MK1A was announced in 2015 to keep production line open till 2023, since MK2 was expected to be ready for serial production by then. Now we have MK1A ready for production hopefully by 2023. This beats the whole purpose of the Mk1A project, no savings in time/money/effort. And guess what, we are still staring at idle production in 2022-23 period. Brilliant!
The Mk1 isn't suitable for replacing Mig-21. Only the Mk1A with the AESA and weight reduction can do that.
Also Mk1A production and flight testing will go on together since the airframe is already certified. This is not like the Mk2 program.