MWF may fly next year or in 2026 and go to production in 2028. If we start MWF 2 today, it is possible to fly it by 2030 and induct in 2034. This is a reasonable time line.
Tejas Mk2 (Medium Weight Fighter) - News and discussions
- Thread starter Schwifty
- Start date
MWF may fly next year or in 2026 and go to production in 2028. If we start MWF 2 today, it is possible to fly it by 2030 and induct in 2034. This is a reasonable time line.
It is always the case but if we make it frontal stealth for plane without payload, its frontal RCS with payload shall be very low and it will always have first shoot capability of BVR which is a big advantage. If that is done, we can send it to counter J20. In rest of cases against Pakistan and China, current MWF should be sufficient.
That is true but it is not always black and white like either you can detect or you can not detect. Any damn good radar can detect higher RCS plane from greater distance and lower RCS plane from lower distance, This gives a batter first shoot capability in BVR combat. It all depends on capability to detect from greater distance which is a function of capability of your radar vs RCS of enemy plane. Once is is done, it all depends on how good your BVR is (No escape Zone).
The modern radars are catching up very fast towards detecting/tracking low RCS threats. Now modern Air Defense network is fusing both low band and high band radars to develop a combined weapons grade track against even VLO targets.
Having said that thanks to the use of FSS radome and next-gen RAM/RAP, all our future fighters will have much lower RCS than what they've now. So MK2's frontal RCS is definitely going to be even better than current LCA's, IMO.
I was being facetious in my reply to the other user, but I'll ask you seriously - what gives you that confidence? Literally none of India's modern aviation projects have kept to budget/schedule and you think that India will somehow develop a new advanced jet from scratch and induct it within 10 years?
It's good to have pride in your nation, but you can't let those feelings cloud your judgement. In my eyes there is a near 0% chance in the next two decades of India having a competent enough aerospace industry capable of such feats. I have a lengthy reasoning:
Firstly, it's not because Indian engineers/scientists are incapable or anything (it's honestly closer to the opposite), but the framework of Indian bureaucracy/procurement doesn't lend itself towards quick decision making. There are resource constraints, India is ultimately a poor nation which means there is low R&D investment relative to Indian aspirations.
I would also argue that there is a general lethargy amongst Indian decision makers and PSU partners, which inhibits both the timely delivery of ordered items and the further development of facilities needed for testing/production of future innovation. This is compounded by the reluctance to let the Indian private sector run wild - a colonial hangover that persists to this day. All this results in many of the best and brightest just leaving India. In my own field I work with lots of engineers from India who are first class. But they are here in the US - not contributing to industry in India because the opportunities (financial and intellect stimulating) are just so much better here.
It goes without mention that there is a significant lobby within the decision-making apparatus that will always favor imports over domestic capabilities.
All of this combined is why India today (and for the foreseeable future) is at the mercy of other nations for its defense. Even "indigenous" products rely heavily on imports. Just look to the minor issues that are causing delays over importing engines from the US for the Mk1a. These sorts of import delays are so normalized we don't even think about it.
I don't foresee any of these improving over the next 10 years. It will probably take another 10 years after India get s little more jingle in her pocket to begin optimizing for really lean/mature processes to take root.
Thanks for reading my Ted Talk. I hate being the forum's resident pessimist, but someone has to do it I suppose.
Radars of any gen 4 aircrafts are so advanced that it will detect you at range greated than your AAM envelope, provided you aren't in a stealth aircraft or in an EW aircraft.
In an exercise in Bengluru, Mig 29 could detect Rafale at a distance of 60 km while it carries much longer range missile.
In an exercise in Bengluru, Mig 29 could detect Rafale at a distance of 60 km while it carries much longer range missile
No My friend,
What I say is very simple. No matter which radar you have, you will be able to detect low RCS plane from lower distance and high RCS plane from a longer distance. This gap gives you and advantage of shooting first in BVR Combat. Imagine that Su 30 MKI is equipped with great GAN AESA and detects F 22 from 100 km. However, F 22 will detect Su 30 MKI from 300 KM because of higher RCS. So even if MKI is equipped with great AESA radar, advantage will always be with F 22 because of lower RCS as even a mediocre radar can detect it from 200 km + and shoot a BVR on it.
High-end air warfare will be very cluttered with heavy use of EW that will degrade even the best of radars no matter how advance.
Why do you think USAF is equipping F-22 with twin IRST pods that will increase its RCS but still deemed important for future combats?
Having a kickass IRST system is becoming the key towards air-dominance.
PS: This is not to say that reduction in RCS isn't required, because lower the RCS the better for BVR fights.
My point was that having lower RCS is good but because of advancements in passive detection tech like IRST, Digital-RWRs etc. it's not 'be all end all' of air-combat.
So, just having stealth isn't a guarantee to prevail over peer-level adversaries. So, MK2 even though won't be stealth should have a fighting chance against J-20/J-31 even if its RCS is higher than the above.
Stealth include lower IR signature as well. Stealth planes are difficult to be deducted IR sensor as well. IR detection has a limit. A plane cannot be detected by its IR detection has a range upto around 100 to 110 km while radar detection is possible beyond 300 km as well of enemy plane has a bigger RCS. Su 30 had detected J20 about 300 KM far. No IR can do that no matter how good they are. Therefore, lower RCS is very important in zone beyond 110 KM. Bellow 110 KM, IR detection is possible provided the enemy plane has high IR signature. In modern plane, lots of air is mix with exhaust to reduce IR signature. This is the reason everybody tries to lower RCS.
Mig29 has nothing on par with Meteor....
And if the rafale was detected at 60km, Mig29 was on the Rafale pilot radar at least twice this range.
I'm quite sure all the J-20 flying in peace time at fitted with Lunenberg lens, as F22 & F35 (in peace time).
So that means nothing.
As per USN, IRST-21 of Super Hornet can detect F-117, B-2, F-22, F-35 and even gliders from beyond 100 miles in forward aspect. Since F-117, B-2 and gliders don't employ afterburners or fly supersonic, it means IRST-21 catches all the above stealth fighters flying subsonic in their frontal aspect from over 160kms!
Modern IRST systems have evolved to a point where stealth advantage is almost neutralized. Otherwise why would F-22 need AIRST pods if its stealth allows it to kill everything in beyond visual range?
Anyways, here is the official comment from a Super Hornet pilot:
Source: U.S. Navy Just Got Its First New F/A-18 Super Hornets — Here Are The Key Upgrades
IRST is a passive detection mode, where radar, even LPI, is not. This is mainly why.
And radar is a all weather system, IRST not.
So the two are complementary.
As per USAF evaluation modern battlespace will be cluttered heavily with use of broadband jamming, literally degrading performance of all kinds of aerial radars. If your radar can't track the target then your missiles won't be able to kill it. Simple.
And yes, digital RWR and ECM systems like Dhruti/SPECTRA would geo-locate even smartest of LPI signals if you emit.
F-22 using AIRST pods and not even one but two is literally heralding a new age of air combat. Low RCS is still important but EW and passive systems like IRST, Digital-RWR have become ever more important now.
Of course
. However, an IRST system that works in only one band either LWIR or MWIR has serious disadvantages against a dual-band system.LWIR is heavily affected by rain, fog, smoke, cloud etc. while MWIR is less affected by the above. Having a dual-band sweep solves this problem. Add a HD TV channel and reliability and enemy IDing and tracking becomes ever so reliable.
Another thing is passive ranging without the need of Laser that can alert the target. Modern dual-band IRST system like Gripen-E's SkyWard G can correctly range the hostile bogey by performing a zig-zag maneuver or doing triangulation between two friendlies. So, in-theory you could swat an enemy with a 100% passive shot with him only getting alerts in the endgame from his RWR or MAWS.
May be but J20 is only so called 5th generation fighter with no fifth generation stuff in it. Its engine, shape, radar, electronics, weapon or any stuff you may say is not what is there in other contemporary fifth generation fighter. In an air exercise in China, J 20 scored 3.5 to 1 kill ratio against Chinses third generation fighters. F 22 has that over 1:100. This is the quality of so called fifth generation fighter.
If that is the case, it is remarkable. So far as I know, Rafale IRTS which is considered very good has a range about 110 k,m.
We gonna get busy soon in this front 
for past reference , pics: ASL DRDO
for past reference , pics: ASL DRDO