toanIt’s not at all clear to me what level of capability the aircraft has already achieved. Is it an adequate Mig-21 replacement as is? If so, why not build 100 or so MkI Tejas using the existing Kaveri engine? It would not be so expensive at the unit cost of about $22 million reported earlier in this thread and there would actually be something to show for the last 30 years’ effort to produce an indigenous fighter.
At the same time development of a more capable MkII with a more powerful Kaveri-based engine could be undertaken. By 2015 or so India might be able to field a very low cost F-16/Gripen class aircraft with export possibilities.
LCA MK1 should have enough capability for replacing the short range air-defense mission of MIG-21 Bison in several years ago. The problem is that IAF gives more and more requirements to this simple and tiny fighter, which makes it become more and more complex and heavy, and the history of YF-16 to F-16C repeat itself once again.
LCA should be a simple, light, and cheap interceptor for replacing MIG-21. But IAF ignores its congenital limitation and adds to much requirements on it, and then it gets the price of severe delay of the whole project…………
toanIt’s true that the candidates of MMRCA are much more capable than LCA. However, they are also 50% to three times more expensive in unit cost, not to mention the future operational cost.
If Indian airforce and navy still wants to keep their numbers of tactical fighters in the future, then a less capable but extremely cheap fighter like Tejas is still necessary.
toanI think there is still enough reason for Indian government and airforce to keep LCA projects.
IAF believes it is necessary to keep the numbers of tactical fighters it has (700 to 800 fighters) right now in order to face the threat from Mainland china and Pakistan. After introducing 230 Su-30 MKI, 126 MMRCA, and upgrading 51 Mirage 2000H and 62 MIG-29SMT, there is still room for another 200 to 300 fighters.
The unit cost of LCA Tejas MK1 is around 22.6 million USD per fighter, which should be very ideal for massive production and replacing MIG-21. By comparison, the unit costs of some candidates for MMRCA project:
JAS-39C: 34.0 million USD per fighter.
MIG-35: 35.0 million USD per fighter.
F/A-18E: 49.9 million USD per fighter.
Rafale C: 61.0 ~ 65.0 million USD per fighter.
EF-2000: 70.0 ~ 80.0 million USD per fighter.
Therefore, if Indian airforce abandons LCA project right now and replaces MIG-21 by buying more MMRCA winner fighters (126–> 200 ~ 300), I think it should be financially unacceptable………
toanBecause I do not want my country to be forever dependant on Americans Russians and French for their Arms. I don’t want my country to be sanctioned everytime we test a nuke, by countries which have large stockpiles of it. We will get sanctioned anyway, but with Indigenous equipment it won’t affect the armed forces much.
And you only perfect by practice, so LCA may not be that good, but the next one may be better. the other one even more so. Look how far the Chinese have come from their humble mig rip offs.
Sorry but I would love to see my country stand on its own legs.
The engine of LCA Tejas MK1 is from USA (F404-GE-F2J3 and F404-GE-IN20).
The engine of LCA Tejas MK2 is highly likely to be from USA (F414) too.
The Kaveri engine now is in the hand of Frenchman.
The development of FBW system for LCA was heavily helped by LM and BAEs.
Do you really believe this fighter can be immune from the sanction of USA??
toanDuring the cold war era, the biggest threat for UK homeland is USSR’s hundreds of supersonic and subsonic tactical bombers with thousands of cruise missiles. In order to face this kind of threat, the RAF’s requirement at that time was very similar to the requirement of US navy: A long range interceptor with long range detecting, tracking, and BVR engaging capabilities.
The most ideal choice for RAF at that time was F-14A. However, Tomcat was too expensive for RAF to afford. So RAF finally decided to develop and introduce Tornado ADV instead of buying F-14. As for an long range interceptor for enemy’s bombers, Tornado F3 has done its work very well in the past 20+ years.
However, Tornado F3 is not an ideal choice for dogfighting with other highly agile and maneuverable fighters like F-15, F-16, Mirage 2000, Su-27, Mig-29 and so on. That is the main reason for developing Eurofighter Typhoon.
toanWhen I was a kid, HAL started the concept of LCA.
When I was a school boy, HAL launched the LCA project.
When I became a student of medical university, the TD-1 was born.
When I became an Intern doctor, the TD-1 flew into the sky for the first time.
When I became a resident doctor, the first prototype of LCA project made its maiden flight.
When I finally became a attending physician, the Indian AF got its first productional LCA Tejas at last……😀
toanThe Legend of LCA Tejas……..
1980: HAL started the concept of domestic Light Combat Aircraft (LCA).
1983: HAL launched the LCA project formally.
1985: IAF formally offered its requirements to LCA project.
1986: F404 engine was chosen as the power plant for the initial LCA.
1987: Dassault was chosen as the tutor for the LCA project.
1993: Lockheed Martin was chosen for designing LCA’s FBW system.
Finally, the LCA project becomes a techonological hybrid from India, USA, Russia, French, and Israel.
(and it’ll be a techonological hybrid from more countries if EJ-200 engine is chosen for Tejas MK2…..)
1995/11/17: 12 years after the project had been launched formally, the first techonological demonstrator (TD-1) for LCA project went out from HAL.
2001/01/04: 18 years after the project had been launched formally, TD-1 made its maiden flight.
2003/05/04: The LCA project was name as “Tejas” formally.
2003/11/25: 20 years after the project had been launched formally, The first prototype (PV-1) of Tejas made its maiden flight.
2005: 25 years after HAL had started the project, IAF finally agreed to buy the initial batch (MK1) of Productional Tejas fighters, which includes 16 single-seated fighter and 4 double-seated trainer.
2007/04/25: 24 years after the project had been launched formally, The first productional fighter (LSP-1) of Tejas made its maiden flight.
2008 (25 years after the project had been launched formally):
Before the end of this year, the total family memembers of Tejas plan should include:
a. Techonological demonstrator*2: TD-1 and TD-2.
b. Prototype for Indian Airforce*5: PV-1 to PV-5.
c. Prototype for Indian Navy*2: NP-1 and NP-2.
d. Initially productional fighter*8: LSP-1 to -8.
2011: The time of formally entering service that the Indian Ministor of Defence has predicted recently for the first squadron of LCA Tejas.
2013: The time of FOC that IAF has anticipated recently for the first squadron of LCA Tejas, which is just 30 years after the LCA project had been launched formally.
toanBecause of the protest from Israel, USA government had once suspended the sale of F-15 to Saudi Arabia in 1980s,which offered a very good chance for UK to sell Tornado ADV/IDS to SA.
The 72 Typhoon shall be used to replace Saudi Arabian AF’s Tornado and some F-5 at first. If Saudi Arabian AF decides to buy 48 to 72 more Typhoon in the near furture, then some early Eagle fighters of Saudi Arabian AF shall be replaced by them……
toanInteresting that two squadrons are earmarked for old ASMPs.
I don’t know the degree of stealth incorporated into ASMP. But if you really want the warhead to get to the target without being shot down, put it into a Scalp EG and extend the fuel tankage for a huge increase in range.
ASMP-A is not ASMP, the difference between them is just like the difference between Exocet MM40 Block 3 and Exocet MM40 Block 2.
Comparing with ASMP, it is said that ASMP-A will incorporate stealthy design and have faster speed (the maximal speed at high altitude maybe near mach 4), improved trajectory and maneuverability, and about 2 times of effective range (500 to 600 km).
toanWhat are the squadrons that are projected to transition to Rafale? I see the two at St. Dizier, but what about the others?
1. Provence
2. Gascogne (ASMP-A)
3. Normandie-Niemen
4. Alsace
5. Lorraine (ASMP-A)
6. Lafayette
7. Cigognes
8. Ile-de-France
toan1. What is the max low level speed of Tornado GR4 carying 6000kg, which I presume is the approx weight of 2 drop tanks, 2 AIM-9Ls and 2 1,000lb bombs?
A: 0.8 to 0.9 Mach may be a good guess ~ since it is the safe upper speed limitation for many kinds of traditional bombs.
2. What is the range on a ‘lo-lo-lo’ mission?
A: The typical combat radius of hi-lo-hi for Tornado IDS is 1,390 km. Since a fighter’s combat radius of “lo-lo-lo” is often 50 ~ 66% of the same fighter’s combat radius of lo-lo-lo, the combat radius of 700 to 920 km may be a good guess.
3. Is the max stores load 9000kg? And max take off weight 28,000kg?
A: Yes and Yes.
5. What other fighters have TF radar?
A: A-6, F-111, F-15E, F-16E, Su-24, Su-32/34, Mirage 2000 N/D, Rafale and so on.
6. Will the Typhoon/F-35 use the raptor pod?
A: The possibility should be very high……
toanIn-Flight and Ground Testing of the Candidates for the Tiger Partial Replacement Completed
(Source: armasuisse Swiss Defence Procurement Agency; issued Dec. 2, 2008)
— Evaluation Saab Gripen (28 July 2008 – 19 August 2008):
The flight and ground tests of the first candidate, Swedish Gripen, began on 28 July and covered approximately 30 flights. Approximately 35 hours were flown. That Gripen was followed by the French Rafale.
— Evaluation Dassault Rafale (13 October 2008 – 4 November 2008):
The flight and ground testing of the French Rafale began on 13 October 2008 and covered 39 flights. Approximately 60 flying hours were flown. The number of flights and flying hours, higher than those of the Gripen and Eurofighter, was used for extended tests of a second type of radar. The Rafale was followed by the third and final candidate, Eurofighter.
— Evaluation EADS Eurofighter (6 November 2008 – 2 December 2008):
The evaluation of the final TTE candidate began on 6 November 2008 with the landing of the two Eurofighters and ended on 2 December 2008 with their takeoff to return to their base in Germany. The evaluation of the Eurofighter included armasuisse and Air Force pilots, and altogether 31 flights were completed for a total of 45 flight hours.
— How does it continue?
In January 2009 armasuisse will issue a second Request For Proposals to Dassault, EADS and Saab; the deadline for filing this second offer is the middle of April 2009.
The evaluation of the in-flight tests and the offers, which began in mid-2008, will be summarized by armasuisse in a written evaluation report to be completed by May 2009. A decision is expected by the middle of July 2009; it will be made by the head of armasuisse in cooperation with the Minister of Defence and the chief of the Air Force.
The procurement of the Tiger Partial Replacement (TTE) aircraft is planned as part of the Armaments Program 2010.
toanAccording to the declaration of Magnus Olsson, the test pilot of Gripen DEMO／NG project:
“The JAS-39 C/D today could reach the speed of Mach 1.05 without A/B, but only during the cold season of Sweden. We anticipate that after replacing RM12 with F414G, the Gripen NG shall be able to supercruise with the speed of Mach 1.1 in standard aircombat configuration (Meteor BVR AAMs*4 + IRIS-T WVR AAMs*2) during the normal weather.“
toanCome on, you American / European boys, be honest, most, if not all, of you love these kinds of endless and meaningless “The fighter of my country (or I support) is a brandnew and priceless divine masterpiece, and the fighter of your country (or you support) is nothing more than an outdated and valueless holy sh*t” quarrels, and the personal insults like “I am really a real, fair, justice, and honest person, and you are just a biased, stupid, childish, and pathetic liar”. You will never be really tired of these kinds of argument and personal humiliation, that is why the posts of these series of threads are increasing so quickly, endlessly, pointlessly, and meaninglessly.
toanIt seems that Swiss is very care of the issues of noise, air-polution, and cost for its F-X fighter, and the old fighter it wants to replace is F-5E ~ I’ve heard that Swiss has some narrow highways and small hangars which are just suitable for operating the small F-5E, but not the bigger F/A-18C/D.
Therefore, I think it is Gripen to have the best chance to win this game, if Swiss government doesn’t cancel this project finally.
Sign In
