What’s the accident rate of the MiG-21 for other users compared to Indias. I’m asking because it seem every time a MiG-21 crashes it always a Indian one.

Also are the causes of the accidents ever explained? Is it really due to mechanical failures, old age of the airframes or is it human error?

:confused:

Usually a combination of all 3

See, as already mentioned earlier, the argument of “Customer is king” is your final resort.

There is a reason for this saying, i.e. the customer is always right, as it is the customers expectations which have to be met. So in this case, the IAF obviously believes the LCA does not meet its expectations.

We are discussing that IAF’s assesment of Tejas is incorrect. It is the view of a former Vice-Admiral (retd) and ex-Scientific advisor to GoI that Tejas is equivalent or superior atleast to Mirage-2000 (read: “The case to support indigenous LCA”, The Hindu). It’s payload is equal to IAF’s serving MiG-29s and MiG-27 — not MiG-21. It’s combat range is also estimated to be equal to MiG-29.

I go back to my original argument, if as you say, the LCA is capable as this, then why doesn’t the IAF induct the aircraft in significant numbers?

Tejas today weighs 6,500 kgs which is the same as Gripen C/D. Tejas Mk.2 will have a refurbished undercarriage, more weapon-stations — just the same transformation that Gripen C/D undertook to become Gripen – NG. Mk.2 will have an even more powerful engine than Gripen – NG has.

Now it is nearly ineveitable that IAF will reconsider it’s decision to induct Tejas Mk.2 in lieu of foreign planes as MRCAs. Now, IAF claims that Tejas was meant to replace MiG-21s. So, even if we keep this line, it can induct over 400 Tejas’ because at one time it’s MiG-21 fleet did number that much.

The LCA is STILL undergoing development, has weight issues, is underpowered, has no radar and is no where near being operational. MK2 is DRDOs wishful thinking and a paper aircraft, while the trials for the MRCA are getting underway. How do you possibly concieve the IAF “inevitably” reconsidering the MK2 for the MRCA?

Because, “what is not mechanical can not fail”. It would be a serious trouble if a pilot would want to refuel whil flying, say, over the ocean and not being able to deploy the probe, don’t you think ?

In short: When it is simpler, it is usually less complicated… or the contrary. 😀

How difficult would it be to design a reliable retractable IFR probe, most other aircraft manage it quite well. Besides, using that logic of simpler and less complicated equals more reliable, why not just have fixed landing gear instead of retractable? 😀

See, that is the ultimate argument of “Customer is King”. What we are discussing is, that the IAF is totally incorrect in it’s assesment of the Tejas and it’s capabilities.

Unfortunately, IAF has not only never taken the trouble of co-operating and working with the defence research establishment, it also seem to have a “penchant” towards imported hardware.

The Tejas Mk.2 cannot be termed as an “LCA” in the first place. As per news reports, it will be fitted with a 90 kN – 100 kN engine. EADs consultancy will reduce the undercarriage weight, which will result in even longer range. EADs will also help in installation of multiple weapon-stations and/or bomb racks, that will take the total weapon stations from the current 8, to 10 or 12. This is equivalent to Gripen – NG and F-16.

Only if the IAF needs capability to deliver of nuclear weapons, then one can say that Tejas Mk.2 may fall very short. However, for conventional warfare, it’s range-payload specifications will be equivalent to the Gripen -NG and F-16.

I’m sorry this is complete garbage. Who is in a better position to determine the air force requirements than the IAF itself? DRDO can claim all it likes, but if it can’t produce the goods according to what the IAF needs, then the IAF is left with little choice but to seek other sources.

Regarding the Mk2, seems like what you are describing is a completely new airframe, or at least a heavily revised airframe of the LCA, to incorporate all those changes. I’m not surprised DRDO having to seek external help, considering all the delays with the simpler LCA Mk1. Although given previous experience, I wouldn’t be surprised to hear delays and other problems with this approach.

I think that the time has come for IAF to consider inducting 400-450 units of 1 single type of fighter. The era of operating “bunches” of 60-80 fighters are “long gone”. Every major air-force like USAF, PLAAF, and Russian Air Force have already implemented this strategy.

As per the interview of DRDO chief, Dr. Natarajan, IAF must induct over 450 Tejas jets. In this context, the IAF’s announcement of inducting merely 150 Tejas is “disappointing”. We are told that Tejas’ primary goal is to replace MiG-21s in the IAF, which numbered some 400 units. Thus, Dr. Natarajan’s advise can be heeded by IAF, and 400-450 Tejas jets can be inducted to replace MiG-21s — even though Tejas is actually in the class of Mirage-2000-V, and not the Vietnam War era MiG-21.

HAL’s new chief, Mr. Ashok Nayak has overseen the Tejas development at HAL. Thus, it may be hoped that he expedites the development of Tejas Mk.2 and takes it to it’s logical conclusion. Under him, it may be hoped that the “disastrous” policies of Mr. Ashok Baweja are reversed, and HAL finally stops being a licence producer, to develop it’s own designs.
It can take a “cue” from Embraer, that was set up 30 years after HAL. Today, Embraer indigenously designs it’s own airliners, transporters, and fighter jets — unlike HAL, which is content making spare parts for Boeing and licence producing MiGs and Jaguars.

Having said this, it may still be hoped that the MRCA order is truncated to half, to save $5 billion, and more numbers of Tejas are ordered, instead of the committed 150.

Although the IAF is trying to reduce the number of types it operates, your wishful thinking of 400-450 tejus units is unrealistic.

First of all, although the tejus was initially developed to replace the Mig-21, the requirements of the IAf have changed considerably. Remember, the Mig-21 is primarily an air defence fighter, not a multi-role aircraft. And yes, although the IAF had about 400 of the type, those numbers have significantly reduced through retirement of old airframes and mostly attrition (the infamous flying coffins).

If all the IAF wants are air defence fighters to replace the Mig-21’s, then the tejus in its current form is fine, it doesn’t need any further development. However, the IAF now wants multi-role fighters, which the LCA isn’t close to achieving as of it, your comparison with the Mirage 2KV is whoefully inaccurate. So just becoz the HAL chief says so, the IAF isnt going to induct 450 LCAs. As for LCA Mk2, I bet you will still be here on this forum expecting it to be inducted into the IAF in 10 years time.