matt, as usual your question baffles me. I take it you know what G is and what people mean when writing things in the format G limit : +9/-3.5

so what exactly do you not understand ?

LCA is officially limited to 6G at the moment due to restrictions on FBW and a pilot pulled 6.9 G @ AI 2011, as per a poster in BR.

Mk2 info board has very little in terms of numbers, the G limit being one of the numbers that’s not there. I don’t know what else can be read into it.

about IAF being happy with 8G it simply means that with modern WVR missiles and aiming, IAF feels 8G is optimum.

as predicted here ADA has shaved significant amounts from the empty weight. of course the usual suspects were convinced it wasn’t possible or it would take 20 years/saaaab to do it. :rolleyes:

stands at 6560 kg now.

@ rayrubik, oops sorry.
just copy paste then and remove this one.
thanks again. 🙂

dear quadbike,

Please point out where in my posts I have tried to pass off my opinion as the IAF’s or MoD’s.

each and every time you have tried to pass off your opinion (whether gleaned from flightglobal or the chronicles of madangopal is not my concern) as fact. on this issue only the IAF or MOD decides what is ‘fact.’ everything else is just speculation. that includes internet forums and also defence mags.

The LCA did not meet all the IAF requirements in its current form. Even for the IOC IAF made certain concessions (According to ACM Naik). The truth is that if the MK1 was good enough there would be no need for an MK2.

absolutely correct.
although you should know that such ‘concessions’ from the home air force are quite normal. the gripen was inducted by Flygvapnet before it achieved IOC. the rafale and the EF flew around in their air force markings for years sans many of their operational capabilities. none of that makes them bad projects, the eurocanards are at the cutting edge in terms of engineering and project management. (and can probably teach a thing or two to the JSF team)

Going by the track record of the programme the IAF may not be inclined to count on ADA to deliver the MK2 on time and with the promised capabilities.

for the poor track record of the programme IAF should put the blame squarely at the doors of the govt. they asked ADA to develop a fighter and stopped funding them. there was little ADA could do about it.
they started funding them again from 1993 and here we are 18 years hence and the LCA Mk1 has achieved IOC, inspite of the 2 years lost in US sanctions where lockheed martin refused to return the Indian scientists’ own work. even when compared with the eurofighter and rafale that is quite creditable. especially if you consider the fact the LCA team had to build the lab infrastructure and the discipline of modern fighter development in India along with developing LCA.
ADA’s track record is hardly at fault here.

p.s. NOT ONCE have I insulted you, personally or otherwise.
if you disagree please complain to the moderators.

As I clarified I was thinking/talking about the MK2 alone.

no one on keypublishing forum can know what goes on in your brain. (thankfully)
we have only your typed replies to go by.
since you chose to continued your stand pre-clarification you thereby negated your ‘clarification’.

moreover the exact statement you were replying to was about numbers of LCA vs numbers of MRCA in IAF, not whether it was LCA Mk1 or Mk2.

Its been widely acknowledged by a host of defense journalists from many publications (quite reputed ones like Aviation week and flight global even) that the MRCA deal is more than likely to go beyond the intial 126. Which is better than the gusses made by us arm chair generals.

“acknowledged” by a host of journalists ? Aviation week and flight global even ? shiver me timbers ! it can’t get more official than that can it ? 😀
seriously, how old are you ?

who the heck are they to “acknowledge” anything on behalf of IAF ?
which of them is the air marshal in charge of IAF’s procurement ?

It will depend on how the MK2 comes off. The Akash for example done well so subsequent orders were placed, the MK1 did not turn out that well so only a token number was ordered. I doubt the IAF will have the LCA in mind when they are making the MRCA decisions.

yada yada yada, everything depends on something my young genius, nothing is absolutely certain. and akash SAM has nothing to do with LCA orders.
only 40 Mk1 was ordered because IAF agreed that by the time production of that number is completed HAL could start production of LCA Mk2.

I have no idea why you think the rather strange notion of LCA being or not being in IAF’s mind while taking a decision on MRCA has anything to do with this discussion.

You are the one stating opinions as facts which will not make them so.

ah ! the “you are a bad man because I say so” attack. 😉 my 5 year old nephew does it when I ask him to stop being naughty.

83 MK2 is what is confirmed that is fact.

a fact that has been repeated umpteen times by me.

You think they MAY order more that is opinion.

well, hold the press ! that is EXACTLY what I claim it is, my opinion, based on my years of observing IAF procedure and interacting with military officers.

What we know is that ADA has solid commitment for 83 LCA MK2 this is fact. Unless and untill there is offical confirmation that they are going to order more what I said stands.

sigh ! since you insist on carrying on this inane exchange…… :rolleyes:

you said

While Teer has over stated the numbers of the LCA as 126 (the ACM and ADA says 83)

Fact : IAF’s commitment to LCA currently stands at exactly 123 (40 Mk1 + 83 Mk2) not counting the 8 LSP which too will join IAF.

The MRCA winner is almost certain to have more orders than the 126 because the Tejas MK2 is limited to just 83 orders.

Fact : There is no official statement even remotely resembling that, a fact you acknowledged. Neither is there any confirmation that IAF would exercise its options for MRCA beyond the 126 number, which also you acknowledged as “None of us know IAF’s offical view on the matter”

it’s quite another matter that a subsequent order for LCA MK2+ is not just likely, but very likely and this is apparent to anyone who has even a little understanding of how IAF works. but let’s ignore that for the moment.
and now, you say

What we know is that ADA has solid commitment for 83 LCA MK2 this is fact. Unless and untill there is offical confirmation that they are going to order more what I said stands.

please let me make you understand dear sir, that what you said isn’t standing, or even sitting; it is lying down, dead in a coffin waiting to be buried.

so kindly allow me to remind you :

do not try to pass off your personal opinion as official view of IAF/MOD/DRDO/HAL etc.

it’s your problem that you have too much money and want to get rid of some. 😀

but please don’t push this personal opinion as IAF’s official view of the matter.

thanks for clearing it up.

The MRCA winner is almost certain to have more orders than the 126 because the Tejas MK2 is limited to just 83 orders.

which is where you are wrong. Mk2 suggested number of 83 is in the exact category as MRCA’s 126. there is no cap imposed on Mk2 as you suggest (where did you get that idea ? )
IAF can and probably would exercise its options for both varieties.