AbhimanyuBut is it the only the engine that would differ between Mk1 and Mk2?
No. EADs consultants will help in modifying the undercarriage, that will make Tejas Mk.2 lighter. They will also help in increasing the weapon-stations. It is for these reasons that Eurojet is set poised to win the engine contract, beating GE-F414.
Currently, EADs is helping to accelerate the validation of flight-testing parameters on Tejas Mk.1 so that IoC is recieved in Dec. 2010.
AbhimanyuFor all the people who is saying LCA MK2 for MRCA.
1. ADA/HAL track record of delivering things in time is so poor for IAF to even contemplate it.
See, the positive aspect of the decade-long delay in choosing the MRCA is that the Tejas Mk.2 has enough time to catch up with the MRCA. This is important, as one of the excuses given to justify the MRCA was the “delay” in Tejas. Now when both are slated to be introduced in the 2013-14 timeframe, it is enough for the IAF to reconsider the MRCA and increasing the order of Tejas Mk.2. ADA director Dr PS Subramaniam has stated that he is confident of meeting the 2013 deadline for introducing Tejas Mk.2.
2. It is going to take ages for the LCA MK2 to get certified with all the weapons it needs to be truly multirole fighter IAF needs all the capabilities and do not have time for wait for it. So inducting a matured figther as MRCA is the sensible choice.
The above is inaccurate. Tejas Mk.2 does not have to undergo each and every test that the Mk.1 underwent from Jan 4, 2001 to 2010 to get certified. As per the latest statement from Eurojet officials, Tejas Mk.2 can be integrated with EJ-2000 engine in just 2 years.
AbhimanyuThe stark irony in the MRCA “circus” is that, on the one hand the IAF keeps claiming the MRCA is a really “important” purchase, and that they need it very urgently. Whereas on the other hand, the MRCA saga has been going on since 2001, with a decade gone by and no final selection so far. And people say DRDO doesn’t meet timelines !
News articles (really, opinion pieces) in Times of India and Indian Express deride the Tejas for being “delayed” since “1983”, whereas they have no comments on the decade long MRCA saga.
AbhimanyuYes, the Tejas is coming up as the indigenous Gripen, isn’t it.
This is the problem for us outsiders. What exactly is the aircraft that India wants?
I do understand why some Indians say “scrap it all”. If you want something for A2G, wouldn’t the Tejas in big numbers suffice?
India wants a fighter that can “fill the coffers” i.e. overseas bank accounts, of defence ministry personnel, arms dealers and even retired IAF officers, who are arms agents today (like a certain ex-Air Chief).
Rewind to 2001 : IAF wanted about 100 odd Mirage-2000-V fighter jets to augment it’s “doddering” fleet. However, Dassault shut down it’s Mirage production line. So after much deliberation, by 2005 the IAF sent an RFI (Request For Info) to Gripen C/D (not NG), F-16 (Blk 52) and MiG-35. By 2006, Typhoon, the F-18 and Rafale too had been invited to join the tender. Only poor J-10 was left out because of disputes between India and China. Other than that, the RFI was sent to every “tom, dick, harry”, which made a fighter jet. From the 7 ton Gripen, to the 14 ton F-18, it was a “free-for-all”.
Forward to 2009 : The much-delayed RFP was finally sent to the 6 companies in 2008. By this time, Lockheed fielded the F-16 IN-60, and SAAB fielded the Gripen-NG.
But by this time, the Tejas Mk.1 too has materialized into something much more than a “MiG-21 replacement” that it was touted to be by the media. Two of India’s top ex-defence officials publicly stated that the Tejas is equivalent to the advanced Mirage-2000 (the original MRCA), and there is no need to import an MRCA. Another noted aviation expert has stated that the Tejas already has specs equal to IAF’s MiG-29s. Now it’s current specs are already equivalent to the Gripen C/D — one of the earliest MRCA contenders.
Besides, the changes announced for the Tejas Mk.2, like a 90kN engine, more weapon stations, a redesigned fuselage — it is the same transformation that Gripen C/D underwent to lead to Gripen – NG. Thus, the Tejas Mk.2 would suffice as an MRCA.
Unfortunately, the IAF has not yet moved beyond the “blinkered” view of the Tejas as merely a “MiG-21 replacement”.
+1
Best strategy for IAF:b) Build LCA 2 with EJ200 TVC instead of MRCA and save money.
Unfortunately all, except the IAF understand the wisdom of the above. It is hoped that they will soon too.
AbhimanyuFireFox.
Abhimanyup.s. why would you want to rip out electronics from one of the worlds newest fighters and start wasting time and cause delays to entry into service for your airforce by doing a pick and mix of systems?????
Please remember thales etc were at one point rumured to have signed on with Sukhoi for avionics etc! There were actual reports in the news saying that they had signed a deal. So before we get all excited and start ripping out perfectly good bits of kit just to call it an Indian plane we need to sit back and take a deap breath.
matt, you snatched the words from me. I fully agree with your views. Just for the sake of DOING SOMETHING on the PAK-FA, (could be anything, even painting) HAL decided to “rip off” perfectly fine Russian systems, only to replace them with western/Indian systems, that are no better.
They are merely doing all this to display a facade of doing “work” on the twin-seat PAK-FA. This, they’ll use to justify “joint development”, when all they’re doing is “hera pheri”.
It is really shocking to note that HAL is going to town, claiming this is a “25% joint development”. And the media bought this.
I really dont see the problem people have with paying 50% for the PAK FA it will mean that the Indians will get all the operating procedures, process specifications, manufacturing instructions and technical documents to the last 20 years or PAK FA development.
India is basically bank-rolling the PAK-FA to get licence assembly rights. It doesn’t mean India will get the detailed fabrication know-how or technology transfer of the PAK-FA. It is a fact that DRDO did not get the intricate Brahmos manufacturing details either; it got assembly rights only.
AbhimanyuInstead of debating how and if a “Su-50I” will ever be accomplished, we can try listing out the potential enhancements:
1. Second seat for co-pilot
Note that the second seat will be designed by Sukhoi only, and not HAL. It is just a customization for the buyer. Again, note that “history is repeating”, what with IAF demanding a twin-seat Su-30 after evaluating the single-seat Su-27 in 1992.
2. Indian manufactured MFDs
How exactly is replacing Russian MFDs, with Indian ones an “enhancement” ? More like a wasteful exercise.
3. Elbit HMDS (as seen in MiG-29K)
How would just replacing possible 5th generation Russian HMDS by NPO Geofizika (seen in MiG-35), by Elbit be of any use ? Moreso, considering that Russia fielded the world’s first HMDSs
4. Integration of Indian LGBs
5. Integration of Astra AAM
These two are NOT any kind of “joint development” by HAL. In the past too, IAF’s MiG-29s have been integrated with French missiles, and Mirage-2000s have been integrated with Russian missiles.
6. Indian EW suite
Why ? What’s lacking in the 5th gen. Russian EW suite ?
9. Integration with Litening LDP
Why remove the OLS-K only to replace it with Litening ?
10. Integration with Israeli EW and ECM pods
11. HAL INCOM communications suite
12. IFF
13. Datalink with A-50EI and MKI
The next generation Russian EW and ECM pods are likely to be wholly comparable to western ones.
Thus, we see that in actuality, HAL’s so-called “25% workshare” on the customized PAK-FA is nothing more than “yanking out” Russian systems, only to replace them with a “hodge-podge” of Indian / western systems. This was exactly the same exercise done on the laid bare Su-30. The only difference was that the “barren” Su-30 didn’t have any equivalent Russian systems to speak of, and thus the integration of Indian and western electronic systems was necessary then.
Hence, in the light of all this, how exactly do the HAL and IAF tout the so-termed FGFA as a “joint development” between India and Russia ? If merely REPLACING (I repeat, REPLACING) Russian avionic systems with equal western systems is called “joint development” by HAL and the IAF, then we ought to change the very definition of lies and cheating.
AbhimanyuThe following appears to be another one of IAF’s “hare-brained” acquisitions :-
IAF plans to acquire 75 basic trainer aircraft
Looking to acquire 75 basic trainer aircraft for the Indian Air Force (IAF), the Ministry of Defence has issued a request for proposal (RFP) to a dozen global aircraft manufacturers.
The manufacturers including such global names as Embraer (aircraft name in brackets) (Tucano), Pilatus (PC-7 or PC-/9), Raytheon (T-6 Texan), Finmeccanica (M-311), Grob Aircraft Company (G-120TP), EADS PZL (PZL-130-TC-11 Orik) and Korea Aerospace Industries (KT-1) are required to submit their proposals by March 17.
Reference :-
http://beta.thehindu.com/news/national/article97811.ece
The above names are all taken from references in wikipedia.
IAF claims that this import decision was taken in the light of the crash of the ab-initio trainer (used for basic flying) HPT-32 Deepak, that killed the instructor and trainee. Now it is “unfathomable”, as to why the IAF has totally forgotten about the NAL Hansa trainer, which is already certified, and being used in flying clubs across India and Australia.
It is true that the Hansa, like the HPT-32, is a side-seater, whereas the bids are for tandem-seat trainers. Then, in that case, whatever happened to IJT Sitara ?
Why doesn’t the CAG haul up the IAF for what is clearly a “shoddy” decision ?
AbhimanyuI think the idea of an indigenous 5th gen. fighter must be told to the IAF.
On the one hand, they’re purchasing … er….I mean….”jointly producing”……the two-seat version of PAK-FA. And on the other hand, they’ve given a slow nod to the indigenous Medium Combat Aircraft.
Europe can develop a 5th gen fighter. The question is, which 4.5 gen fighter will it succeed, or will be based on ? The Typhoon, Rafale or Gripen ? Or will there be 3 European 5th gen. fighters ?
AbhimanyuI think non-Indian members must not be allowed to start A vs. B comparisons in this thread. A Chinese member recently triggered an A vs. B comparison, which led to disruptions.
And Pakistani members like to question stuff about Tejas — questions that have been answered “millions of times”.
So here’s a basic FAQ on Tejas that will help :-
1) It’s not overweight, and weighs the same as it’s contemporaries, JF-17, Gripen C/D, and T-50. Check any source for that.
2) Engine bids for Mk.2 have been submitted on Dec. 2009. Eurojet-2000 and GE-414 are the competitors. 100 engines will be procured from the winning company.
3) Design began in 1987-88. 1983 was the year of official sanction and fund allocation.
AbhimanyuI don’t think such A vs. B threads can lead to any concrete conclusion as to which fighter is “better” and in which areas it is “better”.
Actually, all “new-breed” fighters presently are very good and equivalent to each other (except weapon-load), like Gripen, Rafale, Typhoon, J-10 and Tejas. All of them are able to carry weapons on 8-13 hardpoints, advanced target pods, HMDS, quadruplex FBW, FLIR, contemporary radars, RWR, jammers, and a variety of weapons.
All are canard-delta jets, except Tejas, which is purely delta. Now again this leads to “heated” debates on which one would be more manoueverable. There is no point in debating it, as all are capable of performing high-g manuoevers. All claim to have T/W ratios >1.
AbhimanyuI’ve heard that the JF-17 has F-16 like wings, with the same shape and inclination.
The following are 2 comparison diagrams. From the top, both jets indeed look very similar. The wing-shape is nearly identical.
AbhimanyuYeah…that´s all nice. But in the early 1980´s a bunch of people were allocated a few hundred of million dollars to make way for a new multirole fighter that could replace the aging MiG-21s in the the 1990s. But nothing seemed to been happening until 1991-92 (or something in that area). Isn´t it a fair question to ask, what happened during the decade before that and with the money? A decade of party down with lovely girls?
Edit: FYI In the 1990s Sweden experienced the worst financial crises it had ever known. The interest rates went over 500% and the value of the Swedish krona was down more then 100%. This little “experience ” made the Gripen project cost more then $5 billion higher then expected. That´s what you get when buy the engine etc. from abroad….
We have answered this question many times. If you don’t know the answer, you can “dig” the archives of this forum. Nobody is going to explain all over again.
For a start, the first Tejas did roll out of the factory floor in 1995. Then came nuclear sanctions in 1998, because of which FBW consultancy and further engines were withdrawn.
AbhimanyuYour claim and below the present Indian reality.
http://ajaishukla.blogspot.com/2009/11/order-for-2nd-tejas-squadron-being.html
It is upto you to choose your sources to believe : the IAF chief’s interview, or the unnamed “senior IAF officer” in a blog post. I’ve also posted the interview of Tejas’ project head, who concurred with the IAF chief.
I have utmost respect for the author of the blog though, a former army officer and one of India’s well-known defence journalists. His “inside info” has been the most accurate so far.
BTW Abhimanyu. You are not in the position to claim any facts or come with timelines. You´r credibility are gone long time ago….
If Thailand pays the same price for equipped Gripens (with weapons, accessories, service and spares) as does the Swedish Air-Force, then I may require a re-think .
AbhimanyuI think Sens, Maskirovka, etc. must do some basic research before repeatedly asking the same questions on Tejas, like it’s timeline, selection of engines, etc. Wikipedia’s article on Tejas is very well referenced with news reports, official announcements, interviews and technical articles.
Once again :-
1) IAF has ordered 48 Tejas Mk.1.
2) In Dec. 2009, Eurojet and GE officially submitted their bids to supply 100 engines for Tejas Mk.2. The RFP also mentioned an option for 40 more. DRDO will announce the contract winner in a few months time.
3) Point 2 means that, IAF will order atleast 100-140 Tejas Mk.2 units. They may be powered by either the Eurojet or GE-F414.
4) In a TV interview (posted here for the “umpteenth” time), IAF chief said that IAF is happy with Tejas’ progress, IoC will be achieved by 2010, and the first squadron will enter service in 2011.
The above points have been repeated here and backed by references, ad nauseum. Still, if some don’t understand, or don’t bother to do a “wee bit” of research, then their intent to “flame” is clear.
Sign In
