AbhimanyuThat is compared to CKD Kits, Best of Luck.
Please note that HAL does not manufacture every component of any fighter jet that it licence assembles like MiG-21, Jaguar, MiG-27 etc. There is a supply chain of over 200 private govt. enterprises that it sources materials from. As an example, the composite panels for wings will be sourced from NAL (National Aeronautics Lab), ejection seat from DRDL Pune, HuD from CSIO Chandigarh, cockpit displays from Samtel Pvt. Ltd, to name a few.
So the IOC is ?
IoC will be achieved soon before the first squadron is inducted into the IAF.
AbhimanyuThere is something wrong here, either by reporter or…
You are talking of 26 LCA assembled in a year, when you know a little bit of history of LCA.
Note that the production rate of Su-30 MKI is 12 aircraft per year. Thus starting now, upto end of 2010 atleast 22 Tejas can be manufactured, given that it has only 1 engine and is much smaller.
Granted, they can improve the production, what about the IOC?
See, as per a previous interview of India’s Defence minister Mr. Antony, the IoC of Tejas will be obtained by next year :-
“Oct. 25: Defence minister A.K. Antony on Saturday declared that the induction of the light combat aircraft Tejas into the Indian Air Force (IAF) would be a reality after 26 long years. He announced that the LCA is expected to get final operation clearance by the end of 2010 and that the first delivery of the LCA to the IAF would take place in 2011. The Indian Air Force, he said, would induct one squadron initially and a total of seven squadrons eventually in due course of time.”
the LCA is a joke.I mean how long have they had prototypes flying
Since Jan 4, 2001. Thus, 7 prototypes have been flying since only 8 years.
and they still dont know when it will be in service proper
As per the interview posted earlier, it will be in IAF service by end of 2010.
by the time they iron out any problems with it the PAK-FA will be sharing the ramp with it, which will make it comnpletely obsolete.
Indian PAK-FA’s introduction date has tentatively been set at 2017 by IAF Chief, Mr. Fali Major. The chief of Sukhoi, Mr. Pogosyan has categorically refused to begin work on India’s customization until the Russian one is complete (when that will be, was not mentioned).
As per the latest statement of Dr. Natarajan, chief of DRDO the MCA will feature F-22’s technologoes 10 years hence, i.e. 2019. Thus, MCA will “share the ramp” with PAK-FA and hopefully, completely replace it too.
AbhimanyuMP703, Mr. Fali Major is referring to the first batch of 20 Tejas fighters. These are excluding the 8 LSPs (2 of which that are already flying). Thus, a total of 28 Tejas are scheduled to be inducted by next year.
The Tejas Mark 2 will also be introduced in the IAF by 2014, as per another interview by Mr. Fali Major.
———
The following is another comment by a very senior member from BR forum :-
The OZ forces plan to retire all their F-18Fs by 2020 (AWST),in favour of the JSF.What point is there in therefore buying an aircraft in its last avatar which other air forces are going to discard in a decade hence? Serious thought should be given to the future obsolescence factor of the various types competing,as we should not be sold a turkey at Christmas prices!
I fully agree with the above. One reason why major airforces across the world are deferring to purchase the Rafales, Eurofighters etc. is because of their impending obsolescence. Nevertheless, it is true that the IAF cannot have 126 fighters of 5th G, but of 4.5 G only. Hence, if they can be replaced easily by fighters that are indigenously made, are cheap, and are sanction-proof then there is NO reason why an F-18 or Rafale must be purchased, instead of the Tejas Mk. 2.
AbhimanyuThe following is a news report in whch Mr. Fali Major has said that the first squadron of Tejas will be inducted by 2010. He also wanted ADA to develop the Mark 2 and even MCA :-
Bangalore : The induction of first squadron of the Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) to Indian Air Force (IAF) can take place by the end of 2010 or the beginning of 2011 with regular persuasion and monitoring of the LCA programme, the Air Chief Marshal Fali Homi Major said.
The Chief of Air Staff during his farewell visit to Aeronautical Development Agency recently said: “IAF is on the transformation stage in the matter of gaining overall capabilities, with the help of organisations such as DRDO, ADA, HAL and other partners.”
An official release said that the Chief of Air Staff was affirmative that the ongoing LCA programme would further lead to LCA mark II, MCA and many other projects of self- reliance nature by sprinkling lot of patriotism around.
It may be hoped that like many past tenders of the armed forces, like 155 mm howitzers, 197 light helicopters, etc. the MRCA poposal is also dropped/cancelled at the last moment and the Tejas Mk.2 is inducted as the MRCA. This time an indigenous alternative will be present, unlike no indigenous howitzer or light choppers.
Reference :-
http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NEWS/newsrf.php?newsid=10814
AbhimanyuIn my view, it may be “laughable” and “shameful” that a nation which has a full-fledged 4.5 generation fighter jet under development in full swing, seeks to purchase similar fighters from abroad at exorbitant costs.
What is even more “shocking” is that the tender for the same has also been pursued in a leisurely way. It is not at all like India’s purchase of the Israeli AWCs while our own AEWC is in a “nascent” stage. Both the Tejas Mk.2 and MRCA are estimated to be out by 2013-14. India is perhaps the only nation with such a dichotomy.
Some other examples :-
Arjun tank / T-90
PAD-AAD / “Flirting” going on with Aegis, Patriot, Arrow etc.
Dhruv / Global tenders for medium helicopter
MCA / PAK-FA
Akash / Spyder
PAD / MRSAM
Pinaka / Global tender for MBRLs.
AbhimanyuWing Commander Kukke Suresh VrC (retd) has written many articles for bharat rakshak, including the one posted by 21Ankush. This article and this article are some of his other articles posted on bharat-rakshak’s website. He was the relative of one of the owners of the site.
Abhimanyudont measure empty weight to favor tejas to gripen measure real usefull data, like MTOW and range, radarrange/angles instead etc.
The above has already been done with in other threads numerous times. Besides, this thread is about MiG-35, and not Gripen or the MRCA tender in general.
AbhimanyuI think he concept of MTOW is not clear to you still. 24,500 kg is the max. that MiG-29 K can take-off with. Once in the air, it can refuel to it’s full internal fuel and so it’s all-up weight will increase to >25 tons or so.
If it’s MTOW is 24,500 kgs and max. payload is 5.5 tons then assuming internal fuel to be 4.5 tons (1 ton to be refuelled mid-air) then it’s empty weight comes to 13.5 – 14 tons. This makes it in the F-15C class.
As regards the abbreviation MRCA, it stood for Medium Range Combat Aircraft. Now, IAF circles refer to it as MMRCA, which stands for Medium Muti-Role Combat Aircraft. The “Medium” here still stands for Medium range and not empty weight, considering that the IAF has invited tenders from the 7 ton single-engine Gripen, to the 13.5 ton two-engine MiG-35. However, it is said that the absolute empty weight too will play an important role in this because a serving Air Force chief (now retired) when interviewed few years back, said that the MRCA will “bridge the gap” between the “light” Tejas and “heavy” Su-30 MKI.
I’m also sure that the af.mil site has revised the specs of the F-15C and F-15 SE. I distinctly remember F-15 SE’s empty weight to be 14-15 tons empty. A member who said that these are old specs, may thus be right.
AbhimanyuIn my view, MiG-35 is of the weight class of F-15C and has nearly the same dimensions to a Su-30 MKI. But despite this, it does not have commensurate specs as these 2 fighters. It’s specs are inferior to the F-16 in some respects, like payload.
Thus, it is NOT a cost-effective option at all. Besides, given Russia’s past record of cheating on contracts, hiking prices, “arm-twisting”, etc. the IAF must not choose MiG-35 as the MRCA.
AbhimanyuIn my opinion 4th generation aircarfts are the most beautiful aircrafts.I mean aesthetic aircrafts.5th generation aircrafts are also beauituful but there is no soul, just sharp surfaces.
medal64, I agree with your views. The 4th generation has produced the best looking fighter jets.
Be it from the west or Russia, the 4th generation has indeed been the epitome of fighter jets. It demonstrates what it means to be a fighter jet, to fly a fighter jet. Their non-TVC manouevers were graceful and complemented their
already good looks.
Pilots of this generation are not like captain Kirks in these new 5th G “spaceships”, and neither like the sweater-clad jockeys of post WW-2 jets. Pilots of the 4th generation are just that — pilots.
Now amongst the 4th G planes, the best from Russia have to be the MiG-29 and the Su-27. From the US, they have to be the F-teens, especially the F-14 Tomcat and F-16 Viper. From France, the Mirage-2000. However, the Viggen may be an exception as it’s canards made it look like a “weasel”. I personally don’t like canards because they spoil the traditional look of a fighter jet. I don’t say this only because Tejas doesn’t have them, but genuinely.
A 4th G JF-17 too looks much better than the 4.5 “canarded” J-10.
AbhimanyuYes the above links points to 17000kgs for the Strike Eagle, and a little link beside it points to a 14500kg empty weight for the F-15C. Your estimate of 12-13 tons is off by a good 1.5 tons.
As mentioned earlier, if the MiG-29 K’s MTOW is 24,500 kgs then it’s empty weight comes to 14.5 tons. This is equal to F-15C and decisively brings it in the medium class.
This link given by you earlier now no longer works. I also recall referring to the very link long time back to argue how the F-15 Strike Eagle is much superior to the Su-30 MKI, in that despite weighing a “good” 3 tons lesser, it carried 3 tons more external payload. It is surprising that af.mil now says F-15 SE weighs 17 tons in empty.
I can’t see the need for the MRCA either, esp. with the MCA being given thought. If they need numbers desperately fast (which they don’t seem to be in much of a hurry). A couple of squadrons of MiG-29M (new builds) for about $ 1.5 billion would do it. Considering the commonality with existing fulcrums induction should be pretty quick.
See, MCA is to introduce a 5th G fighter in the Indian Air Force and is not related to MRCA. Tejas Mk.2 must be used in lieu of Gripen – NG and F-16; and Su-30 MKI must be used in lieu of the other 4 twin-engined contenders. There is absolutely NO necessity of a foreign made MRCA in the IAF.
AbhimanyuTeer’s style of writing is similar to Nick_76, a former member who was banned earlier. Hence, the language used and ideas expressed are expected.
ante_climax, had it not been for composites Tejas’ weight would have been much more than now. Airbus A-380, (also called a ‘flying dinosaur’) made it’s weight lighter by many tons, because of extensive use of composites. This proved very crucial in weight reduction for an aircraft of it’s size.
Hence, composites are “here to stay”. Tejas’ weight increase is in spite of composites and not because of composites.
If I may allow some “humour”, Tejas shouldn’t have had composites. Then it’s weight would have crossed 7.5 tons and it would have atleast passed muster with the IAF’s “twisted” logic of a medium weight jet, and been selected for MRCA. But it would’ve needed an F-16’s engines in that case.
AbhimanyuAbhimanyu,
How many years Rafale has been around? Its only now Dassault claims that its a mature system. It has put some years in Afghanistan. Tejas will have to put up a lot of years for maturity as India does not yet posses a self made proven plane in recent few decades. IAF needs a mature system. The MMRCA’s even if they have latest additions, they still are evolution that spans 3-4 decades. India needs to have a mix of fighters which includes MMRCA and Tejas.
See, proven-ness is measured in FoC, a certificate that is given after 1 squadron serves any Air Force for a period of 1 -2 years. This includes routine sorties, vigil sorties, training missions, mock war games, etc.
Tejas is expected to get this certificate in 2014 after the first squadron is inducted in 2011. Then it can be deemed combat ready.
The Russian 5th gen will be customised for IAF like SU-30 MKI. But, India still needs MCA for self development. Its more of a strategic decision, than equipment decision. India will never be able to build 6th or 7th gen if we do not pursue MCA.
The need for 2 fifth G planes is unclear. Their costs of maintenance, logistics notwithstanding, there has been no clear explanation by the IAF as to exactly why does it need not one, but two fifth G planes. We know the strategic importance of MCA as you said above; but why purchase PAK-FA ?
Not even China ‘next door’ is pursuing two such projects but only their indigenous J-XX. It must be noted that they too will face Indian 5th G in the south, F-22s from Okinawa in Japan, and B-2s and F-22s from Guam. They have Taiwan to capture, India in the south, an F-22 squadron in Japan and a large USAF presence in Taiwan and the Pacific. But despite all this, they are NOT pursuing multiple 5th G fighters except their indigenous J-XX. Note that PLAAF had rejected the Russian offer for partnership in the PAK-FA many years ago. Their existing fighters too are only as advanced as Su-30 MKI.
Thus, IAF’s “quest” for two disparate 5th G planes is totally inexplicable.
On the purchase decision, IAF was happy with M2K. Our political outlook and new circumstances made it slow. The IAF has urgency. Then there is no guarantee that LCA MK2 will fly in the time frame.
This “urgency” should have been shown by IAF with Tejas instead, as a Mk.2 could very well have been under development by now. Both the USAF and the PAF work very closely and professionally with their pet projects, and ensure their proper development. Be it the F-22 of USAF or the JF-17 of PAF, these are very good examples on how an Air Force must proactively participate in any important project from scratch, and manage it’s development at every step of the way. The IAF has a lot to learn from the PAF in this regard.
Currently being “spoilt for choice”, IAF only knows how to throw “grand tenders”.
AbhimanyuBack to Square 1:)
Once again, the most fundamental difference between every other MMRCA contender and LCA is that whareas every other MMRCA contender is based on a proven (in service) design (and hence a number of operational problems every fighter encounters to start with have been debugged) LCA is yet to enter operational service.
See, I’m talking of Tejas Mk.2 when it would have obtained Final Operating Certificate (FOC) from IAF. FOC certifies a fighter as combat worthy.
See, as mentioned earlier why didn’t passengers of the Airbus A-380 have “apprehensions” about it when it first flew in 2007 ? Your logic dictates they have every reason to :- 1) It was new and inexperienced 2) Never enjoyed operational service in any airline. After all, the lives of 500+ passengers are at stake and also the crew. But the passengers had full confidence in it because it was rigorously tested and certified.
The same will be the case with Tejas Mk.2 after getting the FOC from IAF in 2013.
Besides, the A-380 and Tejas are related. The software developed by ADA to make the layout of composites on Tejas was later sold to Airbus in a “high tension” tender, in which global “biggies” also competed. So, India’s ADA, a “new kid on the block” with NIL experience, selling it’s composite software to Airbus to make a never-tried-before A-380. In the view of some, it is very “risky” and even “heady”, but it has already worked. A-380’s composite frames have proven fine, having flown thousands of passengers since 2007. They can thank the “unproven” Tejas Mk.1 for that.
Even the notoriously nationalist BR forum does not have that many buyers of LCA in MMRCA competition theory.:) In addition, We all know that whereas by 2015 every other MRCAs contender could be introduced in the IAF in required number, you cannot say the same thing for MK.2 with similar levels of certainty regardless of what Mr X, Y, Z has said-read previous history.
Please note that the MRCA is also estimated to be introduced around 2014. As was the case with it’s “elusive” RFP, that was supposed to be sent in 2006, but finally sent in 2008, nothing may also be said of the 2014 date either.
In a few months time, the field trials would start and would continue for quite a while. Would MK.2 be there to compete or would you compare its theoretical qualities against other MMRCA competitors? A physically existing product is different from a paper product.
Unfortunately, the above is “stacked up” against Tejas. The DRDO has to improvise to make the IAF accept the Tejas Mk.2 in lieu of MRCA in 2014.
He was telling me that they started to test the composite materials beginning from 1986, to start getting material data and the allowables that have been used on the Tejas have been conservative. the reason he offered (which I’d already guessed) was that they wanted to ensure that under no circumstance should a catastrophic failure occur due to their over-estimating the material allowables data.
The above is accurate. The designers did not want to leave any “stone unturned” to prevent a situation that Tejas couldn’t handle. That’s why they overstrengthened the Tejas’ frame. This is a partial reason for Tejas’s weight increase.
other things he mentioned was that co-curing and co-bonding of the LCA wing has reduced a lot of fasteners, and most crucially, takes care of fatigue issues due to holes drilled after panels are built and then fastened to the underlying structures.
Tejas has the unique distinction of having the least number of rivets, joints and welding. It’s part count of just 7,000 is the lowest amongst all fighters globally. All these factors have helped in it’s weight reduction.
Composites are just expensive trash and not worth the money you invest in them in my opinion. Mostly composites are LCA is still over weight. While the metal JF 17 is doing allright.
The above is inaccurate. Just like Tejas, the PAF is reluctant to accept more than 40 JF-17s unless it gets a western engine (and also western avionics). Like Tejas, it is also undergoing various tests on 7 prototypes. The only difference is that the Pak media does not “overhype” it’s obvious shortcomings like a requirement for a new engine (even though the Russians are willing) and unacceptability in the PLAAF. The Indian media on the other hand is biased against Tejas to the point of being hostile.
AbhimanyuBunch of BS from BR. LCA does not have an engine. Even it comes it will take ages to integrate, fly and learn. What IAF needs is a system which has a proven production system and ready availability. LCA MK 2 is any way pursued.
See, as per the IAF chief and also the head of DRDO, the Tejas Mk.2 is expected to begin induction in 2013-14. This is the same year that the first few MRCAs will begin induction in the IAF. Thus, there is no time lag whatsoever in their introduction.
Thus, it would be better if the IAF chooses the Tejas Mk.2 as the MRCA.
IAF is anyway working with Fifth gen fighters from Sukhoi and India (HAL and ADA respectively.)
The above decision by the IAF may also be categorized as “nonsensical”. It is totally unclear why the IAF is pursuing not one, but two 5th gen. fighter programmes. No other Air-Force has plans for two 5th gen. jets, not Russia, not China, and none of the European Air-Forces, not even Australia. Even the US is debating the future of F-35 now that F-22 is acceptable to USAF.
DRDO chief Dr. Natarajan has clearly stated that the MCA will have almost all features of the F-22, albeit 10 years hence. Considering that the PAK-FA to be purchased (yes purchased, and not “jointly developed”) from Russia will also be no more than an F-22 when it is supposed to be introduced in 2017 (per Fali Major’s estimate in an interview), the IAF’s decision makes no sense.
The IAF msut cease negotiations with Russia and abandon the PAF-FA. It must actively participate with DRDO, spend resources and efforts to start developing the indigenous MCA from now onwards.
If a war happens what is IAF going to field? Engine less or un proven LCA MK2? IAF needs to gradually shift from foreign dependency to Indian systems. There can be no shift overnight.
The above is a “perennial” excuse to not indigenize. Obviously, we cannot change our neighbours or geography but yet indigenization has to take priority at some time, with some risk and some alertness.
As regards “risk”, please note that the IAF has been sitting on the MRCA proposal since 2001. It dilly-dallied upto 2008 to merely send an RFP and that too without sending a prior customary RFI to 4 of the contenders. Instead of this, had the IAF spent resources like personnel, money and engineers in working together with the ADA to develop the Tejas all these years, the Tejas Mk.2 would’ve begun production by now.
See, risk in introduction of new planes is not so much as its made out to be. The passengers of many airlines can also ask the same of the new A-380 “flying dinosaur”. The VIPs of Israel or the doctors of Ecuador can also ask the same of Dhruv helicopter, vis-a-vis the “proven” American and Russian choppers that Dhruv beat in the tender.
And these are fighter planes not passenger ones that fly with thousands of passengers daily. And wars are not fought daily, but maybe once in 2 decades (in the subcontinent). The IAF can EASILY afford to take such a “risk”, if there ever was one.
Even at 2015, you will not see LCA MK2 in numbers, where as you can have lot many MMRCA birds.
See, by 2015 only 8-10 MRCAs will have been introduced in the IAF (as first 8 have to be delivered off-shelf). The same will be the case with the Tejas Mk.2 also.
LCA is a light bird. MMRCA is a medium bird. What will be the LCA MK2 weight?
Absolute weight is irrelevant from the IAF’s very own behaviour itself. It has sent the RFP to candidates ranging from the 7 ton Gripen, to the 12.5 ton MiG-35. As already discussed earlier,the Tejas Mk.2 will have range-payload specifications similar to Gripen and F-16 on offer. The other 4 contenders have capabilities similar to the already extant Su-30 MKI.
Hence, the Tejas Mk.2 and Su-30 MKI complement each other perfectly and there may not be any need of a so-termed MRCA in between.
There is no urgency that LCA MK 2 to be in service in lieu of MMRCA.
In my view, the urgency could not have been more acute. The Tejas Mk.2 has everything in it’s favour to be selected as MRCA, except IAF “boffins” :- the same expected release date as the MRCA, and same specs as Gripen and F-16.
The squadron strength has to be augmented. MKI, LCA, MMRCA, 5th gen etc will fill them up.
Not just augmenting squadron strength, but also reducing the numbers of fighter types is a priority. The IAF must finally “wake up” to the practice of keeping 400-500 fighters of one single type. Thus, it must eliminate the MRCA in favour of Tejas Mk.2 and eliminate the PAK-FA in favour of MCA. Otherwise it would be committing the same mistake it did in the last century by having as many as a “nightmarish” 9-10 types at one point of time.
Sign In
