HAL begins flight trials of LCA Tejas Mk-1A

[Lava820]

On procurement front PAF has always proven to be more nimble than IAF (sad for me).

IAF is progressing well on a capability driven modernization plan.
Additional combat support assets like Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS), Airborne Early Warning and Control (AEW&C), Flight Refuelling Aircraft (FRA) are also being procured. Air Defence Radars, long and medium range surface-to-air missile systems (S-400, MRSAM), Low Level Quick Reaction Missiles (LLQRM), Akash Prime and 1S, Spyder SAMs and Close In Weapon System (CIWS) are being procured in order to provide adequate multi-layered air defence. Development of the Operational Data Link and upgraded version of Integrated Air Command and Control System are at advanced stages of completion which would enable the IAF to be ready to fight modern hi-tech wars.

 

[MirageBlue]

Won't happen. It took 5 years to go from AON to CCS approval.

This is definitely going to be on schedule. Tejas Mk1A first flight (SP-25) was earlier than scheduled, in May 2022 itself. A lot of risk reduction activities related to various sub-systems being flight tested on other prototypes has also been done.

Tejas Mk1A first production fighter will be delivered to IAF in Feb 2024. There's no doubt about it.

brah its still not good enough......the flights yr saying maybe will be with drop tanks r are in ferry range category. Mean from 1 air base to another. In Combat Air Patrol mission u will need to carry yr full weapons load fly in a hot zone do yr mission and still have enough fuel to return back safely. Thats whats called Combat range. And that what matters for an A/C in air warfare.

With 1 hr internal fuel its combat range is only 500km. Which is not good enough. At best it will only be used as an interceptor that way these Mig21s r also used as interceptors in PAF and IAF for this reason. It wont be able to function has a multirole a/c that it is designed for.

also what do u mean by ''Mk1A was supposed to be a quick fix''? isnt its internal fuel capacity and lack of maneuverability a concern for u guys?

It's internal fuel is ~ same as JF-17, as is the engine thrust. So what you're saying for the Tejas Mk1/Mk1A applies to the JF-17 as well.

So question is- what's the JF-17's role in the PAF? just interceptor?

It's kind of known and actually accepted by HAL , ADA and IAF themselves that LCA aerodynamics is not upto the mark. But at this point there's not much we can do.

If we give up now, then in few years everything we have learnt will start to get lost. It's important to stick with this project untill the next one gets into production.

One thing I would say is that the DASH HMDS we are buying for this is quite a costly item. It's to cover up for some of the deficiency. And in the initial stage of conflict in WVR it's shown promising results. I will leave it at that. This solution will not solve the problem but make it but easy.

DASH HMDS was not integrated to cover up any aerodynamic deficiency (which is minimal to start with). Even Rafale has the Thales HMDS integrated. Which person will crib about it's aerodynamics?

 

[VkdIndian]

IAF is progressing well on a capability driven modernization plan.

I have no doubts about that and I want the best for our defence forces.

But a toxic mix of bureaucracy, HAL, DRDO and military planners have failed to provide our forces what should have been done at a much faster pace.
It took Pulwama to trigger urgent procurement and installation of secure comms. It was going on for decades at its own pace. PAF had that capability for more than 15-20 years. Look at the number of AWACS IAF has. Is it adequate for the airspace we have to cover? Look at PAF numbers. It may not be the best in the world but it is doing fine with them. PAF was able to negotiate and finalise the deal for J10s in a time frame in which files on our side wouldn’t have even left the MoD. These are just few examples. There are many more.

The current government has triggered many good things. But we lost a lot of time which we shouldn’t have. Even now there are hiccups that would take some more time to take care of.
Tejas would have come out much faster, had adequate push been given by the powers that be.
Now, Tejas is coming up well and would be a capable beast with home grown AA missiles and smart munitions.
There are lost decades in between. No one to answer for that.

 

[ProudPak]

70% indigenous 4.5 gen aircraft. Congratulations to Indian scientists and engineers! Hope PAF takes heed. Pakistan's JF-17 needs to reduce reliance on China for critical subsystems. It is about time it had an indigenous FCS.

70% looool ..

OK

 

[Umair Nawaz]

Integration of new systems shouldn’t be an issue since most of the newly developed aircraft have modular concept.
Engine change may not be that easy. As per my understanding aircraft is desgined around available engine and putting in a completely different one may be a tall order. If RD3 is already installed, putting in a WS series may not be feasible due to structural change requirements that would add to cost and time.
I am sure PAF would have done due deliberation and decided on the best option. On procurement front PAF has always proven to be more nimble than IAF (sad for me).

actually jf17 is a buffed up F20 tigers shark, with f16A wings and Gripen's vertical tale as well as airbrakes of a mirage. We were developing with Northrop Grumman a F20 Tiger shark for Pak specific needs with full local production and TOT including design in late 80s under SABR II Project. Until America sanctioned us in 1990. We then by mid 90s signed agreement with CATIC who were also under sanctions for Super 7 project with Northrop Grumman for Tiananmen square protests.
Both projects were merged together and result was jf17, jf17 also has a mig21 style spine in the upper side of its airframe and has the same mig21 guns. Thats Super 7 project influence in it.

So it was always designed to carry an American F404 engine right from start. But due to sanctions we couldnt get so as a compromise China convinced Russia for RD93 engines. American and Canadian GE and PW engines r both high performance engines which give excellent high speed handling. RD93 is a slow speed handling engine, its gives its best performance in slow speeds.

So with Ws13E we will be able to fly it to its full design potential. Testings have been going on and off on jf17s since 2010 with ws13.....just last year there was a video that im trying to find in which this ws13e is being tested with full afterburners in PAC, and the smoke n dust flowing due to its full 101kn thrust is a sight to see. But unfortunately cant find it yet if i did i will mention u in that post. Oh BTW, ws13e is same size as rd93, its basically a rd93 on steroids. ws13 is based on rd93. So basically same engine tech with Chinese further improvements. Its not a Chinese invention/new engine from scratch.

Right now, make due with the pic and old thread i found of jf17 with baseline ws13 testing.

 

[SQ8]

In close combat JF-17 lacks what it takes to win the fight. Its wings doesn’t have wing twist nor does it have enough area to provide a low wing loading. Its performance during low speeds and high alphas would be very dangerous for the pilot indeed. It has a Maximum G loading of only 8, as claimed by PAC. Its thrust to weight ratio is another negative point. Pakistan Aeronautical Complex(PAC) proudly displays the RD-93’s “Combat thrust with afterburner” as 19,200lbf, while the whole defense community knows RD-93’s thrust is 18,300lbf and the only real thrust increase was achieved with its new re-designed Sea Wasp RD-33MK engines- which has been explicitly stated by Klimov. However, Klimov’s RD-33 series 3(or series 2?), whose avatar is RD-93 with re-positioned Gear boxes, has a provision for emergency thrust which Klimov says can produce 8700kgf(~19200lbf) in their officially released document. They further state that as “Take-off emergency mode”. So the mentioned thrust can only be used during take-off where the Air is denser, and also only during emergency situations since it would seriously lower the engine’s lifespan. This is a far cry from PAC's “Combat thrust” claim. Hence the true, lower than published, specifications of Chinese and Pakistani components are open to any one’s guesses. In any case, the close combat capabilities of JF-17 is below average or average at best.


The next Achilles heal is JF-17’s speed. For a good interception, speed is an important criteria. However JF-17’s max speed is Mach 1.6 which is claimed by PAC. This indicates that JF-17 is draggier. When compared, their F-7s(Reverse engineered Mig-21s) have higher speed of mach 2+ with a lower thrust engine. The IAF fighters which it is going to face, all have speeds greater than the Thunder.

What absolute tripe!

Doesn’t have the wing twist? Its not a kite
Its stressed to +8/-3 Gs … how did wing twist get to you… resorting to stupidity to get high?

What is the wing loading on it? Quote it vs a comparable jet before spouting nonsense

As for speed - it isn’t designed for chasing down the Mig-25 - it’s designed for acceleration and transonic transition. You can send the Bison for it and it will be brought down before it manages to cross the border by PL-12.

I mean there is logic and understanding, then there is Bhaktora Chutiyapa such as yours.

 

[VkdIndian]

actually jf17 is a buffed up F20 tigers shark, with f16A wings and Gripen's vertical tale as well as airbrakes of a mirage.

As per my knowledge based on widely available open source info, JF-17 is a version of FC-1. Purely Chinese developed aircraft. PAF did give inputs but they were minimal considering limited Pakistani capability in this regard.

it was always designed to carry an American F404 engine right from start. But due to sanctions we couldnt get so as a compromise China convinced Russia for RD93 engines.

It is possible to carry out preliminary studies and plan for a certain engine. But final work can progress only after one engine has been finalised. The aspects related to size, various engine controls, fuel supply etc are extremely engine specific and can’t be modified for a fighter class of aircraft. It may be feasible for passengers jets where engines are slapped outside. Even there, there are serious technical issues as seen with 737 Max.

Once an airframe is designed around an engine, only minor modifications seem feasible to me. You would agree that change of size is completely ruled out due to consequential impact on airframe size and other engine related aspects.

I guess, it wouldn’t be viable to change the engine now.

Chinese could have designed WS-13 keeping RD93 as the base design then there is a possibility. Not very easy to mimic and copy everything. There are bound to be differences that would make it very difficult to swap.
In such a scenario RD-93 can be removed and used for Block -1 and 2 and block 3 fitted with WS. Cost would still prove to be challenge.

Let’s wait and see, what comes out of this. I am a little sceptical though.

 

[Umair Nawaz]

As per my knowledge based on widely available open source info, JF-17 is a version of FC-1. Purely Chinese developed aircraft. PAF did give inputs but they were minimal considering limited Pakistani capability in this regard.

It is possible to carry out preliminary studies and plan for a certain engine. But final work can progress only after one engine has been finalised. The aspects related to size, various engine controls, fuel supply etc are extremely engine specific and can’t be modified for a fighter class of aircraft. It may be feasible for passengers jets where engines are slapped outside. Even there, there are serious technical issues as seen with 737 Max.

Once an airframe is designed around an engine, only minor modifications seem feasible to me. You would agree that change of size is completely ruled out due to consequential impact on airframe size and other engine related aspects.

I guess, it wouldn’t be viable to change the engine now.

Chinese could have designed WS-13 keeping RD93 as the base design then there is a possibility. Not very easy to mimic and copy everything. There are bound to be differences that would make it very difficult to swap.
In such a scenario RD-93 can be removed and used for Block -1 and 2 and block 3 fitted with WS-10. Cost would still prove to be challenge.

Let’s wait and see, what comes out of this. I am a little sceptical though.

yeah, good points as always VkdIndian as always. Waisy FC-1 and JF17 arnt different fighters/variants, they r same jets with 2 names to the best of my knowledge. One is a Chinese name/designation other is Pakistani.

Pakistan is actually a 58% owner in this project and has a 50-50 profit share agreement for exports. Given how Chinese r and the kanjoos they r known as, i dont think they would have agreed to 58% our share and 50-50 profit split had it been a purely Chinese developed jet. If u have worked or done business with Chinese u would know what im saying.

Another point i would like to differ is, that jf17 is build around engines. This approach is a Russian approach, they develop a/c around engines, and same is for chinese they also do the same. Since this a/c was a western design ie US, in US they develop a/c around the cockpit and pilot comfort rather then around engines. These r just 2 different approaches for designing fighter jets.

JF17 since was a f20 tigershark, was also designed that way.

But i agree with u generally, infect PAF also plans to install the new engine in Block 3s and the older ones will keep on flying with older models. But lets see what PAF decides.....for now Blk 3 r flying with older rd93.

Or han, Cheenio ko underestimate na kia kr, wo copy k master hain, chahe jitni b complex product q na ho......Chhuhe, Billi, saanp or cockroach b kha jaaty hain.....ye sab kha kha k boht teez ho gye hain wo log......100% copy maar lety hain or wo b boht fast!!!!!

 

[VkdIndian]

Or han, Cheenio ko underestimate na kia kr, wo copy k master hain, chahe jitni b complex product q na ho......Chhuhe, Billi, saanp or cockroach b kha jaaty hain.....ye saab kha kha k boht teez ho gye hain wo log......100% copy maar lety hain or wo b boht fast!!!!!

That’s is definitely a very solid argument. 😀😀

Let’s see how things pan out. I am sure PAF would have covered all angles.

 

[Chandragupt Maurya]

News is coming that Tejas MK1A will use UTTAM MK2 AESA Radar which has 992 TR modules and is way more advanced in comparison to MK1 variant

 

[my2cents]

Fcuking hell, this has been a long journey

Better late than never.

 

[hussain0216]

Better late than never.

Better never, then this shit

 

[K_Bin_W]

70% looool ..

OK

70% and top of that 4.5 gen, LMAO.. delusion of the highest order.

There was another indian Einstein claiming 100 percent indiagenous.

 

[Trango Towers]

Better late than never.

Let's not jump the gun...few decades to go b4 this beast enters service

 

[my2cents]

Better never, then this shit

You learn from it and improve. No nation has progressed from assembly plant products and call their own.