What's new

HAL Tejas | Updates, News & Discussions-[Thread 2]

ziaulislam

ELITE MEMBER
Apr 22, 2010
14,416
10
13,517
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
It's actually good for us that they feed their masses this BS. Means they will never have a real onus to try and really achieve anything.

Sweden with population of 10 million made a jet quickly with US engine, sold it to 6 countries. First flight was in 1989, first batch of 110 planes ordered in 1992, first full combat squadron First full combat squadron in 1997.

Now compare that with India (who had Swedish and French help and learnings). First LCA flight in 2001. It is no 2021 and they do not have a full combat capable squadron (just IOC squadron).

That is how bad this programme is
Does Tejas have a MAWs.
Someone was saying it doesnt
I refuse to believe that it doesnt has one
Because every 4th gen fighter has it
Gripen has 6, jf17 4

Its basic part of self protection
 
Last edited:

ziaulislam

ELITE MEMBER
Apr 22, 2010
14,416
10
13,517
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
Here's a brochure for the Elta EL 8212/8222 Wide Band EW jammer pod that will be a key part of the EW suite of the Tejas Mk1A. It is already integrated with the Elta 2052 AESA radar, being a product of the same company. One damn good piece of EW Self protection jammer kit.

EL 8212/8222 WB SPJ
IMO lack of integrated self protection kit and MAWs is going to be big downfall of LCA as compared to contemporary fighters like Gripen

this also means that cost will further go up when buying these pods
 

Ali_Baba

SENIOR MEMBER
May 27, 2018
2,018
1
2,844
Country
United Kingdom
Location
United Kingdom
IMO lack of integrated self protection kit and MAWs is going to be big downfall of LCA as compared to contemporary fighters like Gripen

this also means that cost will further go up when buying these pods
External pods affect the dynamis of the platform alot as the Tejas is a small aircraft, also that means it cannot be internally mounted as they have obviously run out of internal mounting space. The decision to make it as "small as it is", has turned out to be flawed as you cannot place as many systems on it as you need for the modern era. It could have been a briliant decision when they made that decision, and had they kept to schedule, they coud have for a period of time achieved some miitary capability and supremacy before it became obsolete. In the era of WVR, a small fighter with a high TWR would have been a challenge to any contempory platform in that era. Poor project execution and delivery has meant they have missed out of the benefit of their decisions.

It is starting to show how it is a 30+ design paradigm that reflects its ancestry and how that design paradigm was for a different warfighing approach( of WVR dogfights ) than what is now the normal.

Tejas is a very old concept that has taken so long to come to reality, that it is actually obsolete now ... that is why they have the scramble for Mk1A as they have realised it etc ... there is no getting away from a set of decisions made at inception that have not aged well !!!!
 
Last edited:

ziaulislam

ELITE MEMBER
Apr 22, 2010
14,416
10
13,517
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
External pods affect the dynamis of the platform alot as the Tejas is a small aircraft, also that means it cannot be internally mounted as they have obviously run out of internal mounting space. The decision to make it as "small as it is", has turned out to be flawed as you cannot place as many systems on it as you need for the modern era. It could have been a briliant decision when they made that decision, and had they kept to schedule, they coud have for a period of time achieved some miitary capability and supremacy before it became obsolete. In the era of WVR, a small fighter with a high TWR would have been a challenge to any contempory platform in that era. Poor project execution and delivery has meant they have missed out of the benefit of their decisions.

It is starting to show how it is a 30+ design paradigm that reflects its ancestry and how that design paradigm was for a different warfighing approach( of WVR dogfights ) than what is now the normal.

Tejas is a very old concept that has taken so long to come to reality, that it is actually obsolete now ... that is why they have the scramble for Mk1A as they have realised it etc ... there is no getting away from a set of decisions made at inception that have not aged well !!!!
LCA should have been scrapped by 2005 and instead MWF/mk2 or gripen should have been choosen

But anyway MAWs and wing tip mounted sensors dont take place

My guess it is cost savig measure not space saving measure

Gripen a/b c was better then LCA both use same engine
 

Yasser76

FULL MEMBER
Mar 28, 2017
1,574
1
2,387
Country
United Kingdom
Location
United Kingdom
LCA should have been scrapped by 2005 and instead MWF/mk2 or gripen should have been choosen

But anyway MAWs and wing tip mounted sensors dont take place

My guess it is cost savig measure not space saving measure

Gripen a/b c was better then LCA both use same engine

Yes, spot on. Basically India have managed to make a Gripen a full 30 years after the Swedes did it. Mark my words, there will be massive delays as MK1A will run into problems as well if HAL's track record is any indicator. Would not be surprised if MK1As were still being delivered to the Indian Air Force 20 years from now, literally when PAF Block II JF-17s and F-16s will be being phased out
 

MirageBlue

FULL MEMBER
Mar 24, 2020
319
1
608
Country
United States
Location
India
Tejas Mk1 FOC fighter SP-23 landing after it's first flight yesterday.


Does Tejas have a MAWs.
Someone was saying it doesnt
I refuse to believe that it doesnt has one
Because every 4th gen fighter has it
Gripen has 6, jf17 4

Its basic part of self protection
Tejas lacks MAWS. But so does Gripen C/D.
 

MirageBlue

FULL MEMBER
Mar 24, 2020
319
1
608
Country
United States
Location
India
This is the most Indian response ever. "It's OK, we are incompetent, but so is some foreigner too, so it's OK".
Funny when a Pakistani talks about competence. someone whose nation’s technical competence lies in specifying to the Chinese what they want on the JF-17. Since Pakistanis have 0% contribution with ANY part or technology on the JF-17. 0%. Just lots of green paint.
 

ziaulislam

ELITE MEMBER
Apr 22, 2010
14,416
10
13,517
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
Funny when a Pakistani talks about competence. someone whose nation’s technical competence lies in specifying to the Chinese what they want on the JF-17. Since Pakistanis have 0% contribution with ANY part or technology on the JF-17. 0%. Just lots of green paint.
i know ...you led the JOINT venture project
 

KapitaanAli

SENIOR MEMBER
Nov 22, 2017
2,423
-3
2,742
Country
India
Location
India
Members are being too general when they talk about MAWS. When you bring up different fighters, you've to specity the capabilities of respective MAWS. Ignoring very few exceptions, MAWS on fighter jets are highly overrated and is mostly useful against shoulder fired missiles, if that's the nature of your main adversary.

This is why it's not a priority for IAF, unlike the Army with their ALH choppers.

Su30 MKI currently lacks MAWS too. The MAWS under integration for it is an IR/Dual Colour version which can be useful, but with high False Alarm Rate.

Pod will do until MAWS gets better tech, perhaps aimed at ramjet and such. Pod also gives modularity when better MAWS are available. Also note that Mk1 already has an extra hardpoint for this purpose.
 
Last edited:

MirageBlue

FULL MEMBER
Mar 24, 2020
319
1
608
Country
United States
Location
India
i know ...you led the JOINT venture project
I don't want to derail the Tejas thread with JF-17 discussions, but since you guys troll on and on about Tejas and how indigenous it is and so on, please do enlighten us on how much of the JF-17 was developed by Pakistan.

If you know that there are parts of the JF-17 developed in Pakistan, please do share the list. Or forget a list, maybe just 1 part or technology?

I know you'll have no answer just as many others have not had any answer ever since they've been calling it a JV.
 

MirageBlue

FULL MEMBER
Mar 24, 2020
319
1
608
Country
United States
Location
India
TEDBF probably will deserve a thread of it's own, but here is the latest TEDBF model from an interview with the PD, TEDBF program.



From the interview

As formal OR (Operational Requirements) from Indian Navy came out in May 2020, and based on the OR, ADA had finalized on 2 possible configurations for TEDBF. They are continued to be worked on.

1 - Delta with close coupled canards (as the model shows)
2 - Trapezoidal with tail (based on the LCA Navy Mk2 single engine design)

Delta canard configuration is going into the Low Speed Wind Tunnel testing soon. The requirements that the IN has put in terms of carrier suitability, point performance requirements, mission performance requirements, all taken into consideration in working out this delta canard configuration. IN will share it's PSQRs after ADA and IN go over the 2 designs and how they meet the Operational Requirements (OR). After that they will go ahead with one of the designs.
 

VkdIndian

FULL MEMBER
Jan 6, 2021
189
0
130
Country
India
Location
India
I don't want to derail the Tejas thread with JF-17
One country (country 1) needed an aircraft badly but had hardly any options. Another country (country 2) with adequate know how offered them assistance. Country one sent its team to country 2 to lay down the QRs. That is where it’s contribution ended. It just laid down the QRs. Not one bit more since it didn’t have any technical capability whatsoever. Country 2 developed the aircraft and country 1 started assembling the same from the kits supplied by country 2.

Country 2 in its magnanimity allowed the usage of word “JOINT”. Country 1 became a tiger on that day and decided to call itself equal to any other country with a capability to develop an aircraft,.

By this criteria India should call SU-30 a joint aircraft since its role is much bigger than that of country 1 in developing this joint aircraft. 😀😀
 
Last edited:

MirageBlue

FULL MEMBER
Mar 24, 2020
319
1
608
Country
United States
Location
India
One country (country 1) needed an aircraft badly but had hardly any options. Another country (country 2) with adequate know how offered them assistance. Country one sent its team to country 2 to lay down the QRs. That is where it’s contribution ended. It just laid down the QRs. Not one bit more since it didn’t have any technical capability whatsoever. Country 2 developed the aircraft and country 1 started assembling the same from the kits supplied by country 2.

Country 2 in its magnanimity allowed the usage of word “JOINT”. Country 1 became a tiger on that day and decided to call itself equal to any other country with a capability to develop an aircraft,.

By this criteria India should call SU-30 a joint aircraft since its role is much bigger than that of country 1 in developing this joint aircraft. 😀😀
We already know that, don't we. Also, PLAAF didn't ever operationalize the fighter, despite it being cost effective. What does that tell you about the fighter? That it was purely an export fighter for China.

The thing I find ironic is how is it that they don't see it? Do they genuinely believe that assembling a fighter from kits or even raw materials is the same as designing and developing a fighter on one's own?
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Top Bottom