Few Countries will be briefed on LCA-Tejas: Source

[damiendehorn]

Don't quote me for dumbass 1 liners again.


Generation in terms of electronic warfare. Like I said. Electronics are constantly being updated as well as EW eq. They evolution of streamlined cockpits is still being done. Imagine all aspect observation and tracking. Stealth will be of limited use against othe stealth aircraft. PAK-FA is going to be designed for something like this in mind. As for the Tejas, its a 4 gen airframe very similar to Rafale albeit with a much lower wing loading and weight. The electronics will keep getting updated. Once the engine is the F-414 than the Tejas will have limited super cruise.

Thats very unlikely even with the F414. You don't get super cruise just by increaseing the dry thrust by such a small factor (Just check the F414s dry thrust).

You skipped answering my query wrt. Point #3 which I specifically quoted and focussed on...Your response would be appreciated.

Wrt. to your current point. I do agree that at $40-$45 MM a pop, the price is not lucrative...
Nevertheless, this price is obviously based on the current configuration which includes the Indian requirements, ie. fully loaded..
Potential buyers if any will obviously consist of mostly third world countries...I do not believe that the export version will field each and every component that exists within aircraft as it currently stands...
Next,...exports usually start once economies of scale are achieved..At that point, the price should come down further..without going into if and when Indian sub systems become available for replacement in the current platform.

Nevertheless, we arent there yet...but you raise good points, and certainly something to consider if Export is a consideration for HAL.
Personally, I dont think this aircraft is meant for export...I think it should suffice as a stop gap measure/learning platform for the IAF.

The reason you dont see many third world countries with modern fighters is because they dont have budgets for planes at $40m each. They have to make do with either F7s or do without....thats where the LCA falls....too expensive for third world countries....yet not suited for rich advanced nations needs.

Right now you could buy a similar spec'd F-50 from South Korea for a lot less....and its already available, you see my point...The LCA is still years away from being available for export, priced far higher then its nearest competitor and its from a supplier thats not got the best reputation!

 

[Peshwa]

The reason you dont see many third world countries with modern fighters is because they dont have budgets for planes at $40m each. They have to make do with either F7s or do without....thats where the LCA falls....too expensive for third world countries....yet not suited for rich advanced nations needs.

Right now you could buy a similar spec'd F-50 from South Korea for a lot less....and its already available, you see my point...The LCA is still years away from being available for export, priced far higher then its nearest competitor and its from a supplier thats not got the best reputation!

Wanted to add...
its $30MM without the AESA and advanced EW suite...with it come out to $40-45MM a pop...

I dont think thats a bad deal my friend if at all...Ill have to find a comparison chart but I still think its competitive at $30MM/unit...supply issues not withstanding..

 

[desimorty]

Thats very unlikely even with the F414. You don't get super cruise just by increaseing the dry thrust by such a small factor (Just check the F414s dry thrust).

Source: https://defence.pk/threads/few-coun...-lca-tejas-source.419564/page-5#ixzz3yZbCN3O6

Actually the Gripen NG will use the F414 and will have limited super cruise. The same could be expected of Tejas. Difference in the 2 designs is that Gripen has canards is inherently faster. The Tejas has huge flaps and a lower wing area. Its take off and turns are good but its unstable through and through unlike the Mirage.
But you are right. Even if Tejas doesn't have super cruise for functional use, its top speed and economic flight paths will be a lot better off.

 

[damiendehorn]

Wanted to add...
its $30MM without the AESA and advanced EW suite...with it come out to $40-45MM a pop...

I dont think thats a bad deal my friend if at all...Ill have to find a comparison chart but I still think its competitive at $30MM/unit...supply issues not withstanding..

Your taking the price for the IAF bro. For export you on need to add the development (roughly 1/3) costs etc....so if the LCA is offered to the IAF at say $26-30m add about $8-9m will get you unit fly away cost of around $34m then you need to add the margin for HAL, support, spares, training etc etc......There is no such thing as a cheap fighter.

 

[Peshwa]

Your taking the price for the IAF bro. For export you on need to add the development (roughly 1/3) costs etc....so if the LCA is offered to the IAF at say $26-30m add about $8-9m will get you unit fly away cost of around $34m then you need to add the margin for HAL, support, spares, training etc etc......There is no such thing as a cheap fighter.

Have to run out...But I do want to discuss further...
It might actually be a great thread to see how fighters are priced...

 

[damiendehorn]

Actually the Gripen NG will use the F414 and will have limited super cruise. The same could be expected of Tejas. Difference in the 2 designs is that Gripen has canards is inherently faster. The Tejas has huge flaps and a lower wing area. Its take off and turns are good but its unstable through and through unlike the Mirage.
But you are right. Even if Tejas doesn't have super cruise for functional use, its top speed and economic flight paths will be a lot better off.

Lower wing area? I think you meant lower wing load. I have been following this project from 1983, and its a good design for the 80s-90s the era of the unstable fly by wire. The problem is that it took far to long to mature, and when it does get in squadron service (2020), it might come up against aircraft like J10, j31 and J20.....I don't envy the pilots chances.

The basic design of the cranked delta wing has higher drag, the US even tested a F-16 with similar wing. The higher thrust F-414 will help a lot, though not super cruise. What india should do is apply what it has learnt to develop the AMCA, and not wait like it did with the marut.

Have to run out...But I do want to discuss further...
It might actually be a great thread to see how fighters are priced...

How long is a piece of string? There is no set formula, its what ever the client is able to afford, willing to pay and the circumstance they are in (Case in point Russian pricing for india). I have some IISS papers on the subject but they are hard copies

 

[desimorty]

Lower wing area? I think you meant lower wing load. I have been following this project from 1983, and its a good design for the 80s-90s the era of the unstable fly by wire. The problem is that it took far to long to mature, and when it does get in squadron service (2020), it might come up against aircraft like J10, j31 and J20.....I don't envy the pilots chances.

The basic design of the cranked delta wing has higher drag, the US even tested a F-16 with similar wing. The higher thrust F-414 will help a lot, though not super cruise. What india should do is apply what it has learnt to develop the AMCA, and not wait like it did with the marut.

Source: https://defence.pk/threads/few-coun...-lca-tejas-source.419564/page-5#ixzz3yaCYP3xh

J-10 will be around for another 3 decades. F-16s as well, and F-7s for another 2 decades in some places not to mention Your same arguement could be applied to everything including Eurofighter, Rafale JF-17 because the IAF keeps Migs in cold storage.
Dog fighters that are cheap to keep around. ANd to have dog fighters, you need training. JF-17 does not provide training on the level Tejas does with a higher uptime, more reliable engine not to mention fuel efficient.
Trust me. The big advantage to the JF-17, was that it was fast. Too fast. Now the PAF has huge wishlist with aircraft that already require extreme upgrades.
Tejas does not come off that way. Its failure in deadline extensions but other than that, the LCA as you noted leads to AMCA. JF-17 dies with J-31.
IMO if Pakistan would have bet on being friendly with India instead of an enemy, they could have enough support from Europe or Washington for alternatives. The Chinese should have been 2nd vendor from the beginning NOT the first.
If I look into the investments. I'll bet Karmac is pissed that the got F-7s tooling kits and not Gripen.
The TWR will help. Did you look into the F-414 specs? Its a good engine. The gripen NG will have it, so will the Tejas.
Both are also getting structural changes in accordance to the difference. And if you have look into the wings you'll note that the are highly fuel efficient and provide very low wing loading. The wings are great of Tejas. But they aren't entirely Indian in design.

How long is a piece of string? There is no set formula, its what ever the client is able to afford, willing to pay and the circumstance they are in (Case in point Russian pricing for india). I have some IISS papers on the subject but they are hard copies

Source: https://defence.pk/threads/few-coun...-lca-tejas-source.419564/page-5#ixzz3yaI7Keau

In times of war, price is not significant. Getting a seller is. Who would sell weapons to BD? Or Pakistan or China if CCP attacks Japan?
Old allegiance. Remember how vietnam got all those Migs shooting down USAF. You think a rice producing country could afford it?

 

[damiendehorn]

J-10 will be around for another 3 decades. F-16s as well, and F-7s for another 2 decades in some places not to mention Your same arguement could be applied to everything including Eurofighter, Rafale JF-17 because the IAF keeps Migs in cold storage.
Dog fighters that are cheap to keep around. ANd to have dog fighters, you need training. JF-17 does not provide training on the level Tejas does with a higher uptime, more reliable engine not to mention fuel efficient.
Trust me. The big advantage to the JF-17, was that it was fast. Too fast. Now the PAF has huge wishlist with aircraft that already require extreme upgrades.
Tejas does not come off that way. Its failure in deadline extensions but other than that, the LCA as you noted leads to AMCA. JF-17 dies with J-31.
IMO if Pakistan would have bet on being friendly with India instead of an enemy, they could have enough support from Europe or Washington for alternatives. The Chinese should have been 2nd vendor from the beginning NOT the first.
If I look into the investments. I'll bet Karmac is pissed that the got F-7s tooling kits and not Gripen.
The TWR will help. Did you look into the F-414 specs? Its a good engine. The gripen NG will have it, so will the Tejas.
Both are also getting structural changes in accordance to the difference. And if you have look into the wings you'll note that the are highly fuel efficient and provide very low wing loading. The wings are great of Tejas. But they aren't entirely Indian in design.


In times of war, price is not significant. Getting a seller is. Who would sell weapons to BD? Or Pakistan or China if CCP attacks Japan?
Old allegiance. Remember how vietnam got all those Migs shooting down USAF. You think a rice producing country could afford it?

it all boils down to given $40m which aircraft would you buy? LCA, J10, mig 35....I doubt the LCA will have much traction in the export markets. Who will you sell it to?

 

[desimorty]

it all boils down to given $40m which aircraft would you buy? LCA, J10, mig 35....I doubt the LCA will have much traction in the export markets. Who will you sell it to?

Source: https://defence.pk/threads/few-coun...-lca-tejas-source.419564/page-5#ixzz3yad5xo1S

Political. Its all political. Eurofighter - Rafale _tejas and all.
Got to keep people employed and allies armed.
Vietnam, perhaps. HAL has already gotten a report that is of good quality.
India may enter the arms market late, but this was because of economics. Russians aren't leaving India. They are invested deeply.
Oh and the Mig-29 deal to Bangladesh. Guess who helped with it and pilot training.

 

[Srinivas]

Most modern projects are based on open architecture, thats nothing special. As it is an export version of the LCA will be roughly $40m when you factor in the development costs..IAF have been quoted $26m...integrating and testing replacement systems will increase the price further, negating any cost advantage the LCA would have had.

The main selling piont of the original concept was a advanced yet light and inexpensive fighter that was easy to use. Why would a middle eastern buyer spend $40-45m on such fighter from an unknown source, when they can buy say a mig 35, F-50 or JAS-39?

LCA is a swing role fighter jet, it can be used for ground Attack as well.

There are many air forces around the world who are looking to replace their fighter jets, they can spend money of about 40 mil per jet.

Latin America, countries around china, Africa and Middle East are good markets for LCA.

 

[damiendehorn]

LCA is a swing role fighter jet, it can be used for ground Attack as well.

There are many air forces around the world who are looking to replace their fighter jets, they can spend money of about 40 mil per jet.

Latin America, countries around china, Africa and Middle East are good markets for LCA.

The market for fighters is actually very very small, specially for a light fighter thats priced above $35-40m.

Sub-Saharan Africa only has 2 countries with defence budgets large enough (South Africa and Nigeria) and one of them has allready bought the Griffen. North Africa is dependent on gas/oil exports and with the current prices none really have the budgets for big ticket purchase (those that did like Algeria has already bought Russian SUs, and Egypt bought Rafales).

Latin America is doubtful, Brazil is committed to co-producing the Griffen, and the rest (Argentina, Venezuela, Bolivia etc) are in dire financial trouble.

The Middle East is reeling from the drop in oil prices, budgets are being slashed and none are in the market for light fighters. Unless there is major problems between Iran and the rest of the GCC nations the demand won't change...and if the demand does happen the competition with Russian and US suppliers precludes the LCAs chances.

As for South East Asia, the Philipines has already optted for the F-50, Indonesia is only interested in twin engine fighters and is looking at joint development with South Korea. Vietnam may be an option (they have a decent budget and a growing economy) but again they are looking for twin engine long range aircrafts. The rest either dont have the budget or aren't in the market for LCA type of aircraft.

So please tell me which country will you market to? Where is the realistic demand, remember to afford a $40m fighter they will have to spend near enough $1bn for a single squadron. As of now there is very few nations with thst financial capacity.

 

[Srinivas]

The market for fighters is actually very very small, specially for a light fighter thats priced above $35-40m.

Sub-Saharan Africa only has 2 countries with defence budgets large enough (South Africa and Nigeria) and one of them has allready bought the Griffen. North Africa is dependent on gas/oil exports and with the current prices none really have the budgets for big ticket purchase (those that did like Algeria has already bought Russian SUs, and Egypt bought Rafales).

Latin America is doubtful, Brazil is committed to co-producing the Griffen, and the rest (Argentina, Venezuela, Bolivia etc) are in dire financial trouble.

The Middle East is reeling from the drop in oil prices, budgets are being slashed and none are in the market for light fighters. Unless there is major problems between Iran and the rest of the GCC nations the demand won't change...and if the demand does happen the competition with Russian and US suppliers precludes the LCAs chances.

As for South East Asia, the Philipines has already optted for the F-50, Indonesia is only interested in twin engine fighters and is looking at joint development with South Korea. Vietnam may be an option (they have a decent budget and a growing economy) but again they are looking for twin engine long range aircrafts. The rest either dont have the budget or aren't in the market for LCA type of aircraft.

So please tell me which country will you market to? Where is the realistic demand, remember to afford a $40m fighter they will have to spend near enough $1bn for a single squadron. As of now there is very few nations with thst financial capacity.

There is market for this fighter jet, I think soon the details will be out.

This fighter jet is the best option for airforces who want cheaper aircraft with swing role capability.

 

[damiendehorn]

There is market for this fighter jet, I think soon the details will be out.

This fighter jet is the best option for airforces who want cheaper aircraft with swing role capability.

Well then please do tell where that demand is? What nation is going to buy such an aircraft?

 

[knight11]

it all boils down to given $40m which aircraft would you buy? LCA, J10, mig 35....I doubt the LCA will have much traction in the export markets. Who will you sell it to?

Vietnaam could be the potential buyer reason for being MIg-21 replacement, and India have good defence relationship, and HAL providing spares for her Mig-21, and helping in upgradation.

However I think the its the MK-2 which will be great product in international market reasons :

1. Active duty in Indian Airforce which is forth largest airforce in the world.
2. F-414IN Engine with 10% more thrust that F-414 engine with TVC, whose TVC nossle is available from US and European thus removing the AOA limit and increase STR.
3. Trainer and Naval variant available.
4. MK-1 was not designed for the mass production but MK-2 will be, which could be produced very fast with the subsystems manufactured by Pvt companies like TATA, Mahindra, Godrej efficiently.
5. UTTAM, ASTRA 1/2, Sudarshan LGB will be available till then giving the choise of the customer to choose either Indian (Uttam, Astra 1/2), Russian (Zhuk, R-77, R73), Israeli (2032/2052, python/derby) or european (Raven) choices.

 

[Irfan Baloch]

Aviation enthusiast would at least know what to compare and and what not to compare. A jet which is imported in knocked down kits is being compared to a jet which was home grown is stupid, yes?

Just because there are foreign items, it should perform like a F-16? Lol

Our first attempt at a complex weapon system and it has already demonstrated that it has performed well. Now, it cannot go down from here, lot many challenges were faced and overcome that is what makes it worthwhile for us.

Compared by you of course
Topic is tejas why so defensive?