HAL pegs price of Tejas fighter at Rs 162 crore

[JohnyD]

I am not interested in comparing LCA with the Rafale.

I am interested in building a credible IAF and at the same time build up the aerospace Industry in India and revitalizing our economy.

Each DRDO AEW&C costs us 100 million. Offer Indian built AEW&C aircraft to each LCA squadron along with the necessary Air to Air refuelers. How would they be any less than a Rafale ? If anything they would be more flexible and more lethal.

I work in the aerospace industry and I can assure you Rafale is NOT going to give any great boost to our Aerospace Industry. At least nothing that 800 LCA will not provide.

you are not interested to compare LCA with Rafale but IAF certainly is...and I dont buy your numbers funda...with Rafale you are actually buying the sophisticated tech...remember its TOT clause...u wont build the local industry overnight..have patience...

as far as DRDO AWACS is concerned, I guess it will support Phalcons but there is no comparision at least now....

 

[AUz]

Can you enlighten us about the superior avionics,4 axis fly by wire,composites,navigation equipment,radar,HMD in the block 2 please I inclined to know about these.

Information is not mature. I'll tell you when it becomes mature. Alot of reports are circling around. Inflight refueling is confirmed by PAF and also the picture of IFR prob on JF-17 is published...which means, even MORE range!!! that is wonderful! JF-17 block II could most probably reach Israel with inflight refueling! haha...

Composites are already in use in JF-17 block 1. Go to JF-17 "information pool" to get more information.

Radar in Block II will remain the same, KLJ-7, albeit with up-gradation...

Believe me, Pakistan got LUCKY with JF-17 Thunder. We could have NEVER thought that this project would turn out to be THIS great, Mashallah!

And can give us a source where PAF and PAC confirmed agreement for large nos of jf-17s.

PAF is building JFT along with PAC...No need for contract per say. PAC is not an independent, private aircraft company like Boeing etc.

PAF has "contract" of 150 aircrafts solid, and the number might be increased to 250...

 

[holysaturn]

Well, RD 93 is an upgrade of RD 33 which has been powering Mig 29s all over the world, including in IAF...I'm not sure if American engine is significantly superior...might be some difference, but negligible...

I don't know where you get the less responsive thing...

Also, I don't see any trade-offs in JF-17 uptil now...

It is has more service ceiling than LCA (it means it can fly higher..6,000 ft. higher than LCA's maximum flight height), both aircrafts have same speed (Mach 1.6 to 1.8), and JF-17 also has more range 3,450+ km vs 3000km for LCA....JF-17 can carry 4 tons of pay load (4,000 kg) ...I am not sure of LCA's payload...probably there is a difference? :/

well an engine with fadec is always more responsive than an engine without one,plus russian engines are poorly built compared to american ones esp the RD series which due to its poor reliability was not used to power single engined fighter until jf-17 where as 404 is used in gripen, MAKO,t-50 trainer and the ge-404in20 is the highest rated 404.

Its poor efficiency gives was the primary reason for the short legs of early mig-29s but that is improved with the latest rd-33mk with blisks,fadec which are not present in the rd-93 as of now.The combat load of the jf-17 is not 4 tons but 3 to 3.5 tons and not to mention that having a far less wing loading than the jf-17 a fully loaded lca handles far better than a fully loaded jf-17 which is the most likely configuration in combat.

And about the altitude difference its is a known fact that the delta wing works better and flies faster at higher altitudes than the conventional wings(similar comparison of mirage and f-16) and tejas vortex lifting surfaces enable better controllability at high alpha angles so while tejas can be controllable at 26-28deg AOA jf-17 struggles to maintain controllablility at 24-26 deg and lack of 4 axis FBW and high wing loading worsens the situation.

 

[SrNair]

[q


Well, in that case, getting ruled by Muslims...for atleast 500 years!...and getting your civilization, temples, and 'gods' destroyed by Muslim invaders..was a bigger humiliation. Also, the fact, that your hindu women were raped day and night by Muslims...and Muslim invaders like Tamerlane have explicitly written that only "hindu-women" were raped and those Hindus who joined Islam and "became our brothers" were treated as "we treat our brothers"

And no, getting "escorted" back to your nation by enemy planes is much, much more humiliating.

Twisiting the historical facts.and off topic .pathetic.Muslims invaders are central asians and persians.Not pakistanis.
and Pakistanis is manifestation of mughal oppression in India.You already show reasons.Hindu womens raped and rest hindus converted and this people and their generation is your predecessors.And generation that oppressed by Muslims invaders caused the creation of Pakistan.

 

[MehrotraPrince]

If Tejas is comparable to Mirage-2000 @ $26M a pop, only an idiot would pay $45M a piece to upgrade a 33 year old Mirage, unless that near obsolete Mirage is still better than brand new Tejas.

Because @ $ 45 million upgrade for Mirage also include weapon package as well as other spare parts, since this is last upgrade for our Mirages, while Tejas MK1 just cost $ 26 million ( aircraft only, excluding weapons, spares, support systems and one need to remember that Mirage is already flying in IAF but Tejas will take 3-5 years more to get in active service).

 

[Manvantaratruti]

you are not interested to compare LCA with Rafale but IAF certainly is...and I dont buy your numbers funda...with Rafale you are actually buying the sophisticated tech...remember its TOT clause...u wont build the local industry overnight..have patience...

as far as DRDO AWACS is concerned, I guess it will support Phalcons but there is no comparision at least now....

Of course IAF is not interested in what is good fro India. Their job is to figure out what is best for IAF. However policy planners needs to look beyond IAF wish list.

All kind of sophisticated tech can be built in-house if we can put in the necessary effort and money. The entire LCA program cost us only 1 billion $.

What are you comparing DRDO Embraer AEW&C with ? Phalcon ? Why ?

 

[AUz]

well an engine with fadec is always more responsive than an engine without one,plus russian engines are poorly built compared to american ones esp the RD series which due to its poor reliability was not used to power single engined fighter until jf-17 where as 404 is used in gripen, MAKO,t-50 trainer and the ge-404in20 is the highest rated 404.

No one is denying that Americans build better engines, but the difference is not of "significance" in performance b/w RD-93 and 404...that is my point.

Tejas engine is a little better, I can give you that..but not decisively better.

The combat load of the jf-17 is not 4 tons but 3 to 3.5 tons and not to mention that having a far less wing loading than the jf-17 a fully loaded lca handles far better than a fully loaded jf-17 which is the most likely configuration in combat.

You see, thats the problem. You are innocent.

3.5 tons is a prototype 1 2007 number...

JF-17 block 1 payload is atleast 4000 kg (Dubai Airshow statistic from 2011!!!) and many Chinese sources report it to be even more. Chief Designer of JF-17 Thunder stated the payload, at Dubai Airshow, as > 4000kg ....which means "More than 4000 kg"

Most latest payload figure for LCA from HAL was 3,400 kg to 3,700 kg maximum.

So JF-17 can carry more payload to vastly superior ranges.

And that is just block 1 without inflight refueling....

And about the altitude difference its is a known fact that the delta wing works better and flies faster at higher altitudes than the conventional wings(similar comparison of mirage and f-16)

Yes. Delta wing has this advantage.

Both designs have their advantages and disadvantages.

and tejas vortex lifting surfaces enable better controllability at high alpha angles so while tejas can be controllable at 26-28deg AOA jf-17 struggles to maintain controllablility at 24-26 deg and lack of 4 axis FBW and high wing loading worsens the situation.

Then people tell me that I go hard at indians.

For the above line, I have a source...a test pilot who flew F-16s, and even Mirage 2000-5 (Middle-East deployment), all his life and now testing JF-17..according to him...JF-17 is VERY responsive and outperforms even F-16 at low-speed, tight turns...while when it comes to Mirage 2000..JF-17 will..and I'm quoting him.."beat Mirage 2000 in a dog fight hands down!"

Now what is YOUR source of the above stated line?

 

[SrNair]

There was no Pakistan back then, only hindustan. Hindus got r@ped..shameless hindus that is. My ancestors, who were courageous and dignified, stood up for their rights and LEFT a barbaric system that divided humanity into castes...made humans "untouchable garbage", and told women to burn alive when their husband dies. My ancestors accepted the system of equality and justice..which did not divide humans into sub-human categories.



I hope you would think that. Raping Kashmiri Muslim women goes well with indians and your army.



Current Pakistan is composed, other than of Punjabis, of tribes and peoples who conquered Delhi and defeated indian armies...Search of Khilazai Pushtun tribes. So yes, Pakistanis DID rule and/or defeated indians in the past--again and again..but then again, it is stupid to use the word 'Pakistan' since nation-state is a recent concept.


And no, it is REAL humiliation for you to have signed an agreement of stalemate with a nation SEVEN-TIMES smaller than you.

In all previous wars, W.Pakistan (today's Pakistan) defeated a larger nation and forced it to sign stalemate with it...

In 1948 , Pakistanis got THE MOST strategically important lands in Kashmir. Pakistan captured population centers of Gilgit , Skardu etc and secured access to central Asia...Cutting India off from Central Asian route..and hence containing poor indians in useless gigantic plains .... Where India would've got entire Kashmir due to Hindu treachery ...it only got some parts..and that too which are strategically of very less importance...and made even less important due to Indo-Pak water-accords ..

In 1965 , Pakistan defeated Indian attack on Lahore city and forced indians to retreat , captured strategically important Indian towns like Khem Kharan , captured strategically important Indian supply-lines like Muna Bao railway station , PAF just badly blasted the a$$ of five times larger IAF , and all this eventually forced India to face the humiliation of signing an agreement of stalemate with SEVEN TIMES smaller nation-that was badly outgunned and outnumbered during the war... Your OWN media back then called it as "giving a walkover to Pakistan."

In 1999 Kargil war , just 5000 Pakistani troops+fighters got 30,000 indian soldiers with their pants down .... We slaughtered the f*ck outa your poor troops...At the end of the war , Pakistan captured strategically important Indian heights such as point 5353 , Dalu Nag , Saddle Ridge etc etc..We STILL hold these Indian territories ... We over-look NH-1 and Indian supplies to Siachen...

So in every war against W.Pakistan (Today's Pakistan) , Indian forces have faced humiliation from SEVEN TIMES smaller nation..When indians faced their EQUALS...they were a$$-raped by Chinese But Pakistanis faced SEVEN TIMES larger nation and stood their ground pretty...

180 million Pakistanis contained 1200 million indians ...and THAT is humiliation.

Bangladesh was a CIVIL WAR and your OWN general said that if wasn't a military victory of india



They were escorted. Senior members here have confirmed this. Even indian members who have connections in military confirmed that Su-30s entered Pak's airspace and were locked-on by F-16s immediately and were "let to return to india while the beep of F-16 lock ringing all the way" ....

And indian migs never dared to cross LoC...you bombed Pakistani soldiers that were in indian territory. Big deal?

When indians did cross LoC however, they got shot down right away

If Pakistan is like this then no one can saved poor pakistanies.Boast man........ Boast Boast about medieval glory and barabrisms.But think carefully what is the present situation of Pakistan ? Yesterday a brave Pakistani kid sacrifices his life for 100 of kids in his schools.Who is responsible for that?Ha... ahaa....So much for tribalisms and Pashtun glory blah..blah.People killed like this
Whether you like or not.It is this attitude Pakistan become a big zero in world stage.Think about that.
Sold your all sovreignity to some western superpowers .Think about it.
Check the difference between India and Pakistan.
And return to topic if you can.

 

[Manindra]

PS, can any senior member tell that if basic specs of Tejas MK1 are out? Wikipedia has specifications for HAL Tejas MK1..are in they in right ball-park?

Specifications in wikipedia makes Tejas MK1 as a REALLY under-powered aircraft...I'm sure there is some catch. I mean, combat radius of just 330 km for LCA? Thats pathetic.

JF-17 Thunder block 1 has combat radius of 1,352 km, more than three-times of LCA with slightly superior payload, too?

There's definitely something missing....

Tejas empty weight has less compared to JF-17 & its payload is 4000 kg compare to 3600 kg of JF-17 , LCA have MTOW of 13200 kg compare to JF-17's 12700 & its engine is more powerful compare RD-93.
RD-93 series engine consumes less fuel in dry thrust but guzzle more fuel in wet thrust & unreliable & have poor performance in emergency thrust. RD series engine is specialy made for MIG-29 which is twin engine plane & stable design , which have to less use of emergency thrust unlike JF-17 which is single engine & semi-unstable design which have to use emergency thrust many time.

For short combat radius it has IFR so no problem. F-18 Super Hornet is also short leg.
So which one is under powered.

PS, can any senior member tell that if basic specs of Tejas MK1 are out? Wikipedia has specifications for HAL Tejas MK1..are in they in right ball-park?

Specifications in wikipedia makes Tejas MK1 as a REALLY under-powered aircraft...I'm sure there is some catch. I mean, combat radius of just 330 km for LCA? Thats pathetic.

JF-17 Thunder block 1 has combat radius of 1,352 km, more than three-times of LCA with slightly superior payload, too?

There's definitely something missing....

Tejas empty weight has less compared to JF-17 & its payload is 4000 kg compare to 3600 kg of JF-17 , LCA have MTOW of 13200 kg compare to JF-17's 12700 & its engine is more powerful compare RD-93.
RD-93 series engine consumes less fuel in dry thrust but guzzle more fuel in wet thrust & unreliable & have poor performance in emergency thrust. RD series engine is specialy made for MIG-29 which is twin engine plane & stable design , which have to less use of emergency thrust unlike JF-17 which is single engine & semi-unstable design which have to use emergency thrust many time.

For short combat radius it has IFR so no problem. F-18 Super Hornet is also short leg.
So which one is under powered.

 

[AUz]

Tejas empty weight has less compared to JF-17 & its payload is 4000 kg compare to 3600 kg of JF-17 , LCA have MTOW of 13200 kg compare to JF-17's 12700 & its engine is more powerful compare RD-93.
RD-93 series engine consumes less fuel in dry thrust but guzzle more fuel in wet thrust & unreliable & have poor performance in emergency thrust. RD series engine is specialy made for MIG-29 which is twin engine plane & stable design , which have to less use of emergency thrust unlike JF-17 which is single engine & semi-unstable design which have to use emergency thrust many time.

For short combat radius it has IFR so no problem. F-18 Super Hornet is also short leg.
So which one is under powered.

JF-17's payload is more than 4000kg. Haven't you been following airshows JF-17 is taking part in? Even Chief designer of the aircraft stated the payload as "More than 4000 kg" at Dubai Airshow 2011. Please, stop quoting inaccurate stats from 2007 Prototype 1 for goodness sake. Or you are probably still reading dysfunctional PAC site which has not been updated since ages

Kindly, can you show me the source of 4000 kg payload for Tejas..thanks.

 

[kingdurgaking]

Information is not mature. I'll tell you when it becomes mature. Alot of reports are circling around. Inflight refueling is confirmed by PAF and also the picture of IFR prob on JF-17 is published...which means, even MORE range!!! that is wonderful! JF-17 block II could most probably reach Israel with inflight refueling! haha...

Composites are already in use in JF-17 block 1. Go to JF-17 "information pool" to get more information.

Radar in Block II will remain the same, KLJ-7, albeit with up-gradation...

Believe me, Pakistan got LUCKY with JF-17 Thunder. We could have NEVER thought that this project would turn out to be THIS great, Mashallah!





PAF is building JFT along with PAC...No need for contract per say. PAC is not an independent, private aircraft company like Boeing etc.

PAF has "contract" of 150 aircrafts solid, and the number might be increased to 250...

Can you draw the clean weight of Thunder , MTOW, the engine specs of the Thunder?? I have the information in wiki.... if i compare the same with LCA.... i dont think it makes any logical sense how it can carry more than LCA or do more combat radius... i hope you can prove me wrong by providing a logical stats and logical argument

Twisiting the historical facts.and off topic .pathetic.Muslims invaders are central asians and persians.Not pakistanis.
and Pakistanis is manifestation of mughal oppression in India.You already show reasons.Hindu womens raped and rest hindus converted and this people and their generation is your predecessors.And generation that oppressed by Muslims invaders caused the creation of Pakistan.

you are wasting time with him.. all the information he has posted is wrong and doesnt make sense to the thread in the first case.. he is driven by superiority complex... you cant convince him at any cost..

 

[AUz]

Can you draw the clean weight of Thunder , MTOW, the engine specs of the Thunder?? I have the information in wiki.... if i compare the same with LCA.... i dont think it makes any logical sense how it can carry more than LCA or do more combat radius... i hope you can prove me wrong by providing a logical stats and logical argument

lol....You don't asses aircraft's performance by your "logic" ...

You go by tests ...hardcore tests...

No company can even thinking of mis-stating the specifications of an aircraft while showing it to the prospective buying nations.

JF-17 Thunder has a combat range of 1352 km and thats a verified fact. How come logic is needed here?

 

[kingdurgaking]

No one is denying that Americans build better engines, but the difference is not of "significance" in performance b/w RD-93 and 404...that is my point.

Tejas engine is a little better, I can give you that..but not decisively better.


You see, thats the problem. You are innocent.

3.5 tons is a prototype 1 2007 number...

JF-17 block 1 payload is atleast 4000 kg (Dubai Airshow statistic from 2011!!!) and many Chinese sources report it to be even more. Chief Designer of JF-17 Thunder stated the payload, at Dubai Airshow, as > 4000kg ....which means "More than 4000 kg"

Most latest payload figure for LCA from HAL was 3,400 kg to 3,700 kg maximum.

So JF-17 can carry more payload to vastly superior ranges.

And that is just block 1 without inflight refueling....


Yes. Delta wing has this advantage.

Both designs have their advantages and disadvantages.





Then people tell me that I go hard at indians.

For the above line, I have a source...a test pilot who flew F-16s, and even Mirage 2000-5 (Middle-East deployment), all his life and now testing JF-17..according to him...JF-17 is VERY responsive and outperforms even F-16 at low-speed, tight turns...while when it comes to Mirage 2000..JF-17 will..and I'm quoting him.."beat Mirage 2000 in a dog fight hands down!"

Now what is YOUR source of the above stated line?

you accept the fact GE is more powerful than RD.. and Tejas actually has lesser weight than JF-17.. so it proves if JF-17 can carry more.. LCA can carry more than right and will have better radius? prove me wrong

lol....You don't asses aircraft's performance by your "logic" ...

You go by tests ...hardcore tests...

No company can even thinking of mis-stating the specifications of an aircraft while showing it to the prospective buying nations.

JF-17 Thunder has a combat range of 1352 km and thats a verified fact. How come logic is needed here?

True which means LCA will have the same atleast right? going by the logic and facts?

 

[AUz]

you accept the fact GE is more powerful than RD.. and Tejas actually has lesser weight than JF-17.. so it proves if JF-17 can carry more.. LCA can carry more than right and will have better radius? prove me wrong

hehehehe...

As I said, you are innocent

Go to wikipedia..and see empty weight for JF-17...it will say something like 6586 etc...now go to the "source"...it will say "PAC website 2007" ...and THAT is what I'm saying to you guys all along.

You guys are seeing the non-existent stats of Prototype 1 from 2007. JF-17 had 8 prototypes before production started in 2009/10 I guess...

JF-17's empty weight is less than 6,500 kg, which is the empty weight of Tejas (latest figure,2012)...

Again, go through threads of JF-17's information pool and participation in airshows where "actual" specifications are stated...unlike wikipedia which is entirely false and makes innocent guys like you confused

Itna kafi hai ya or b education chahiye kch? I'm a senior member with alot more up to date information. Please educate yourself by going through some JF-17 threads first...

 

[Manindra]

JF-17's payload is more than 4000kg. Haven't you been following airshows JF-17 is taking part in? Even Chief designer of the aircraft stated the payload as "More than 4000 kg" at Dubai Airshow 2011. Please, stop quoting inaccurate stats from 2007 Prototype 1 for goodness sake. Or you are probably still reading dysfunctional PAC site which has not been updated since ages

Kindly, can you show me the source of 4000 kg payload for Tejas..thanks.

You state a airshow for your so called inducted aircraft without actual load it with that load.
Here HAL states a Payload of 5.3 M.T.
Welcome to Aerospace Division of HAL