Indian Air Force Chief Arup Raha To Take Maiden Flight In Tejas

[Water Car Engineer]

Well done air chief for doing something more suitable to your stature than wearing that silly smile.
However not sure what he was trying to prove since Tejas has not even got it's FOC yet.

http://www.domain-b.com/aero/aero_mfg/20160517_tejas.html

He's taking a ride on the LCA, what's there to prove other than that? What is there for FOC? BVR trials happening, quartz cone and refuel probe are integrating, if not integrated, flight test soon(if not happening). Regardless of FOC, pre-FOC models are being produced now to form the first air force squad. They'll be produced when the FOC is complete anyway.

 

[knight11]

Our Air Marshal has flown the JF-17 and by the way JF-17 was upto the mark with all our Fighters. Therefore, Trainer version was not required unlike the great TEJAS for which initially trainer is built for Indian Pilots to get accustomed to.

Then why are you seeking 8 F-16 block 52, of which 2 will be twin seater. Answer is to train the pilots to fly JF-17.

He's taking a ride on the LCA, what's there to prove other than that? What is there for FOC? BVR trials happening, quartz cone and refuel probe are integrating, if not integrated, flight test soon(if not happening). Regardless of FOC, pre-FOC models are being produced now to form the first air force squad. They'll be produced when the FOC is complete anyway.

He means two things trolling and troller

 

[Dr Shaheryar]

Then why are you seeking 8 F-16 block 52, of which 2 will be twin seater. Answer is to train the pilots to fly JF-17.



He means two things trolling and troller

You gave the answer yourself. F-16 is not our baby made and manufactured by USA, therefore trainer required. JF-17 is our product hence trainer not required. Likewise Tejas is your product why you need a trainer for it.

 

[knight11]

You gave the answer yourself. F-16 is not our baby made and manufactured by USA, therefore trainer required. JF-17 is our product hence trainer not required. Likewise Tejas is your product why you need a trainer for it.

Question you should asked, whether JF-17 dual seat is needed by Pakistan or it is needed for the export countries.

1. If PAF don't need trainer for JF-17, then it means that the pilot would be trained on the F-16 dual seater.

2. If the export countries are seeking dual seater JF-17, it means that JF-17 needs trainer version.

For you queries LCA Tejas don't need trainer for IAF because IAF already have HAWK advance trainer jet. However there are many advantages with the LCA trainer over HAWK trainer.

1. LCA trainer version will have bigger space for the fittment of the MMR (EL/M-2032), and HAWK trainer don't have space for such radar in its nose.

2. The LCA trainer is home grown product and could be customised, such as its digital cockpits could be programed in such a way, that it could mimic SU-30 MKI cockpit, and could be used for the training of the pilots of the MKI, reducing the cost of the training several times.

3. Those LCA trainer could be used in the combat mission, if the need arises, and could be used for the tactical interdiction role, and ground attack role.

4. IAF already is inducting LCA MK-1 in numbers -- 120 number, so the advancement of the avionics, and upgrades could be benifited by the trainer version too.

5. LCA program also have the MK-1 Naval trainer version too, which INAf could used for the carrier operation, thus reducing the training cost of the MIG-29 K and could be used in the costal area defence and survellance.

6. For the Ground attack role, the trainer version could be fitted with the IRST on its nose and NAV attack avionics.
and for the air defence role, the LCA trainer version could carry EL/L-2032 MMR.


P.S HAL too have one more product called Combat HAWK project which is the combat version of the HAWK trainer which HAL is developing with the JV with the BAE for the global market. So the LCA MK-1 trainer will have to compete with the Combat HAWK version too.

 

[Manas]

I think He wan't to say "Dehaant" ..

Kya batt hai , You guy are Hindi pandits . Congrats !

 

[knight11]

Well done air chief for doing something more suitable to your stature than wearing that silly smile.
However not sure what he was trying to prove since Tejas has not even got it's FOC yet.

http://www.domain-b.com/aero/aero_mfg/20160517_tejas.html

For the Air chief to fly LCA Tejas IOC certification is more than enough. Few times ago you posted the Air chief of Pakistan flying in the Dual seater F-16 Block 52, and chest thumping that he is the leader to lead the front, and now when the Indian Chief is only taking a ride on the Home grown product, what makes you uneasy.

 

[sathya]

Trainer is like road ways car, fighter is like F1 car..

Trainer cannot simulate fighters full envelope. That's why each type of fighters have their own twin seaters.

Exceptions do exist.

 

[Dr Shaheryar]

Question you should asked, whether JF-17 dual seat is needed by Pakistan or it is needed for the export countries.

1. If PAF don't need trainer for JF-17, then it means that the pilot would be trained on the F-16 dual seater.

2. If the export countries are seeking dual seater JF-17, it means that JF-17 needs trainer version.

For you queries LCA Tejas don't need trainer for IAF because IAF already have HAWK advance trainer jet. However there are many advantages with the LCA trainer over HAWK trainer.

1. LCA trainer version will have bigger space for the fittment of the MMR (EL/M-2032), and HAWK trainer don't have space for such radar in its nose.

2. The LCA trainer is home grown product and could be customised, such as its digital cockpits could be programed in such a way, that it could mimic SU-30 MKI cockpit, and could be used for the training of the pilots of the MKI, reducing the cost of the training several times.

3. Those LCA trainer could be used in the combat mission, if the need arises, and could be used for the tactical interdiction role, and ground attack role.

4. IAF already is inducting LCA MK-1 in numbers -- 120 number, so the advancement of the avionics, and upgrades could be benifited by the trainer version too.

5. LCA program also have the MK-1 Naval trainer version too, which INAf could used for the carrier operation, thus reducing the training cost of the MIG-29 K and could be used in the costal area defence and survellance.

6. For the Ground attack role, the trainer version could be fitted with the IRST on its nose and NAV attack avionics.
and for the air defence role, the LCA trainer version could carry EL/L-2032 MMR.


P.S HAL too have one more product called Combat HAWK project which is the combat version of the HAWK trainer which HAL is developing with the JV with the BAE for the global market. So the LCA MK-1 trainer will have to compete with the Combat HAWK version too.

So still means you need a trainer. Gud. That was my point from beginning. And please again comparison are made when an actual thing is present. When you will have full flying squadrons then we can compare role of JF-17 and LCA Tejas with what they have and what they don't have. We have 60+ planes flying with no trainers and you have 4 with 1-2 Trainers that sums it up in the long run.

When did JF-17 got FOC? I still cant find any authentic source, can you please post a link, would like to read more.

How many jf-17 birds flying in air and how many tejas flying. Can you please answer that?

 

[@RV]

I am asking what can tejas do which SU30, Mig 29 can't do?

Let me put it this way.
You own a motorcycle, car, and a Volvo bus. Would you use your Volvo to go for a place with a couple of members when the car could do the work. Or would you use the car to carry only you when you can use motorcycle and is using which is very cost effective.

 

[knight11]

So still means you need a trainer. Gud. That was my point from beginning. And please again comparison are made when an actual thing is present. When you will have full flying squadrons then we can compare role of JF-17 and LCA Tejas with what they have and what they don't have. We have 60+ planes flying with no trainers and you have 4 with 1-2 Trainers that sums it up in the long run.

You are actually contradicting yourself. It is very well known, that LCA Tejas was developed with trainer and Naval version from the start. Comparison of JF-17 and LCA Tejas is foolish, because LCA is the program to developed inhouse technologies needed for the development of the fighter plane in India, and on those quest developed a plane what you saw here is LCA Tejas. JF-17 is the industrial venture to get the fighter plane quickly, which is more focused in getting the product quickly and not getting the technology and know how to build the fighter planes.

How many jf-17 birds flying in air and how many tejas flying. Can you please answer that?

Again you are confused here, number of JF-17 which is inducted in haste, without any IOC certification is due to the fact that PAF don't have much choice for the replacement of the J-7, Nanchang Q-5 and Mirrage 3/5 thus is supporting this program, and developed by the Industrial giant, China which have superior industrial base, and CALTIC was already working on this super Sabre project but needed the money which Pakistan invested to complete this plane from off the shelf products developed by the Chinese.

And on the other hand IAF have very stringent demand of FOC, and they had only settled to SOP-2018 standard and agreed for 20 IOC-2 standard, 20 number of FOC standard, and 80 of SOP-2018 standard. That means all the capabilities and the features would be present in the Tejas, which was not present in JF-17 when inducted.

And if you are actually interested in the number than for you

TD 1, and TD-2 -- 2 number (Tech demonstrator)

PV-1 to PV-6 -- 6 number

LSP-1 to LSP-8 -- 8 number

SP-1 to SP-4 -- 4 numbers

NP-1 to NP-2 -- 2 numbers (Naval Variant)

NP-3 to NP-5 --3 number Design worked almost complete (MK-2 Naval variant)

SP-5-SP-20 -- 16 numbers is on the build.

For the sake of you here is the link which will answer to many of your questions -- Interview from the CMD of HAL himself.

http://bharatshakti.in/hal-plans-to-double-lca-production-soon-says-cmd/

Trainer is like road ways car, fighter is like F1 car..

Trainer cannot simulate fighters full envelope. That's why each type of fighters have their own twin seaters.

Exceptions do exist.

LOLZ the Jaguar fighter plane in IAF was developed as the trainer. The sabre Slayer GNAT was the trainer developed by the UK.

 

[RealNapster]

Kya batt hai , You guy are Hindi pandits . Congrats !

You forget to add this "" "" ??

 

[knight11]

Let me put it this way.
You own a motorcycle, car, and a Volvo bus. Would you use your Volvo to go for a place with a couple of members when the car could do the work. Or would you use the car to carry only you when you can use motorcycle and is using which is very cost effective.

Can Su 30 and Mig 29 survives from the attacks and desperation of the Import Lobying.

Ok on serious note both SU-30 and MIG-29 are meant for Air defence/Air superiority and have higher cost of operation than the single engine Point defence fighter plane line Tejas. As far as the original question is conserned, than does SU-30 or MIG-29 can fly with full load in the high altitude airfield like LEH in the prescribed short range distance for takeoff. May be MIG-29 can, but did it passed the cold weather and hot weather test may be no.

 

[Water Car Engineer]

 

[Abingdonboy]

Test pilots are so bada$$- cool as cucumbers no matter what.

 

[Mustang06]

Can someone tell me which HMD is mounted in Tejas?