They did, as they uses the same Israeli EW pod that IAF used on the Mig 21s or 27s. We further modified the internal EW at the MKIs from the Ks, the EW pod however remains the same till today and that will most likely change only by the next upgrade, when the MKI is likely to get the wingtip EW pods. But once again you only try to distract from your earlier claims, which was why would the Mig 21 / LCA be used in escorts when you have more capable Su 30s, or Mig 29s with better BVR capability or IRST and I proved you that IAF is exactly doing that and why, so you can keep posting unrelated stuff as much as you want, but you can't run away from the reality.
Dear sancho
Mig 21 in those exercises were nt using those EW pods they had their in bulit
Tempest EW suite so it does nt matter they were using PODS or not as it was as effective as those pods .
Plus that is also not clear that Su 30k were using those pods becoz the article which i had posted earliear didnt mention anything about them
Your reality on POV= fantasy in real combat 
becoz
your so called low observable LCA /MIg 21 with those EFTS & without having a proper EW suite in escort looks good in your own land against a mediocre / handicapped adversary but not in foreign land
with a hitech adversary equipped with AWACS/ Aerostats /SAM radar/ plus 4.5 gen fighter with aesa/IRST /BVR capabilty .
You have swallowed upon those exercise in 2004 as a standard for IAF in future combat also
but i like to point out that those exercises were done in india only where you can field more MIG 21/LCA as compare to their fighters to overwhelm them plus that too against a mediocre adversary with no awacs backing at all .
That advantage wont happen in foreign land with AWACS/ Aerostats /SAM radar/ plus 4.5 gen fighter with aesa/IRST /BVR capabilty .until & unless you have a proper EW suite either internal/external or electronic attack capabilty from rafale in foreign mission With advent of it's RBE 2 aesa radar + Spectra .
.
LOL another cheap try to distract from the fact that IAF doesn't have dedicated EA fighters, so it doesn't matter who the opponent was, since if you have that capability you use it for the protection of your own fighters and not based on the capability of the opponent. That's why the US are using Growlers and Prowlers in every war, be it Iraq, Kosovo or Libya.
you can keep on LOLLING all you want & accuse me of distracting from the fact, But the fact is we dont have the requirements of EA fighters at those previous wars so we dont need them at that time,
we cant get a growler/prowler like the US becoz they had built them keeping soviet union as their primary threat in mind as they had formidabble air defences SAM plus flankers , so for that they require them to do their specilaised SEAD mission to make inroads for non stealthy fighters/bombers
Their doctrine from the very beginning were offensive so they need them .But not for us at that time .
But now we need them
as now our enemies are getting hitech with equivalent net centric warfare capabilty with improved detection & counter defensive capabilty through adavnced SAM , awacs , aerostat plus high capable fighters
& not only in that for doctrine also changed like IAF"S Surgical strike plus CSD .& as usual with nuclear retaliatory strike mission
So that is the reason we are investing a lot on high EW capable plus with improved self protection suite planes like rafale also upgrading MIrage 2000 / multirole Su 30mki with their EW suites to meet future threat scenarios till our 5th gen fighters comes in & around 2020
Due to the AASM weapon system! The Rafale and the EF were able to detect Libian air defences with their advances EW sensors, but only the Rafale was able to attack them, because they had a suitable stand off weapon, while the EF didn't!
An Epic nonsense
so your POV is rafale'
" AASM is the only factor "& spectra EW suite had no role in it's low obseravilty during those sead mission in libya
& for simply nothing they had comfortably undertaken SEAD mission without taking any support of EA aircraft like growlers in LIBYA .
Amazing !!
6)JAMMING THE ENEMY:
Not really, because all we need to know is, how the IAF uses fighters and how they use tactics! And when they replace older fighters with newer once, while remaining with the same tactics, they only implement the fighter. LCA is even designed and developed with the advantages and roles of the Mig 21 in mind (air policing, ESCORTS, CAS, low RCS, BVR and precision strike capability, data linked with AWACS or other fighters of IAF..., just a generation ahead of what the Bison offered back then), so it doesn't matter how the Eurocanards do it in NATO conflicts, since every country / force has it's own way and own tactics.
i had pointed out this fact 100 times from your prevoius posts & i am repeating that again
"the fact is you are always thinking on one sided point of view , meanwhile ignoring the enemy's capabilty that is your biggest problem"
the adversary have also upgraded their fighters . They have also similiar or even in some cases better BVR capable fighters than LCA MARK1 & much improved detection capabilty
plus no matter how much you beat the drum about LCA ' low observabilty any 4th fighter with 3 EFTS would have
a higher rcs than a cruise missile also no matter how low you fly .Even cruise missile can also be detected so why some one beleiveing LCA would escape detection from against an enemy with AWACS/AEROSTAT /SAM radar coverage plainly on low observabilty basis
plus you are ignoring that in a foreign land you never know what no of aerial threat would emerge & one cannot guarantee 100 % KP of it's BVRAAM against latest planes with improved MAWS & self protection suite
so having as much no of BVRAAMS is a safe bet for any CAS fighters
{IMO}
if LCA doesnt take the help of advanced EW suite either internal/external
LCA 's role in air escort in foreign land would be practical only if employed in high number with strike package to saturate enemy air fighters & air defences by diverting them from strike package .but that would be applicable in PAK scenario only at the moment
but probabilty of high number of casualty of LCA cannot be discarded also
And another distraction! I never said the M2K was passive, that wasn't even the point, but the fact that the less capable fighter
(M2K with limit missile and sensor performance) was used for the escort role, contrary to your believe that the more capable fighters are always used. It's hilarous how often and how bad you try to distract from your wrong claims, by going off topic to something completely different.
and the fact is you still post wrong info even if it is passive or not
that Mirage 2k provided air escort to mirage 2k which is totally wrong as it aint as MIG 29 provided air escort in kargil war
& when people do point out that . You inorder to save your face try to degrade their post with these terrible
accusations of Distractions /diversionary tactics to them
great!!
CHEERS
