HAL Tejas | Updates, News & Discussions

[sancho]

If yes it would be good what u are suggesting but I don't think dassault will agree to this.

Why would we need Dassaults approval to add components to LCA? In fact, it's silly from them that they didn't pushed harder for commonality to LCA and joint developments that would had benefited both fighters, because that would had increased the chances for the Rafale order and might even had made decisions faster.

 

[he-man]

Why would we need Dassaults approval to add components to LCA? In fact, it's silly from them that they didn't pushed harder for commonality to LCA and joint developments that would had benefited both fighters, because that would had increased the chances for the Rafale order and might even had made decisions faster.

Who knows the details man?

Maybe they are vary of russian inspections!
Although I recon we won't let them do that but anyways no one knows why

 

[DacterSaab]

If Saab can aim on a mini EF and benefit from developments and off the shelf parts, why don't we benefit from a similar "simple" approach and aim for a mini Rafale? Off the shelf-, co-developed- or co-produced parts to speed up developments and ease operations in IAF, rather than complicating everything and increasing costs?

Had Dassault suggested a partnership with us like the EF Consortium I would have agreed with you. But try to look at it from this angle:-
So far IAF has committed to atleast 126 rafale + 63 optional + IN may buy upto 40 and the if FGFA, AMCA or even LCA mk2 are delayed we may see additional orders for IAF so total no. may very well cross 250 almost 1/3rd of our fleet dependent on France.
Also IAF has ordered 40 LCA mk1 and procured engines to equip another 80 LCA mk 2 so I think all will agree with me if I say that final LCA no. may safely cross 200 almost 1/4th our fleet.
Now with such a large AOR is it wise to make 1/3 + 1/4 = I don't know exactly but it's more than half your fleet dependent on France.
But I totally agree with you about not using sub-standard equipment that has adverse effect on the survibility of the state of art equipment aim your products for high performance give them reasonable time and use em when they are ready not only on LCA but also on Mig-29k & Rafale MLUs as well as on AMCA.
But in the current scenario I say we already have the best possible engine, the best possible radar would be 2052 (we should somehow convey the message that we want this radar more than their crappy F-35s they keep offering us) with Elta/American IRST, Dash/Topsight HMS, American EWS, Litening/PDL-NG LDP, Python WVR, Derby/Astra BVR and probably make developing LR airborne cruise missile (295 km range of Brahmos is not up to global standards Taurus range exeeds 500 km) and Anti-ship missile (Brahmos may do but I don't know if LCA center hardpoint can carry 2500+kg) top priority.
Now please don't think I'm an American supporter or anything I really hate the strings they attach but just to be safe lets make LCA dependent on neither Russia nor France. So getting American techs from pro-American nations like Israel, Japan, South Korea (citizens of these countries please do not be offended that is not my intention but I truly wish i had a better way of explaining what I mean) is our best bet.
The 1990s Economic crisis is probably the reason why we still have so many vintage fighters we inducted MiG-29s and M2ks in very few numbers.
What I don't understand is IAF have 200+ MiG-21s and 100+ MiG-27 in need of immediate retirement as well as ~100 Jaguars that should also be retired soon a total of 400+ fighters and they plan to cover the gap by increasing Su-30MKI orders and waiting for MMRCA and LCA to materialize
OK so far but how would you cover up the force depritiation due to extensive delays in MMRCA and LCA?
What I mean is why keep upgrading those fighters whose air-frame life has expired and is a danger not only for the pilot but also for the local public on which it'll crash, fighters that crash so commonly on routine sorties were pilots don't need to push them to their limit, just Imagine what will happen when these expired jets are put in a high intensity scenario where the pilot is obliged/stipulated to push the plane to it's limits?
There are several countries in the world that make stop gap purchases, Why not us? Why didn't we go ahead and order idk say 3 more MiG-29 sqds and 2 more M2k sqds (bring the sqd numbers up and ease logistics of aircraft currently in fleet)?
It wouldn't make us look smaller or poorer, it would just send out the message that we have a sound sense of defending our borders or probably skies in this case.
Please understand I am not suggesting these procurement at the cost of LCA or MMRCA. I'm just saying right now replace MiG-21/27 with MiG-29/M2k (purchase second hand to keep cost down upgrade yourself or extend current fleet upgrade programs) later replace these MiG-29/M2k with LCA/MMRCA/AMCA/FGFA whatever they want/need.
I don't need to say that anyone would prefer MiG-29 over MiG-21 or M2k over MiG-27/Jaguar.

 

[sancho]

Now with such a large AOR is it wise to make 1/3 + 1/4 = I don't know exactly but it's more than half your fleet dependent on France.

You are missing a few things here, LCA MK1 would not have the Rafale techs or AESA / IRST..., nor would there be a need to keep adding Rafale techs when the indigenous AESA might be ready an good enough. We have 80 LCA MK2s on order now, but any order beyond that, would come after 2022, so IF we go for more LCAs or want to offer it to export customers with an indigenous radar, we could do it then.

My point is, that MMRCA's and LCA MK2 order (126+80) are planned to be inducted roughly at the same time frame and with productions of core parts in India. So instead of licence producing 108 x AESAs, IRST and HMS, it could be 188 for 2 type of fighters, which speed up LCA MK2s development and induction into IAF, besides eases operations too.

What I don't understand is IAF have 200+ MiG-21s and 100+ MiG-27 in need of immediate retirement as well as ~100 Jaguars that should also be retired soon a total of 400+ fighters and they plan to cover the gap by increasing Su-30MKI orders and waiting for MMRCA and LCA to materialize

Only the Migs will be phased out, the Jags will remain in service for quiet some time, because we kept producing them for far too long (last produced was in 2008 with an operational life of at least 30 years).
The Mig 27s will already be replaced by MKIs in numbers and capabilites, since it is the replacement for the Mig 23 and 27, which actually leaves only the Mig 21s and the delays of LCA development caused the the need of adding another fighter, which lead to MRCA and now to MMRCA. If it was for IAF, we would have added more M2K-5s by now, but GoI wanted more benefits and opted to go for MMRCA. So while they add a ready and proven MMRCA on the one side with additional benefits, they remain with the hope on LCA too and that's good, but there is no need to see both seperately, but combine as much as possible to speed up things.

Btw, IAF had tried to add 2nd hand M2Ks from Qatar earlier too, but they simply were far too costly. The UAE won't sell theirs anytime soon, so there are hardly options left.[/quote]

 

[he-man]

You are missing a few things here, LCA MK1 would not have the Rafale techs or AESA / IRST..., nor would there be a need to keep adding Rafale techs when the indigenous AESA might be ready an good enough. We have 80 LCA MK2s on order now, but any order beyond that, would come after 2022, so IF we go for more LCAs or want to offer it to export customers with an indigenous radar, we could do it then.

My point is, that MMRCA's and LCA MK2 order (126+80) are planned to be inducted roughly at the same time frame and with productions of core parts in India. So instead of licence producing 108 x AESAs, IRST and HMS, it could be 188 for 2 type of fighters, which speed up LCA MK2s development and induction into IAF, besides eases operations too.



Only the Migs will be phased out, the Jags will remain in service for quiet some time, because we kept producing them for far too long (last produced was in 2008 with an operational life of at least 30 years).
The Mig 27s will already be replaced by MKIs in numbers and capabilites, since it is the replacement for the Mig 23 and 27, which actually leaves only the Mig 21s and the delays of LCA development caused the the need of adding another fighter, which lead to MRCA and now to MMRCA. If it was for IAF, we would have added more M2K-5s by now, but GoI wanted more benefits and opted to go for MMRCA. So while they add a ready and proven MMRCA on the one side with additional benefits, they remain with the hope on LCA too and that's good, but there is no need to see both seperately, but combine as much as possible to speed up things.

Btw, IAF had tried to add 2nd hand M2Ks from Qatar earlier too, but they simply were far too costly. The UAE won't sell theirs anytime soon, so there are hardly options left.

[/quote]

My immediate concern is mki upgrade and lca mk1 and pakfa.

Rafale deal will def be signed this year,no doubt about it.

But we have shown 0 intent on signing tha pakfa contract,we need to think more in that aspect.

Plus as earlier pointed out its high time we get serious on indigenous radars,jammers,irst and maws.

All this stuff will be applicable to air force,navy and army so benefits are immence for all three arms.but I am afraid we are spending far too little on r&d

@sancho

Any idea who develops software for our mki's?
The screens looks just like the russian sm's and su-35.
pls tell me I am wrong on this

 

[DacterSaab]

You are missing a few things here, LCA MK1 would not have the Rafale techs or AESA / IRST..., nor would there be a need to keep adding Rafale techs when the indigenous AESA might be ready an good enough. We have 80 LCA MK2s on order now, but any order beyond that, would come after 2022, so IF we go for more LCAs or want to offer it to export customers with an indigenous radar, we could do it then.
My point is, that MMRCA's and LCA MK2 order (126+80) are planned to be inducted roughly at the same time frame and with productions of core parts in India. So instead of licence producing 108 x AESAs, IRST and HMS, it could be 188 for 2 type of fighters, which speed up LCA MK2s development and induction into IAF, besides eases operations too.

So you mean to use french radars on only 40-80 LCAs depending on when DRDO AESA is ready. but then by your logic GE-F414 is also not the best choice we should have gone for Snecma M-88 instead and possibilly sign engine and radar JVs for future use on both ac.

Move just 1 step more and you'll reach the logical destination which i mentioned earlier 250<Rafale+200<LCA=>1/2 IAF fleet using French/Indian JV equipment and thus making them dependent on France.

 

[he-man]

So you mean to use french radars on only 40-80 LCAs depending on when DRDO AESA is ready. but then by your logic GE-F414 is also not the best choice we should have gone for Snecma M-88 instead and possibilly sign engine and radar JVs for future use on both ac.

Move just 1 step more and you'll reach the logical destination which i mentioned earlier 250<Rafale+200<LCA=>1/2 IAF fleet using French/Indian JV equipment and thus making them dependent on France.

Plus making sure we are never able develop our indigenous systems as there will be simply no need then

 

[sancho]

but then by your logic GE-F414 is also not the best choice we should have gone for Snecma M-88 instead

The F414 was chosen because it suited the requirements, especially of IN, the M88 doesn't and therefor wasn't evaluted.

Move just 1 step more and you'll reach the logical destination which i mentioned earlier

No, because you still think that additional LCAs would also take French radar for example, but they wouldn't if an Indian alternative is available. Today it isn't that's why taking the French AESA as a stop gap, would be the most logical choice, but by 2022 there should be, so no need for further French AESA. Also what makes us dependent on France, when we produce the radar in India, with full ToT and source codes? We are asking for these things to be less dependent from foreign countries, UNTIL we have similar techs on our own.

It's actually like this, if indigenous AESA is delayed or simply not mature enough:

- the first LCA MK2 squads will be inducted with indigenous puls doppler MMR around 2019!!! (same reason why LCA MK1 might have EL 2032s this year)

or

- a ready and proven RBE 2 AESA radar, from the BEL production line

What is better for LCA and for IAF/IN?

 

[DacterSaab]

The F414 was chosen because it suited the requirements, especially of IN, the M88 doesn't and therefor wasn't evaluted.

That's not what I read. Snecma was deliberately excluded from evaluation 'cause it was already conducting talks with GTRE for a JV engine based on Kaveri/M88 (GTX-35VS Kaveri uses components scourced from Snecma).

No, because you still think that additional LCAs would also take French radar for example, but they wouldn't if an Indian alternative is available

Sancho you are not trying to understand what I'm saying. additional LCA would not purchase French radar (I seriously doubt RBE-2AA will fit in LCA nose without any modification which we will not have to pay for) but aren't you suggesting JV which means they will use Thales/DRDO JV AESA thereby eliminating need for any funding for a purely Indeginous AESA project and will also make such a choice financially unviable and even when developed this AESA will not be prefered choice of Air Force due to a better JV AESA already available making this project unfeasible and we will be limited to developing only Tech Demos.

Today it isn't that's why taking the French AESA as a stop gap, would be the most logical choice

Why French why not Russian? 189 RBE-2AA vs 270 Zhuk AE (which will be more financially viable while easing fleet logistics at the same time?) to be inducted in IAF.

but by 2022 there should be, so no need for further French AESA

Any link to confirm the expected date of induction or even a link that provides details of DRDO AESA development hell we don't even know the status of MMR.

Also what makes us dependent on France, when we produce the radar in India, with full ToT and source codes?

Well I'm pretty sure that even after TOT absorption all raw materials will be stipulated to be imported from France just like MKI.
Also we can't really manufacture sophisticated components like T/RMs and other engine components so those will have to be imported.

We are asking for these things to be less dependent from foreign countries, UNTIL we have similar techs on our own.

Yes but as I said earlier as soon as you go for JVs on high-cost equipment like Radars and Engines you kill all indigenous projects in the direction.

It's actually like this, if indigenous AESA is delayed or simply not mature enough:
- the first LCA MK2 squads will be inducted with indigenous puls doppler MMR around 2019!!! (same reason why LCA MK1 might have EL 2032s this year)
or
- a ready and proven RBE 2 AESA radar, from the BEL production line

Where is this fictional MMR. I doubt there's even any such project and even if there is it's useless.

What is better for LCA and for IAF/IN?

Well the answer to your question will be RBE-2AA,
but if your choosing it to increase similarity in fleet you'd be better off going for Zhuk AE
at the same time if you wanna increase defensive co-operation and enter a JV then your surely gonna kill all scope for indigenous AESA and make more than half our fleet dependent on French.

 

[he-man]

That's not what I read. Snecma was deliberately excluded from evaluation 'cause it was already conducting talks with GTRE for a JV engine based on Kaveri/M88 (GTX-35VS Kaveri uses components scourced from Snecma).



Sancho you are not trying to understand what I'm saying. additional LCA would not purchase French radar (I seriously doubt RBE-2AA will fit in LCA nose without any modification which we will not have to pay for) but aren't you suggesting JV which means they will use Thales/DRDO JV AESA thereby eliminating need for any funding for a purely Indeginous AESA project and will also make such a choice financially unviable and even when developed this AESA will not be prefered choice of Air Force due to a better JV AESA already available making this project unfeasible and we will be limited to developing only Tech Demos.




Why French why not Russian? 189 RBE-2AA vs 270 Zhuk AE (which will be more financially viable while easing fleet logistics at the same time?) to be inducted in IAF.




Any link to confirm the expected date of induction or even a link that provides details of DRDO AESA development hell we don't even know the status of MMR.



Well I'm pretty sure that even after TOT absorption all raw materials will be stipulated to be imported from France just like MKI.
Also we can't really manufacture sophisticated components like T/RMs and other engine components so those will have to be imported.




Yes but as I said earlier as soon as you go for JVs on high-cost equipment like Radars and Engines you kill all indigenous projects in the direction.




Where is this fictional MMR. I doubt there's even any such project and even if there is it's useless.



Well the answer to your question will be RBE-2AA,
but if your choosing it to increase similarity in fleet you'd be better off going for Zhuk AE
at the same time if you wanna increase defensive co-operation and enter a JV then your surely gonna kill all scope for indigenous AESA and make more than half our fleet dependent on French.

Zhuk ae has only 640 t/r elements.
Oh yeah 160 sections each with 4 t/r elements.

Its a primitive design with low power output and a relatively old design.

Thats why russians started developing fga-30.

 

[sancho]

That's not what I read. Snecma was deliberately excluded from evaluation 'cause it was already conducting talks with GTRE for a JV engine based on Kaveri/M88 (GTX-35VS Kaveri uses components scourced from Snecma).

No, Snecma offered a co-developed engine, because they didn't had an off the shelf version with the required thrust. We rejected that for LCA MK2 and evaluated only the available EJ 200 and F414, while talks about a co-developement remained to fix Kaveris problems, not to power LCA MK2, however that finally was rejected by IAF.

but aren't you suggesting JV

No, we will produce the RBE 2 for licence produced Rafales in India anyway, so just ordering more of them and integrating them to the 80 x LCA MK2 is a simple and fast solution to get LCA MK2 ready and inducted as fast as possible. The indigenous AESA then is still required either for additional MK2s, to replace the EL 2032 in the LCA MK1 (40), to replace the Russian radar in the Mig 29Ks (45) and of course if we go for an AMCA (100 to 200). So there are plenty of applications left for the Indian AESA beyond 2022, in a time where we really might have that tech available and mature enough.
JV and co-developments are the way to go, if you start a new project and should had been the way at the beginning of LCA, but not today with all the delays. The prioirty now must be, to get the fighter inducted as soon as possible and that is simpler with the RBE 2 AESA.
Wrt changes, the Mirage 2000 is the testbed for Rafales radar and FSO, and just needed a slightly bigger nose. LCA already has a big nose diameter and whe know that we have to re-design the nose anyway, because of the problems of ADA. So we might be able to solve several issues at once here (nose, AESA, IRST)!

Why French why not Russian?

Because it's ready and available today, while the Russian AESA isn't, as simple as that!

Any link to confirm the expected date of induction or even a link that provides details of DRDO AESA development hell we don't even know the status of MMR.

Nope, we only know that LCA MK2 production is planned to start in 2019 and we have a lot of promises of DRDO officials, but that's it.

Also we can't really manufacture sophisticated components like T/RMs and other engine components so those will have to be imported.

Which means we have to import them for an indigenous radar too, so what's the point?

Where is this fictional MMR. I doubt there's even any such project and even if there is it's useless.

The radar is under development, but it seems not to be ready for MK1, that's why ADA officials stated that it might be used as a stop gap for the first LCA MK2s until the indigenous AESA is ready. Which would be silly, if we produce the RBE 2 at the same time anyway.

but if your choosing it to increase similarity in fleet you'd be better off going for Zhuk AE

IAF don't operate Zhuk AE and might not even go for it. A BARS upgrade and later addition of an AESA based on FGFAs radar seems more likely.

 

[DacterSaab]

No, we will produce the RBE 2 for licence produced Rafales in India anyway, so just ordering more of them and integrating them to the 80 x LCA MK2 is a simple and fast solution to get LCA MK2 ready and inducted as fast as possible.

but will LCA be able to use it without modifications?

Nope, we only know that LCA MK2 production is planned to start in 2019 and we have a lot of promises of DRDO officials, but that's it.

I'll take the date with a pinch of salt actually much more than a pinch cause I eat a lot of salt.

Which means we have to import them for an indigenous radar too, so what's the point?

No point just a fact and possibility for diversifying importers.

IAF don't operate Zhuk AE and might not even go for it. A BARS upgrade and later addition of an AESA based on FGFAs radar seems more likely.

OK what about Ibris AESA? eitherone can be used on MKI

 

[he-man]

but will LCA be able to use it without modifications?


I'll take the date with a pinch of salt actually much more than a pinch cause I eat a lot of salt.



No point just a fact and possibility for diversifying importers.


OK what about Ibris AESA? eitherone can be used on MKI

Irbis e is pesa

 

[sancho]

but will LCA be able to use it without modifications?

Depends on what the diameter of the RBE 2 really is.

I'll take the date with a pinch of salt actually much more than a pinch cause I eat a lot of salt.

I'll take anything DRDO says with a pinch of salt, but that's why I want such simple options too, to make LCA not more dependent on DRDO's promises. It simply suffered more than enough from them!

OK what about Ibris AESA?

IRBIS-E is a PESA, not an AESA

 

[DacterSaab]

No, Snecma offered a co-developed engine, because they didn't had an off the shelf version with the required thrust.

Couldn't low thrust be compensated by better TWR?

IRBIS-E is a PESA, not an AESA

Weren't they developing a third AESA other than Zhuk AE and FGFA AESA?