HAL Tejas | Updates, News & Discussions

[Superboy]

A half made fighter inducted into service is very shortsighted on PAF's part. Maybe that's why PAF has learnt from IAF and has stopped commissioning JF 17 squadrons since 2010 in order to wait till plane reaches minimum operational capability or IOC.

JF-17 achieved IOC in February 2010 when the first squadron No. 26 converted to JF-17. Perhaps you meant FOC?

 

[spectribution]

JF-17 achieved IOC in February 2010 when the first squadron No. 26 converted to JF-17. Perhaps you meant FOC?

Just look at what PAC is offering for JF 17. It's more of a MiG 21 Bison like technology. If this is your 21st century fighter then your airforce is making a bad decision.

• Dual redundant mission computers
• Dual redundant 1553 Mux bus architecture
• Multi-mode Pulse Doppler Radar capable of tracking multiple targets with prioritized firing
• Ring laser gyro inertial navigation system tied with GPS
• Smart head up display with up front control panel. SHUD total field of view is 25 Degrees
• Color video recording camera and video recorder (for SMFCDs)
• HOTAS
• Three smart multi function color displays
• Air Data Computer
• Radar Altimeter
• IFF Interrogator/Transponder
• Air Combat Manoeuvring Instrumentation (ACMI)
• BVR/Communication Data link
• hVHF / UHF Communication System

I can't comment on it.. IAF approach is also not that good. I think something is better than nothing.

If it doesn't work how is it good? Especially when it's supposed to be your premier fighter in the future.

 

[sancho]

A half made fighter inducted into service is very shortsighted on PAF's part.

Not really, actually it's common procedure all over the world, to induct a fighter with limited (opened) capabilities and improve it through operational service. The early EF T1s, Rafale F1M, or Gripen A/B were pure air defence fighters, lacked several weapon and technical capabilties and got multi role capable only in later stages. Therefore the way PAF did it with JF 17 is not wrong.
LCA MK1 could had been inducted earlier, if the aim was to replace basic strike fighters at first, since dumb bombs, LGBs and even LDPs were inducted very early. But sadly several other issues needed to be dealt, time was wasted with useless integrations (HMS/LDP before basic radar, or even EW was available) and things were done too complicated anyway (waiting for indigenous techs, including N-LCA development...) and as a result, we will induct LCA MK1 with similar capabilities as JF 17 Block 2 or Gripen C/D, rather than the early Block 1 or A/B versions.

So our approach was actually the silly one, aiming at too many things at once, instead of making it simple, realistic and with a constant improvement plan.

 

[Superboy]

Just look at what PAC is offering for JF 17. It's more of a MiG 21 Bison like technology. If this is your 21st century fighter then your airforce is making a bad decision.

• Dual redundant mission computers
• Dual redundant 1553 Mux bus architecture
• Multi-mode Pulse Doppler Radar capable of tracking multiple targets with prioritized firing
• Ring laser gyro inertial navigation system tied with GPS
• Smart head up display with up front control panel. SHUD total field of view is 25 Degrees
• Color video recording camera and video recorder (for SMFCDs)
• HOTAS
• Three smart multi function color displays
• Air Data Computer
• Radar Altimeter
• IFF Interrogator/Transponder
• Air Combat Manoeuvring Instrumentation (ACMI)
• BVR/Communication Data link
• hVHF / UHF Communication System

If it doesn't work how is it good? Especially when it's supposed to be your premier fighter in the future.

JF-17 is good enough for PAF requirement. If India invades Pakistan, boom, international sanctions would be placed on India and India would collapse overnight. Don't forget, JF-17 is the world's only operational jet having revolutionary DSI

 

[ni8mare]

JF-17 is good enough for PAF requirement. If India invades Pakistan, boom, international sanctions would be placed on India and India would collapse overnight. Don't forget, JF-17 is the world's only operational jet having revolutionary DSI

ok

 

[Superboy]

The reason why JF-17 has mechanical flight control backing up FBW is that FBW is sluggish and lagging in response. FBW is only needed for unstable planes. If you compare driving a mechanically controlled car and an electronically controlled car, you would know it is much more responsive with a mechanically controlled car.

 

[Dazzler]

keep it LCA related folks, thanks

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

Desert Fighter PAF cannot affford a $30 million fighter.

JF17 bk 1 is $15m each and even this is funded in SOFT LOANS by China

China Giving Pakistan 50 Fighter Jets

Thank you for your analysis... have the 50 jfs arrived? nope.. but manufacturinbg of blk-II and upgrade of blk-I has started.. but i guess a troll knows more abt it.. than PAF guys..

 

[Storm Force]

There is nothing revolutionary in thunder superboy. Its a goof low cost option for developingv countries who want s basic bvr fighter with some fourth generation technology. The thunder costs less than many high-end wstern helicopters.

Great news for a cash struggling airpower.

But not revoluntionsry .

 

[spectribution]

JF-17 is good enough for PAF requirement. If India invades Pakistan, boom, international sanctions would be placed on India and India would collapse overnight. Don't forget, JF-17 is the world's only operational jet having revolutionary DSI

DSI means divertless subsonic inlet. Meaning it helps to slow down plane to sub sonic speeds by using boundary layer flow air. Planes like F 35, J 20, J 31 use this technique. It really has no parable advantage overall.

Even USA will now think billions of times before putting sanctions on us. If they do we and Russia tie up, USA gets left alone in Asia Pacific.

The reason why JF-17 has mechanical flight control backing up FBW is that FBW is sluggish and lagging in response. FBW is only needed for unstable planes. If you compare driving a mechanically controlled car and an electronically controlled car, you would know it is much more responsive with a mechanically controlled car.

FBW is better in a plane as RSS or relaxed static stability makes plane uncontrollable in that axis unless computers step in.

Not really, actually it's common procedure all over the world, to induct a fighter with limited (opened) capabilities and improve it through operational service. The early EF T1s, Rafale F1M, or Gripen A/B were pure air defence fighters, lacked several weapon and technical capabilties and got multi role capable only in later stages. Therefore the way PAF did it with JF 17 is not wrong.
LCA MK1 could had been inducted earlier, if the aim was to replace basic strike fighters at first, since dumb bombs, LGBs and even LDPs were inducted very early. But sadly several other issues needed to be dealt, time was wasted with useless integrations (HMS/LDP before basic radar, or even EW was available) and things were done too complicated anyway (waiting for indigenous techs, including N-LCA development...) and as a result, we will induct LCA MK1 with similar capabilities as JF 17 Block 2 or Gripen C/D, rather than the early Block 1 or A/B versions.

So our approach was actually the silly one, aiming at too many things at once, instead of making it simple, realistic and with a constant improvement plan.

LCA MK 1 = JF 17 BLK III/ GRIPEN C/D/F 16 A/B/C BLOCK 30

 

[sancho]

LCA MK 1 = JF 17 BLK III/ GRIPEN C/D/F 16 A/B/C BLOCK 30

4th gen single role limited capabilities - JF 17 B1, J10A, Gripen A/B, F16 below block 50, Mig 29 blow SMT, Mirage 2000 below -5, Rafale F1, EF T1

4th gen multi role fighters - LCA MK1, JF 17 B2, Gripen C/D, F16 B50/52, Mig 29 SMT, Mirage 2000-5, EF T2, F18 Hornet

4.5th gen multi role fighters with advanced capabilities - LCA MK2, JF 17 B3, J10B, Gripen E/F, F16 B60, Mig 35, Rafale F2 onwards, EF T3A, F18 SH

 

[he-man]

4th gen single role limited capabilities - JF 17 B1, J10A, Gripen A/B, F16 below block 50, Mig 29 blow SMT, Mirage 2000 below -5, Rafale F1, EF T1

4th gen multi role fighters - LCA MK1, JF 17 B2, Gripen C/D, F16 B50/52, Mig 29 SMT, Mirage 2000-5, EF T2, F18 Hornet

4.5th gen multi role fighters with advanced capabilities - LCA MK2, JF 17 B3, J10B, Gripen E/F, F16 B60, Mig 35, Rafale F2 onwards, EF T3A, F18 SH

i have serious reservations on u using jf-17 and tejas mk2 along with others.

 

[sancho]

i have serious reservations on u using jf-17 and tejas mk2 along with others.

If they come with AESA radar, enhenced avionics and weapon capabilities they are at the same 4.5th gen "technical" level, but being light class fighters, they obviously will have shortfalls in "operational" capability compared to propper medium class fighters.

 

[TimeToScoot]

@sancho

Are you a part of some official defense think tank or a part of the armed forces? Just curious. Your posts are very informative and enlightening. Also, if LCA Mk2 and Rafale are both 4.5 Gen Multi Role fighters, would it be advisable for the Indian government to scrap the MMRCA contract?

 

[Black Widow]

@sancho

Are you a part of some official defense think tank or a part of the armed forces? Just curious. Your posts are very informative and enlightening. Also, if LCA Mk2 and Rafale are both 4.5 Gen Multi Role fighters, would it be advisable for the Indian government to scrap the MMRCA contract?

Sancho is official LCA troll ...