Lca delivery way behind schedule!!

[rockstarIN]

If you want to fill a gap, you buy a fighter that is fast to get and to induct. Neither MMRCAs nor LCA MK1 fulfill the latter, since they are new fighters, which IAF needs to gain operational experience first, before they can properly use it. So the only gap filler today are MKIs, Mirage 2000-5s or Mig 29SMTs and only the first one offers enough potential to remain in service for long.
And when it comes to MMRCAs or LCA MK1, the choice is simple too, MMRCA all the way! Do you want a proper 4.5th gen fighter with advanced capabilities and performance in war, or a low end fighter which still needs to mature to offer the "reasonably good" performance it could offer in FOC standard?
We have to get rid of the pride factor when judging the need and importance of LCA. It's hugely important to finish the project and even moreso to focus on improving it, but it's not the best fighter in the fleet and just because it's Indian, doesn't mean it can secure the nation. So we need it, but in the right terms and conditions!

We need to take the fact of 'cost' which is important, in order to procure as well as maintain and operate it. Also what it is going to replace, Mig-21. It is just a wish list of IAF to have all MMRCAs in their sqdns. Even the Gripen C/D too have very littel adventage over LCA MK1 on range.

 

[sancho]

Seems like a lack of coordination between the entities, project management skills need to be improved. Where does the buck stop? the problems relate to a change in requirements from the IAF as well as developing those changes but the whole idea was to replace the mig 21 and I am sure the mk1 version is suited for that role (although many disagree)

IMO DRDO doesn't even know what project management is, so it's not just improving, but getting a base first!
And the Mig 21 comparison is a common misconception, because LCA was meant to replace it in the light class low end field of the fleet, but not with the Mig 21 performance and capabilities as the benchmark, but comparable 4th gen light class fighters. So LCA MK1's benchmark is the Gripen C/D..., but then you need it in FOC standard at least.

How can we progress from mk1 to mk2 to AMCA without having these issues? we can only learn by the mistakes to ensure the mk2 version is up to mark and the skills gathered can be utilised for the AMCA project.

We can't because DRDO only dreams about the next project, instead of finishing one!

Logical way:

Finishing LCA FOC => start of MK2 development => finishing MK2 => start of AMCA

DRDO way:

IOC1 achieved only => whatever, lets start MK2 => FOC failed => whatever, lets start AMCA


As long as they don't finish pojects, they can't gain from the few things that they gained during the project, but that's crucial if you want a steady learning curve and progress.

 

[Storm Force]

INDIA WILL NEVER ACHIEVE FULL SCALE INDENGIOUS FIGHTER CAPABILITY

The single biggest reason is the IAF do not want a indengious fighter

LOOK AT OUR NAVY

They are producing indengious warships in huge tonnage WHY because OUR NAVY demands them and has a vested interest.

PS.

No way can we make do with heavey and meduiom MRCA ONLY

Too keep nos high and costs down a LIGHT WEIGHT MULTI ROLER IS NEEDED.

Choices.

Stick with LCA no matter what get the nation resources behind it
Buy a single engine fighter off shelf ier Gripen or F16 or F35
Get second hand used Mirage 2000

Need to do something quick.

My Vote

Get more used More used Mirage2000 as stop gap. PUSH ON WITH LCA

 

[sancho]

We need to take the fact of 'cost' which is important, in order to procure as well as maintain and operate it. Also what it is going to replace, Mig-21. It is just a wish list of IAF to have all MMRCAs in their sqdns. Even the Gripen C/D too have very littel adventage over LCA MK1 on range.

The same misconception, that I just explained to Yeti. It doesn't matter what fighter will be replaced, because that isn't the benchmark for LCA. The benchmark are similar fighters of the same generation and in our case also what kind of fighters it has to counter!
By 2020 we will see plenty of squads of J10Bs at our eastern borders and LCA MK1 is nowhere near to counter them. So cost doesn't matter, capability does!

BTW, IAF didn't wanted MMRCA, they wanted MRCA and shortlisted the M2K-5, but that was roughly 10 years ago and if LCA MK1 would had been available back then, it would had been the prime choice, but in 2018 onwards, it simply isn't.

 

[migflug]

The same misconception, that I just explained to Yeti. It doesn't matter what fighter will be replaced, because that isn't the benchmark for LCA. The benchmark are similar fighters of the same generation and in our case also what kind of fighters it has to counter!
By 2020 we will see plenty of squads of J10Bs at our eastern borders and LCA MK1 is nowhere near to counter them. So cost doesn't matter, capability does!

BTW, IAF didn't wanted MMRCA, they wanted MRCA and shortlisted the M2K-5, but that was roughly 10 years ago and if LCA MK1 would had been available back then, it would had been the prime choice, but in 2018 onwards, it simply isn't.

What should be the plan to counter dwindlling sqdrns if tejas fails to achieve its objective

 

[sancho]

What should be the plan to counter dwindlling sqdrns if tejas fails to achieve its objective

1) replace 2 single role squads with 1 multi role squad => you can do the same with less numbers
2) add more MKIs or Pak Fa off the shelf from Russian lines => fighters we already have or will have in the fleet
3) finish MMRCA and get more of them off the shelf too

The squadron number myth is not a real issue, since it's more about a paper figure rather than operational or industrial capability. Till 2020 we phase out 9 to 11 squads, while adding 3 to 4 MKI, 2 LCA MK1 and hopefully 2 MMRCA squads too, so the shortfall is not as big as people want to make it. Anything beyond 2020 is dependent on the development of FGFA and how many additional LCA MK2 or MMRCA orders we make.

 

[rockstarIN]

The same misconception, that I just explained to Yeti. It doesn't matter what fighter will be replaced, because that isn't the benchmark for LCA. The benchmark are similar fighters of the same generation and in our case also what kind of fighters it has to counter!
By 2020 we will see plenty of squads of J10Bs at our eastern borders and LCA MK1 is nowhere near to counter them. So cost doesn't matter, capability does!

BTW, IAF didn't wanted MMRCA, they wanted MRCA and shortlisted the M2K-5, but that was roughly 10 years ago and if LCA MK1 would had been available back then, it would had been the prime choice, but in 2018 onwards, it simply isn't.

FirSt of all, are we believe in the concept of light fighter? I'm not talking about mig 21 standard but sort of Gripen c/d. You can't just buy expensive Rafales to fight with j 10 bs. it should be low hi mix . And if MK1 foc is equal or near gripen c.d what is their problem with ordering more? Even it is good than old m2k and the current radar based on 2032 is much better than apg 68 v9 installed at f 16 BLK 52 as per Israeli s.

Even i heard it's radar range is better than M2K upgraded one. And it can be replaced later on with uttam aesa of which A2A mode is already ready.

 

[sancho]

You can't just buy expensive Rafales to fight with j 10 bs. it should be low hi mix .

Of cours not, but the J10 is the lowest threat potential, so we need a fighter that can at least counter it, if not more and LCA MK1 certainly is not able to do that. But MMRCA is about more than just a fighter, since the industrial side had an equally important role. So we pay for the mix of operational capabilities according to our threat perceptions and the industrial benefits we demanded. Rafale and the EF were just the 2 options that suited these requirements the most, which means the cost it high, because we get the most in return too.
The hi lo mix is the ideal situation, but that was not possible imo with the decision to go for a light class fighter in the first place, since the capability gap between LCA and MKI is simply too high. A single engined medium class fighter would had been the better option, but it is at it is and since the only 2 single engine MMRCAs were not shortlisted, there was no alternative either.

And if MK1 foc is equal or near gripen c.d what is their problem with ordering more?

The fact that Gripen C/D is not good enough for 2019 and beyond, that's why Saab is developing the Gripen E upgrade and why we want to develop the MK2 for the same time frame.
Ideally LCA MK1 would had been inducted by 2009 and would had got it's first upgrade by 2019, but now the first 2 MK1 squads will be available only by 2019. This delay is what the MK2 upgrade mainly tries to counter (besides fixing problems) and that's why additional MK1s doesn't make sense for a new fighter.

Even it is good than old m2k and the current radar based on 2032 is much better than apg 68 v9 installed at f 16 BLK 52 as per Israeli s.

And both the Mirage M2K-5 as well as the F16 B52 are outdated technologically too, which is why we evaluated the Rafale and the F16 B60. Which again shows why the LCA MK2 standard is the only way to go forward after the 2nd MK1 squad is delivered.

 

[Luca1]

If hal go on delaying tejas, gripen will surely come into picture

If IAF reject LCA, LCA would be labelled as a failure

 

[Dil Pakistan]

INDIA WILL NEVER ACHIEVE FULL SCALE INDENGIOUS FIGHTER CAPABILITY

The single biggest reason is the IAF do not want a indengious fighter

LOOK AT OUR NAVY

They are producing indengious warships in huge tonnage WHY because OUR NAVY demands them and has a vested interest.

PS.

No way can we make do with heavey and meduiom MRCA ONLY

Too keep nos high and costs down a LIGHT WEIGHT MULTI ROLER IS NEEDED.

Choices.

Stick with LCA no matter what get the nation resources behind it
Buy a single engine fighter off shelf ier Gripen or F16 or F35
Get second hand used Mirage 2000

Need to do something quick.

My Vote

Get more used More used Mirage2000 as stop gap. PUSH ON WITH LCA

What's the rush ?

 

[RIP Pak LAW]

YAWNS!

 

[Speeder 2]

india even cant make a rifle,how can you expect it produce a fighter

I beg your pardon?

I bet you've never seen India-made AWACS:

 

[Alfa-Fighter]

If IAF reject LCA, LCA would be labelled as a failure

JF-17 also rejected by Chinese AF , so its a failure? and PAF selected, so its a failed AC selected by PAF, BTW even BD selected MIG-21 over JF-17.

I beg your pardon?

I bet you've never seen India-made AWACS:

View attachment 217626

nGun is not Priority, this is :

SLBM

 

[Bhuvan93]

All I want to know is...when will the bloody specs of the Tejas MK2/AMCA be frozen/released?

Someone on here, I believe it was Sancho, pointed out the AMCA's internal weapons bay/payload was not looking promising.

 

[sancho]

If IAF reject LCA, LCA would be labelled as a failure

True, but that's not going to happen, since IAF wants LCA, just in a useful manner, not just for the pride to have an Indian fighter. They want to use it in wars, not just and air shows. That's why they demand from the industry, to deliver according to the requirements and sooner or latter that will happen. People say that the fact that IAF doesn't order more MK1s is showing the lack of confidence. I say it's exactly the opposite, because the fact that IAF not only increased it's initial order from 1 to 2 squads, but that they stick with that order, although the industry keeps disappointing them so much for all these years, shows how much confindence they have "on the fighter", just not on it's developers!

LCA will come for sure and it's certainly won't be a failure, but will make the overall project to a success, since the gain for Indian aviation industry is invaluable and in FOC and later in MK2 standards, it can be a pretty good fighter. But we can't deny that crucial parts of the project failed (, project management, radar and engine developments, partially design or navalising), which is of concern since these failures could had been avoided to an extend, but lets hope we learn from it.

All I want to know is...when will the bloody specs of the Tejas MK2/AMCA be frozen/released?

Someone on here, I believe it was Sancho, pointed out the AMCA's internal weapons bay/payload was not looking promising.

Yes, I said that based on the latest AMCA videos and brochures of ADA. Check the AMCA sticky thread for that.
Wrt LCA MK2, we all want to know the final specs for that, but what's way more important than MK2 or AMCA at the moment is, getting LCA MK1 into FOC!
Nothing matters more, since that is the base for anything of this fighter project and the fact that DRDO is already distracted with NLCA, LCA MK2 and AMCA doesn't make things better, but worse! We need to learn to make things simple and one step after the other, not everything at once and as complicated as possible, only then we can make our aviation industry successful.