LCA will not be able to penetrate enemy lines

[holysaturn]

That doesn't make any sense! The upgrade for the M2K was decided only in the recent years, while the LCA ASR is available for decades, so the one has nothing to do with the other.
Also, the design of the fighter is the main problem, since ADA and DRDO designed it, to be the smallest fighter in it's class, which never was a requirement of the IAF! The small form factor however, made the ratio to it's wings too big, which is one reason why drag is a problem, that reduces the flight performance from the ASR aims (speed for example). Same reason is the problem to carry enough fuel and avionics and EW systems internally, as ALL current gen fighters do. So it was ADA's / DRDO's misconception of the needed size, that is currently proving to be the main issue, which will be corrected in the MK2, by extending the airframe and adding more power. Personally, I doubt too that the specs can be met by the MK2, since the weight increase should be dramatic too, but it still shows us where the problem is!

It is wrong to say that ADA and DRDO designed it, it is this "us vs them" mentality is hurting us it was ADA,HAL,IAF who screwed it up combined.If IAF refuses to acknowledge its role in the failure then even a MK10 cannot save the LCA.
The problem was with ASR, instead of going for a phased manner and clearly define what it wanted from the airframe it was just giving disproportionate requirement for its size.While technology updates should have come the functionality should have remained.If the IAF wanted a multirole fighter then it should have given a higher weight criteria from the beginning.
But these changing excessive requirements meant weight increases and an underpowered engine.
I agree that the wing aspect ratio is unheard of in modern fighters.The ADA when the project began was an inexperienced,incapable team,but the IAF was a professional organisation so it was the IAF's role to take up ownership at each level breaking the bureaucratic stronghold and guide the ADA.If not allowed to do so it should have pressured the MOD to allow it,like the Navy does its own ship design, but ironically the IAF took impressive ownership and showed impeccable professionalism at every stage of the MMRCA. ADA is to be blamed but so is the IAF as the country believes that the IAF is a more professional and disciplined one.

 

[Rain]

still you cant stop taliking about both that shows how much you fear them both though they control your thoughts eventhough both are not physically in your teritorry


LCA and JF 17 are not comparable 100% right cause LCA dosent have to worry about most of the jobs which areto be done by JF 17 as PAF have no money or options to do them with a more able and leathel platform but IAF doesso lets talk sensibally sir

Money money and money.... it cool having money and fancy toys.

Thanks for admission.

Now dont worry we have enough platforms to do good fight.

We are feel secure n comfortable with what we have. But do you too?

 

[sancho]

It is wrong to say that ADA and DRDO designed it

It's not, since it's a fact! LCA is a DRDO project, not an IAF one. They and ADA designed the fighter and chose the subsystems, not IAF. The only part IAF played was, giving the general specs and capabilities they need in a 4th gen light class fighter in the ASR. What DRDO and ADA makes with those specs, is not in IAF's hand and also not in HAL's which many people blame for the wrong reasons too.

The problem was with ASR, instead of going for a phased manner and clearly define what it wanted from the airframe it was just giving disproportionate requirement for its size.While technology updates should have come the functionality should have remained.If the IAF wanted a multirole fighter then it should have given a higher weight criteria from the beginning.

Again, IAF was not involved in the size of the fighter and the multi role capability was required from the start and is not even a problem at the moment, since LCA already has integrated strike capabilities. Tech upgrades only came in a phased manner, as a RESULT of the delays and problems (IFR to tackle possible fuel capacity issues, thrust to tackle flight performance issues, upgraded MFD's in the MK2, because of a decade delay of delivery of the 2 x LCA MK1 squads...).

I agree that the wing aspect ratio is unheard of in modern fighters.The ADA when the project began was an inexperienced,incapable team,

Chosen by? DRDO, not IAF!

but the IAF was a professional organisation so it was the IAF's role to take up ownership at each level breaking the bureaucratic stronghold and guide the ADA.

Which is not possible, since it's not an IAF project, but a DRDO one. That's the only difference in LCA and NLCA, the fact that IN is funding the modification, while LCA is a DRDO project in the first place. So one can blame IAF why they didn't chose to fund the project too and get a larger say, but not for the problems the development agencies created. IN can't be blamed now, for the more than 1t overweight of the NLCA gears that ADA / DRDO developed right? So you have to differ between who did what, or is responsible for what? They surely would have liked a proper single seat design of NLCA too, but the lack of space forced them to use the twin seat design in single seat config too, which again is based on ADA / DRDO's decision to design the fighter in such a small form factor.

 

[holysaturn]

It's not, since it's a fact! LCA is a DRDO project, not an IAF one. They and ADA designed the fighter and chose the subsystems, not IAF. The only part IAF played was, giving the general specs and capabilities they need in a 4th gen light class fighter in the ASR. What DRDO and ADA makes with those specs, is not in IAF's hand and also not in HAL's which many people blame for the wrong reasons too.



Again, IAF was not involved in the size of the fighter and the multi role capability was required from the start and is not even a problem at the moment, since LCA already has integrated strike capabilities. Tech upgrades only came in a phased manner, as a RESULT of the delays and problems (IFR to tackle possible fuel capacity issues, thrust to tackle flight performance issues, upgraded MFD's in the MK2, because of a decade delay of delivery of the 2 x LCA MK1 squads...).



Chosen by? DRDO, not IAF!



Which is not possible, since it's not an IAF project, but a DRDO one. That's the only difference in LCA and NLCA, the fact that IN is funding the modification, while LCA is a DRDO project in the first place. So one can blame IAF why they didn't chose to fund the project too and get a larger say, but not for the problems the development agencies created. IN can't be blamed now, for the more than 1t overweight of the NLCA gears that ADA / DRDO developed right? So you have to differ between who did what, or is responsible for what? They surely would have liked a proper single seat design of NLCA too, but the lack of space forced them to use the twin seat design in single seat config too, which again is based on ADA / DRDO's decision to design the fighter in such a small form factor.

Although I agree with a majority of your points that the DRDO is technically incapable I just can't accept the fact that the role of IAF is only the ASR part,did the IAF stop with ASR for MMRCA? It is like saying that F-35 is not a pentagon or USAF project but a Lockheed project , while lockheed is being blasted for its mistakes the USAF is also blamed for excessive emphasis on "nintendo type" warfare,unaccountability,improper monitoring of the project that is how it should be here. DRDO is to be blamed badly no doubt about it but the IAF just didn't care much to interfere from the beginning except for the ASR.

 

[Bhuvan93]

Was the Tejas' size parameters not restricted/built up around the MiG-21's size to make use of existing infrastructure?

Sancho, what are your hopes for the Tejas Mk.II and AMCA? Both formidable and relevant fighters in 2020s or do you expect them to be disappointments?

 

[sancho]

did the IAF stop with ASR for MMRCA?

Basically yes, since they only set the basic requirements and were responsible for the evaluation, but any realy decisions were done by MoD, be it the change from MRCA to MMRCA, be it the shortlisting of Rafale and EF, or the selection of Rafale as L1. None of this was in the hand of IAF and they were and still are dependent on what they get at the end.

Was the Tejas' size parameters not restricted/built up around the MiG-21's size to make use of existing infrastructure?

Sancho, what are your hopes for the Tejas Mk.II and AMCA? Both formidable and relevant fighters in 2020s or do you expect them to be disappointments?

It's only meant to be in the light class, but not the smallest fighter in the class. The MK2 changes will bring it to the same level as Gripen in size again and that shows that they simply missjudged the importance of the size in the initial design.
I don't care much about MK2 at this point and even less on the AMCA, since only the MK1 FOC counts! It still has all the potential to be a good 4th gen fighter, if we solve the issues. But to solve the issues we have to focus on them and shouldn't let us distract with NLCA, MK2, let alone AMCA. One step after the other!

 

[MilSpec]

Basically yes, since they only set the basic requirements and were responsible for the evaluation, but any realy decisions were done by MoD, be it the change from MRCA to MMRCA, be it the shortlisting of Rafale and EF, or the selection of Rafale as L1. None of this was in the hand of IAF and they were and still are dependent on what they get at the end.



It's only meant to be in the light class, but not the smallest fighter in the class. The MK2 changes will bring it to the same level as Gripen in size again and that shows that they simply missjudged the importance of the size in the initial design.
I don't care much about MK2 at this point and even less on the AMCA, since only the MK1 FOC counts! It still has all the potential to be a good 4th gen fighter, if we solve the issues. But to solve the issues we have to focus on them and shouldn't let us distract with NLCA, MK2, let alone AMCA. One step after the other!

The collusion between IA and ADA is greater than what meets the eye.... only thing is IAF is smarter where they keep plausible deniability.

 

[Death Adder]

Penetration in enemy territory is significant thing, let this master piece get FOC first.
Its same story like IA Arjun Tank, Indian army bought 140 of them but almost all of them are not battle ready and having parts and maintenance issues.

 

[dray]

Since when CAG has become experts in military affairs??

 

[Shan-e-ibrahim]

If a fighter is not able to kill an aircraft as an offensive action in enemy airspace or escort the bombers, it cannot play a defensive role in friendly airspace too.

Intercepting f16 or jf 17 will be tough for LCA near pathankot or wagah sector if you go by the logic of POINT DEFENSIVE role, as due to advance EW and better SAM all aircrafts are locked by the radar even before they enter each others airspace. And can be shot over each others territory easily.

 

[holysaturn]

they are already suffering from rape epidemic, after taking Viagra LCA would be raping raping French rafaels



So what you are saying means that everyone in indian establishment is stupid, no one knows what their expertise is and what their job is. who tasked them to waste their time and write that report? why did HAL/DRDO provide them access to all the information? probably they also didn't know what CAG is and what is their scope of work, only indian fan boys on PDF are experts in all fields and know everything.

Do you know CAG?,have you witnessed in the papers some of the stupidity and gross over estimations of the CAG? you know nothing but rape in the neighbouring country when your own country women cant even speak out leave alone rape.
The fact CAG is a financial audit agency(and has the knowledge for that) which also does a general audit of the results where most of the time it doesn have the knowledge.

 

[holysaturn]

If a fighter is not able to kill an aircraft as an offensive action in enemy airspace or escort the bombers, it cannot play a defensive role in friendly airspace too.

Intercepting f16 or jf 17 will be tough for LCA near pathankot or wagah sector if you go by the logic of POINT DEFENSIVE role, as due to advance EW and better SAM all aircrafts are locked by the radar even before they enter each others airspace. And can be shot over each others territory easily.

If you can comprehend things dude if only you can. Tejas is the only aircraft which has be tasked for an Integrated EW RWR cum Jammer not even the SU-30MKI,but some low lQ people here dont know that External EW is always an option like as in the case of SU-30.The CAG report highlights that the EW suite is not ready yet but that doesn't mean it does not have EW. Lunatic,jingoistic PDF members are inferiority complex infected bigots.

 

[dray]

they are already suffering from rape epidemic, after taking Viagra LCA would be raping raping French rafaels



So what you are saying means that everyone in indian establishment is stupid, no one knows what their expertise is and what their job is. who tasked them to waste their time and write that report? why did HAL/DRDO provide them access to all the information? probably they also didn't know what CAG is and what is their scope of work, only indian fan boys on PDF are experts in all fields and know everything.

First part of your post is trolling, and for the second part, try looking for the full form of CAG.

 

[sancho]

Since when CAG has become experts in military affairs??

They don't have to be military experts to evaluate the planned capabilities of the fighters and the time lines, in comparison to what actually was achieved till now. That's why they refer to the ASR capabilities and point their fingers to the problems and not criticizing the fighter in general. For example, they criticize tthe overweight, which is more than 1t above the ASR plans. It's there job to make such inefficiencies in government projects or ministries public, be it in the development of a defence product, or the construction of a road.

 

[Shan-e-ibrahim]

If you can comprehend things dude if only you can. Tejas is the only aircraft which has be tasked for an Integrated EW RWR cum Jammer not even the SU-30MKI,but some low lQ people here dont know that External EW is always an option like as in the case of SU-30.The CAG report highlights that the EW suite is not ready yet but that doesn't mean it does not have EW. Lunatic,jingoistic PDF members are inferiority complex infected bigots.

I care damn about EW or external EW if the aircraft cannot penetrate enemy airspace.