What's new

Tejas LCA sprints towards IAF's frontline squadron

The workload of LCA and JF 17 will be very different, since both air forces are very different. JF 17 brings total operational freedom to PAF, with roles and capabilities that the F16s couldn't offer. LCA on the other side will come at the low end of a force with MKIs and Rafales on the high end, which will take over all main roles in A2A AND A2G. That doesn't leave much for other fighters, except of air policing roles, or CAS and even here, there will be upgraded M2Ks and Mig 29s in competition to the LCA, not to mention that drones will get more and more importance and the delays of LCA will make it arrive nearly when these are available too. Recon and light CAS roles will be gone for fighters like LCA.

keyword is "Share" not replace, if you read again! :)

deployments and Strike package formations are quite different than what paper specs suggest...
 
.
Interesting... and what are they exactly doing about that.... Sir, You might be mistaken as I believe it is HAL which had taken up itself to cater the deliverable's for the Mk2 and not ADA...


SIR,

you are right,It is HAL,Thank you for correction. SIR
 
.
Tejas is lagging behind in combat with jf 17 but still it's worth the effort.
But you will catch up with us because of your economy.
Congrats. :cheers:
 
.
The workload of LCA and JF 17 will be very different, since both air forces are very different. JF 17 brings total operational freedom to PAF, with roles and capabilities that the F16s couldn't offer. LCA on the other side will come at the low end of a force with MKIs and Rafales on the high end, which will take over all main roles in A2A AND A2G. That doesn't leave much for other fighters, except of air policing roles, or CAS and even here, there will be upgraded M2Ks and Mig 29s in competition to the LCA, not to mention that drones will get more and more importance and the delays of LCA will make it arrive nearly when these are available too. Recon and light CAS roles will be gone for fighters like LCA.

Somehow, I feel that the most important role of LCA is parades. Its to impress the India populace to show that India finally can build its own fighter jet.
 
.
This is ridiculous,FOC will be in early 2015.Have they even fired operational BVR like r-77/derby?
Also have the issues with AoA been solved?Also it would take 2 yrs at TACDE to finalize combat tactics for this plane after demonstrators are sent there.
I see this operational only in 2015 and battle ready another yr later.
The TACDE point is a moot one. Yes the plane (just as all new IAF assets have to be) ha a to be flown by TACDE and air combat manuals drawn up, this WON'T delay deliveries and operationalisation- why should it? The purpose of TACDE is NOT to flight test the birds- that is the job of ASTE- but to draw up combat procedures on the planes they have available to them. Just like the MKI's induction into the IAF wasn't delayed by 3-4 years (how long it took TACDE to complete its work on the MKI) and the induction of the Rafale won't be stalled for 18 months-2 years, the LCA's induction won't be affected by the fact TACDE is yet to get their hands on the bird. I think some people don't seem to understand exactly what TACDE does and of gets their job mixed up with ASTE.

Somehow, I feel that the most important role of LCA is parades. Its to impress the India populace to show that India finally can build its own fighter jet.
Noted mr troll. Feel free to vacate this thread now :D
 
. . .
keyword is "Share" not replace, if you read again! :)

deployments and Strike package formations are quite different than what paper specs suggest...

I know what you meant, but that doesn't change the fact that IAF simply will have far more capable fighters to do the strike roles currently done by Mig 27, than an LCA could offer. And the simple fact that they don't need the old model of "strike packages" anymore, when they have upgraded M2Ks, Mig 29s, Rafales and MMRCA which offer credible A2A capabilities, while they are in a A2G role shows that. LCA MK1 will lack exactly here and personally I have not much hope for the M2K and A2G either.
For JF 17 that simply is a whole different case, it will take over A2A and CAS roles for older F16s too, while adding SEAD, stand off and even deep strike capabilities PAF didn't had to such an extend, because they don't have such an high end like IAF has.
 
.
Mid-2015.

So, 5 years after the first JF-17 squadron was ready. :-)

For JF 17 that simply is a whole different case, it will take over A2A and CAS roles for older F16s too, while adding SEAD, stand off and even deep strike capabilities PAF didn't had to such an extend, because they don't have such an high end like IAF has.

Size wise, JF-17 replaces F-7 and J-10B replaces F-16.
 
.
Somehow, I feel that the most important role of LCA is parades. Its to impress the India populace to show that India finally can build its own fighter jet.

That's because you have that limited point of view that I told you last time. In A2A roles, even Tejas MK1 can be an excellent addition to the fleet, with a very low RCS, good WVR and BVR capabilities, or a capable EWS. Even in anti ship roles it will be more capable than the Jaguar IMs, precision strikes are already possible so that's not an issue either. Export customers could even add other foreign weapons too if they want and increase it's capabilities, but one has to understand that the potential of Tejas and it's operational importance for Indian forces are 2 different things.

Size wise, JF-17 replaces F-7 and J-10B replaces F-16.

Possible, but capability wise there won't be much difference between an upgraded JF 17 and a J10B:

Jf-17 Vs. Fc-20 In Dogfight | Page 3
 
.
I know what you meant, but that doesn't change the fact that IAF simply will have far more capable fighters to do the strike roles currently done by Mig 27, than an LCA could offer. And the simple fact that they don't need the old model of "strike packages" anymore, when they have upgraded M2Ks, Mig 29s, Rafales and MMRCA which offer credible A2A capabilities, while they are in a A2G role shows that. LCA MK1 will lack exactly here and personally I have not much hope for the M2K and A2G either.

Depend on the volume of power projections requires, there is strike package configurations reflect their operation load and their role during the which phase of conflict it is in' and not just paper specs...

Next, CAP's and forwards air patrol is as important as stike roles, and LCA Mk2 seems to have good potential in the same, ofcourse after some more specs and capabilities are reported in the public domain
 
. .
Depend on the volume of power projections requires, there is strike package configurations reflect their operation load and their role during the which phase of conflict it is in' and not just paper specs...

And exactly when you need volume, you don't use a fighter for strikes, that occupies other fighters to protect it. As long as LCA can only carry WVR missiles during strikes, it needs the same ammount of protection as Jags, Mig 27s, or M2Ks needed in Kargil. That's where modern multi role capabilities and tactics allows it to use half the number of fighters, to do the same roles. LCAs and Jags will remain in 2nd line roles, be it in A2A or A2G.

Next, CAP's and forwards air patrol is as important as stike roles, and LCA Mk2 seems to have good potential in the same, ofcourse after some more specs and capabilities are reported in the public domain

Nobody said that A2A roles aren't important, but we talked about taking over the workload of Mig 27s and that's not going to happen with LCAs.
The MK2 will increase it's A2A potential for sure, for A2G however, the key will be how much the fuel capacity can be increased. If it's enough to use just a single centerline fuel tank, than the 2 wing fuel tanks, it will free weapon stations and will get far more capable in CAS too. But if the weight increase eats off the added fuel, MK2 will still have to use wing fuel tanks and will remain with the load limitations.

Size wise, J-10B is equivalent to Rafale, MiG-29, Mirage 2000, replacing F-16 as PAF's high end. JF-17 is PAF's low end, equivalent to F-7 in size.

Wrong, because it adds far more capabilities to PAF, which makes J10B actually not necessary anymore. You should read my post in that link and not stick to the size as an argument, because it isn't, with the right capabilities and tactics, our Bisons did more than well against F15s too.
 
Last edited:
.
That's because you have that limited point of view that I told you last time. In A2A roles, even Tejas MK1 can be an excellent addition to the fleet, with a very low RCS, good WVR and BVR capabilities, or a capable EWS. Even in anti ship roles it will be more capable than the Jaguar IMs, precision strikes are already possible so that's not an issue either. Export customers could even add other foreign weapons too if they want and increase it's capabilities, but one has to understand that the potential of Tejas and it's operational importance for Indian forces are 2 different things.



Possible, but capability wise there won't be much difference between an upgraded JF 17 and a J10B:

Jf-17 Vs. Fc-20 In Dogfight | Page 3

You are probably assuming that I'm stating that LCA is useless except for parades. But that is not my point. My point is that India will purchase enough better planes like SU30 and Rafale that LCA can just be use for parades, as its the only plane created by India and will be use to boost the moral of India.
 
.
Wrong, because it adds far more capabilities to PAF, which makes J10B actually not necessary anymore. You should read my post in that link and not stick to the size as an argument, because it isn't, with the right capabilities and tactics, our Bisons did more than well against F15s too.

Engine size dictates a plane's size, since a plane is built around the engine. JF-17 is MiG-21 size. J-10B is F-16 size. They are not of the same size class and their roles do not overlap. J-10B and JF-17 form a high / low mix.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom