The Tejas fighter’s role in war

[MilSpec]

I read somewhere ,LCA used quadraplex digital FBW system ,but JF-17 used less advanced than that.I dont know what is it

updated my reply...

 

[indoPunjabi]

Some Pakistani members are jumping up and down as if tejas is the only fighter jet in IAF's inventory. When we send our top dogs ( su30mki & mig29k)over the border pak pilots would refuse to take off their jf17s and f16s. :p

 

[Srinivas]

Some Pakistani members are jumping up and down as if tejas is the only fighter jet in IAF's inventory. When we send our top dogs ( su30mki & mig29k)over the border pak pilots would refuse to take off their jf17s and f16s. :p

Yeah ..... reason why they are dog fights .....

Each fighter jet tries to be on the tail of the other, just like real dog fighting (no offence)

 

[Bratva]

so you think JF-17 is much better than LCA?

AOA achieved 26*. Hybrid FBW due to stable design. No need of complex FBW. BVR, WVR, PGM integrated on JF-17. Radar Range for JF-17. 130 Km for 5m^2. 111.2 for 3 m^2 . IFR integrated. Work is in progress to integrate HMS/D of south african origin. Do let us know `where JF-17 is lacking? only in composite category. 30-40 percent composites are used in JF-17 instead of 70-80 percent in Tejaas.

 

[MilSpec]

AOA achieved 26*. Hybrid FBW due to stable design. No need of complex FBW. BVR, WVR, PGM integrated on JF-17. Radar Range for JF-17. 130 Km for 5m^2. 111.2 for 3 m^2 . IFR integrated. Work is in progress to integrate HMS/D of south african origin. Do let us know `where JF-17 is lacking? only in composite category. 30-40 percent composites are used in JF-17 instead of 70-80 percent in Tejaas.

I doubt JF17 has a stable design, which might not be a good thing, it looks like it still has an unstable design characteristics which increases its maneuverability.

For the FBW control even for slats, although it has conventional controls, it still has stability augmentation which translates to if the hotas stick is jerked slightly and left alone the mission computer will control the the slats to bring it level flight to provide the stability. So it is not controlling to flight attitude equation but to a certain set of pre built range constant which still does the job, so looks like everything is there, and could be upgraded if needed, FBW might be intentionally minimalist.

 

[Last Samuri]

I think NKVD may have point about russian bvr missles.

India the last few years seems to be going for western missles, jammers, radars and even usa hardware. india,s russian built carrier will be equipped with israeli barak 8 sam system.

Most crucially the ASTRA BVR project is designd to replace and improve upon the russian bvrs of the 1990s for the su30mki/mig29 fleets and not just to arm LCA tejas. indians are clearly not content with russian missles.

imo the best bvr in south asia is the amraam c5 of pafs f16 fleets.

 

[Last Samuri]

Mayfia since its a Tejas thread and you asked the question

Do let us know `where JF-17 is lacking?over the Tejas i would suggest the following

Flight control system on thunder is a stable design which makes less agile than tejas unstable designed FCS

Russian engine on thunder is more labour maintenance work than tejas usa suppplied genereral electric engines which have far more life hours.

Is the chinease radar missle mix as effcient or as lethel as the israeli supplied elta radar and derby/python 5 missle mix on lca mk1.

I believe the thunder at present has not chosen a HMDS system for their fighter where as lca tejas mk1 is getting indian version of israel elbit system.

Ew suites indians developed a Mayavi EW suite, the Indo-Israeli JV. This includes RWR & MAWS /LWR as standard in mk1 Tejas. To date i understand the thunder as no MAWS capability.

PS before the pakistan posters kill me the thunder as its advantages over tejas too

Much bigger weapons range especially strike missles ie cruise missles

far more mature and battle ready today

massive chinease backing to improve in block 2 & 3

longer ranger bvrs sd10

longer combat radius

PAF will induct larger nos far quicker and at cheaper cost.

 

[longewala]

Long discussion, but bottomline is, if the Tejas had been designed with a 70s-era stable, non-FBW metal airframe, with cheap and inferior off-the-shelf components (older generation Russian engine, Chinese radar), it would have been ready 10 years back.

And it would have been rejected with derision by the IAF.

It is pointless trying to compare it to PAF planes, because their ego would not be able to accept anything other than "we are the best." What matters is that we have a plane that is practically the equal or even better than the latest mirage-2000. Our main fighter till 10 years back was the mig-21, and the small number of m2ks was the high end. 10 years from now, the main light fighter replacing the Mig-21s will be a jet that is better than the high-end M2K5s.Instead of settling for such a jet which would be obsolete even at induction, India set their sights a bit higher. And that gamble, and a lot of hard work, is about to pay off now.

 

[Dandpatta]

Exactly as what I wrote, no one take ajai shukla seriously, he's a hack! The writer here is comparing LCA tejs, which is still under testing, 1.6 mach speed, 7G fighter jet with f16 which is a thoroughbred battle proven mach 2, 9G fighter jet..... I dont want to comment on jf 17 comparison, because I dont have the testing specs on hand..... Comparison of different platform without understanding the specifications is foolish and that is exactly what the writer has done here....F16 can fly faster, turn harder, see further than the LCA tejas in it's current configuration.....

What Indian media needs to do is less comparison and just report on developments in the program, once the system matures, comparisons can become evident....ye tod denge phod denge attitude is best left at home....

The problem, @sandy_3126 is that many of our defence writers are put on high pedestal by hyperventilating joe public who may never have flown an air craft , leave alone know much about aerodynamics and weapons systems. For example , these writers may have been tank commanders or naval officers in their prime but to write about aviation - and a platform like Tejas and then comparing it with other blocks, is inhaling too much of propane. I totally agree with your view What Indian media needs to do is less comparison and just report on developments in the program, once the system matures, comparisons can become evident....ye tod denge phod denge attitude is best left at home

 

[npm]

Hope Tejas doesn't become another INSAS riffle like goof up (remember we inducted them and now we are searching for a new one to replace it). We can't afford such a mistake with fighter planes.

Comparison's at the moment are pretty much useless as we are yet to prove it's worthiness in any conflict or to the matter of fact effective weapons integration testing is also not yet completed. Repeat the same thing under various situations and see gauge the response of the system. Then only we will know the limitations, strengths and Quality of the product which we have developed and delivered.

- npm

 

[rockstarIN]

Hope Tejas doesn't become another INSAS riffle like goof up (remember we inducted them and now we are searching for a new one to replace it). We can't afford such a mistake with fighter planes.

Comparison's at the moment are pretty much useless as we are yet to prove it's worthiness in any conflict or to the matter of fact effective weapons integration testing is also not yet completed. Repeat the same thing under various situations and see gauge the response of the system. Then only we will know the limitations, strengths and Quality of the product which we have developed and delivered.

- npm

Insas was not a failure at all. Army wanted a 5.56 and we delivered it and the problems were solved later on. We used it almost 20 years now (more years to come). From where you will get a gun Rs-8000/-? at large numbers.

Now we are 'updating' the forces now and as per the current scenerio we need a gun which can use two rounds. (We are ahead of other forces like US army who still uses M4 only) as per the situation.

 

[Manindra]

Hope Tejas doesn't become another INSAS riffle like goof up (remember we inducted them and now we are searching for a new one to replace it). We can't afford such a mistake with fighter planes.

Comparison's at the moment are pretty much useless as we are yet to prove it's worthiness in any conflict or to the matter of fact effective weapons integration testing is also not yet completed. Repeat the same thing under various situations and see gauge the response of the system. Then only we will know the limitations, strengths and Quality of the product which we have developed and delivered.

- npm

INSAS serve you for 26 years.

 

[NKVD]

I think NKVD may have point about russian bvr missles.

India the last few years seems to be going for western missles, jammers, radars and even usa hardware. india,s russian built carrier will be equipped with israeli barak 8 sam system.

Most crucially the ASTRA BVR project is designd to replace and improve upon the russian bvrs of the 1990s for the su30mki/mig29 fleets and not just to arm LCA tejas. indians are clearly not content with russian missles.

imo the best bvr in south asia is the amraam c5 of pafs f16 fleets.

Yes After the Cag reports were Out Iaf Issued Rfi For BVR Missiles
Read Below:
Indian Air Force Issues RFI for Long Range BVR Missiles | Global Military Review

 

[dbc]

Is there any mission for which an F-16 block 52 is better than a Rafale, without taking other assets like AEWACs into account. One on one?

Define better? a target is equally dead whether its killed by a MICA or AASM launched by a Rafale or an AIM 9/JSOW by an F-16? The F-16 can do anything a Rafale can and do it significantly cheaper than a Rafale. Is cheaper better? Sure today the Rafale has a better radar, better avionics and perhaps improved survivability compared to a Block-52 but with the proliferation of AESA radar of both surface and airborne type the Rafale survivability isn't any better than an F-16 Block 52. Unless you believe Spectra can deceive /jam powerful surface or airborne AESA systems like the Green Pine/Super Green Pine/ M3R/Phalcon/Eriye/Wedgetail....

 

[janon]

Define better? a target is equally dead whether its killed by a MICA or AASM launched by a Rafale or an AIM 9/JSOW by an F-16? The F-16 can do anything a Rafale can and do it significantly cheaper than a Rafale. Is cheaper better? Sure today the Rafale has a better radar, better avionics and perhaps improved survivability compared to a Block-52 but with the proliferation of AESA radar of both surface and airborne type the Rafale survivability isn't any better than an F-16 Block 52. Unless you believe Spectra can deceive /jam powerful surface or airborne AESA systems like the Green Pine/Super Green Pine/ M3R/Phalcon/Eriye/Wedgetail....

In other words, you haven't told me anything that the f-16 can do better than a rafale can. Other than f-16 being cheaper than rafale, which is undeniably true, is there any mission for which an f-16 would be better than a rafale? That was the original question you posed, when you asked what mission is being talked about. I repeat the question - is there any mission at all where f-16 can do better than rafale?

And don't play the politician and ask me to define ''better'', like bill clinton stumped the grand jury by telling them that it all depends on what the meaning of the word ''is'' is. Let's just assume that we both know the meanings of common words, if we want a sane discussion.

If you want some missions where Rafale would be better - since it can carry a helluva lot more load to a helluva greater distance, it would excel the f-16 in all sorts of strike missions. And it won't need the likes of F-15 giving top cover, since it can self escort, due to its much better a2a performance. And yes, lower RCS and those little details matter, unless you assume that all air warfare is going to be like the USAF, with all sorts of AEWACs and jammers and other supporting assets. For most other countries, that is simply not true.

For any mission I can think of, a rafale should be better than an F-16. Other than cost, I really cannot think of any factor favoring f-16. Heck, even the mirage was designed to equal the f-16, and it does in most parameters. If a mirage can hold well against an f-166, it stands to reason that a next gen, much more modern rafale can and does. The french are not stupid, to replace their mirages with a 100 million dollar rafale, if the rafale is no better than an f-16. Nor the rest of europe, who use equally expensive eurofighters.

Bill Clinton and the Meaning of "Is"