Yes seen it , was restricted probably so did not post. There was not much else.
LCA AF Mk2 (Medium Weight Fighter) - News and discussions
- Thread starter Schwifty
- Start date
Long held this belief & said before the above point several times. The Mk1a extra nos are better used in Mk2 make, ie a proper fighter class jet with more endurance, payload capacity & higher thrust engine. This Mk1a extra nos batch is a compromise between the 2 set of jets capability. Mere lobbying standoff weapon should (& would) not make Mk1a the same equivalent to Mk2 class just because the two share similar subsystems & radar config. Then in future if you can develop capability to lob standoff weapon from mere tankers or transport aircrafts or heavy UCAVs it would not make the light combat jets obsolete. No restriction on numbers, but when the total budget allocation is limited, it is hard to find space for adequate amount esp with the huge delays faced by the user because the Govt will NEVER call out the manufacturer HAL or design house ADA.
Mk1 or Mk1a as improved version of the former is a very good agile jet, but its role is limited to escort duty, patrol the sky within the country border, quick dispersal in case of enemy attack package trying to infiltrate your airspace, limited ground attack role with bombs etc. This role demands light very agile configuration which is exactly matched with engine thrust class. In theory every other fighter jet can do the same roles but it is economical to let the light jet do this job during peacetime & at later stages of war where need to manage sortie hours handicap the command.
But during war in the early phase to attack enemy you need to have more juice in your attack jet which is the configuration for Mk2. This attack package also need protection that would be provided by the escort Mk1/Mk1A standard jet. Well defined roles for every type of jet in the whole mission is what a good experienced user like IAF practice. If you (want to) press your light jet to do the other role intended for another fighter class jet just because you are high on my LCA is great sort of drug (which a lot of social media opinion accounts are) then no wonder people in the rank will never take the defence community opinion seriously. Not that they need to btw.
A compromise is always a compromise, no matter how much sweet talk or hype is given. As a country MIC we make few things, some of those are very good. But unnecessary overhype is always detrimental to the cause. Mk2 version should see the min 200+ nos like the Mk1a standard orders to fulfil its role. Shoving one role duty into a lighter less capable jet only shows flaw in ones thinking. Just as it is very hard to define 4th gen 4.5 gen, 5 th gen 5.5 gen etc as ACM correctly pointed out, the same go for multi role , omni role etc.
Simple country airspace patrol , escorting other jets, limited ground attack can be multi role but not in the same sense or way of a medium weight class higher endurance multirole jet like Mk2.
Last edited:
Fair points. Although, Mk1A has a payload of ~4T with a combat radius comparable to the Jaguars. The IAF is integrating all possible weapons in its inventory on the jet for this reason. So that it can take up strike missions as and when required
In any case, it is the only bird we have in hand at a time when we are already down to 29 sqns.
Tbh, production of Mk2 may not ramp up in time to replace the Jags which are due to retire by 2030.
If the enemy capability enhancement do not depend on your own possible projection & instead go on leaps and bounds like China , then issue with this self imposed / Government mandate of only domestic orders also do not fit with what you have to face during wartime just because the Government political coalition want to hype this up as part of their own election propaganda , which is happening with the current political leadership campaign.
This Mk1A is the only available bird is somewhat mistaken. In theory it is the only available configuration of a jet (that is accepted by IAF) which is solely IDDM (sort of). But the order execution part, Mk1a delivery is facing delay & likely to face more in future. So order execution wise IAF is not getting the jets on hand in a not too different timeline of say 114 rafale ordered in 2019 because due to Dassault backlog it would have taken almost similar time to deliver those if ordered.
It can also be argued the locally assembled Su-30 if ordered another 97 nos like LCA back in 2020-2021 would take similar timeline to delivery and it can be argued the total Sqn number won't get affected much different to total mk1a order, based on probable execution timeline.
Case in point, if Sqn no refurbishing was the objective, Mk1A is not the only available option.
All options like
more Su30 nos (IAF not keen)
More Rafale (too costly + no local mfg yet)
more Mk1A (done but at a compromise)
more Mk2 (why not make the program a priority instead of not releasing fund till 2023)
AMCA program given priority (can not happen due to many technology still in development + F414 engine issue still not solved)
local prod of Su57 (been on offer for long time but seen as last resort)
Take Trump offer & buy F-35 (poisoned chalice)
Swallow pride & buy chinese jet (completely unacceptable)
Buy 2nd hand Mirages (not very useful)
Buy Eurofighter or Gripen (detrimental to domestic effort + cost + other issues but likely faster introduction than other options)
all of the above avenues could have been explored.
What I here mean is that the Government is highly reluctant to order the jets in time. Instead they are very happy to play one Balakot, one Op Sindoor every 5-6 years, short conflicts they can manage through diplomatic route and play it as PR for their next election campaign. In this model the current available resources are enough but overall force enhancement is neglected consciously and the erosion in sqn nos set in. This is definitely risky for you or me but not to the political leadership.
The reasoning our political leadership give for this situation is that given our neighborhood example if they strengthen the military too much the Military would at one point try to take over the power just like every other country in our neighborhood. All of pak, Nepal, SL, Myanmer Afghan Iran china are example of that in one way or another. So this argument has some weight to it but given the threat India face, it can not decide our force enhancement even with a restricted budget.
Moral of the entire situation, no matter how much we are concerned, political leadership of the country see very little existential threat. They are happy with drip feeding into capability enhancement & low Sqn nos. China is not a real military threat to them because they would prefer to avoid that conflict.
in the medium term next 10-15 years I see no deviation from this. IAF will spend highly vulnerable times and get blamed for it by everyone even though the blame lie completely elsewhere & in others hand who want to shift the blame onto IAF for their own gain. Asleep for the danger, awake for the money is the hallmark of our political leadership & they are living by it in practice.
The IAF needs a MiG-21 replacement on an immediate basis. The Mk1/A fits that footprint perfectly without additional infra investment. We need to bring up the tail end of the fleet.
The issues surrounding F-404 are to do with geopolitical headwinds that no one could have predicted just months ago. The IAF can't escape the blame for not having a Plan B wrt US-origin equipment (as in the case of Rafale) despite the 1998 sanctions experience. The babooz are notorious for having a short-term memory.
The least the IAF could have done to cut through red tape is to order additional engines as war wastage reserves (as the Army does). But the time for that is gone.
There is no way GoI is placing orders for Mk2 when the jet hasn't even flown yet.
Completely misplaced argument. The Indian military was and is apolitical. We've never had a military dictator unlike our neighbor to the West whose Field Marshall runs a parallel govt.
Not actually. Although I won't apply this to current administration but Nehru Dynasty+ leftists have always been very wary of Indian Army. They have at many times, either not provided die recognition, funds, or the approvals for infra. A dynasty's biggest fear is usurping of power. And fear doesn't allow rationality to triumph. Despite being very professional, the army has been treated rather poorly. Especially, if you look at their contribution and then look at other democratic societies who revere their army even for small things.
Whatever recognition and connection indian army got with people of India is paid through blood despite the lack of proper policy support from state.
As for leftists, and current mix of UPA corterie, Army is the frontier they failed to conquer or infiltrate. And it wasn't for the lack of trying. From involving generals in scams, using bollywood to paint a bad picture of Indian Armed forces through character like colonel and Raghavan.. etc. Left loves absolute control. Look at china. It's army is constitutionally, not meant to safeguard China as we know it, but CCP. That means it's loyalty lies with the party. And tianmen square 2.0 is very real consequence for any threat from within. But left can't have that with Indian army who have cultivated the very soul of India. Only two institution can boast of inclusivity from every corner of India. Army and All India Services. Even govt is "federal".
While AIS have had mixed results despite more autonomy ( corruption) . army has maintained a remarkable discipline and restraint.
So, the very nature of army made it not subservient. So, they made them dependent and weakened. Look at the disastrous state armed forces were in. They couldn't retaliate against shelling, had to tolerate terrorists roaming around etc etc..
So, yes the dynasty has found it to their liking if army remains weakened, which pak calls strategic balance of power. Widely used as reason cited by "eminent" analyst to not strengthen army.
The current administration flipped that. And that's where I disagree with Marich, that current govt is doing it deliberately when the issues facing IAF dates back to decisions or lack thereof , dating back more than decades ago. Since independence, only exacaberated by govts.
The govt can't magically change the fact that institution like DRDO, HAL etc have resisted reforms very much. Neither they can end reservation, change hiring and firing policies or make Mk2 a reality.
While we tend to focus on big items worthy of headlines.. all three services have been getting constant fund and policy support from govt in rebuilding their strength from ground up.
The call for indigineous isn't a political issue, it's a demand of the time that other neglected. If it resonates with wider public, then why not.
Just resisting US and it's tarrifs have electoral costs which pitch for swadeshi can't change in Indian politics. Few people care or understand about the need to resist and need for self reliance. They too only see tarrifs along with narrative and potential effects cited by we know who. So, labeling it as being electoral is like how we used to say that they are using article 370 for electoral gains only and aren't serious about it really. But, you can't abrogate 370, build Ram Temple without widespread Riots, if you aren't serious about it. Same way, indiginesation is long and tedious project which will show it's return in few years. Just how infra boost, make in india, PLI schemes are finally contributing to indian state. There's real things happening, on ground. Despite getting mocked for pushing manufacturing.. they have kept the ball rolling.
Can more be done? Yes. Should more be done? Heck yes!
And IAF will get it's due share too. I mean just look at 2016, 2019 2025.. the evolution [started with "100 billion ollar modernisation" vision] of our armed forces which is btw " ongoing" and nowhere near complete.
5-6 years timeline and PR, is a good narrative but ignores the evolution and changes. Both in system and doctrine. That 5-6 years go into improvement. The critique would be valid if there was no improvement b/w 2016 & 2025. In response and systems, Especially IDDM weapons. Remember " time and place of our choosing".
Current admin is as wary of army as Americans and Europeans are. Understand the risks, but mitigate them, not stifle the institution.
The Indian political class has a cultural aversion to war. Under the N overhang, GOP became paranoid about escalating for fear of retaliation, even in the face of grave provocations like the Mumbai Taj Mahal hotel attack. P Chidambaram recently said that the MM Singh gave in to US pressure in not taking action against Pak post 26/11.
GOP govts indifferent stance on CDS for fear of creating a 'super general' had stalled mil structural reforms. The fiasco involving TSD formed by Gen VK Singh had a lot to do with it.
But even before that, IGs distrust of FM Sam Manekshaw and others had lead to avoidable losses on the battlefield.
However, it was the same IG who oversaw the largest re-armament prog in Indian history post 1965 war which paid off in 1971.
Rajiv G boldly funded the N sub prog in the 80s despite the economic turbulence of the 80s. In the early 1990s, the IAF and IN were at their peak strength.
Since economic liberalisation though, defence spending has not kept up with mil modernisation needs. This had more to do with changing political priorities and even the vain desire to avoid corruption allegations (as in the case of Shri AK Anthony)
The ruling elite in the country thought soft power > hard power until recently. It is because of this lack of vision and the ruthless scheming of the bureaucrats that have created the mess we are in today.
I admit GOP govts sometimes went too far to offer CBMs to Pak but it wasn't because they were afraid of being toppled by the IA.
Here the issue is not fit for fit replacement, we know LCA was conceived for that from the start. The issue is with filling the gap at appropriate time in line with squadron wise Mig21 being phased out. That planning has not been good because the supplier HAL in this case is still struggling to deliver the jets in time for issues cited as beyond their control.
In the development process ADA call the shots, but Mk1A was supposedly HAL own parallel work to improve the mk1 FOC batch to series production Mk1a based upon customer feedback. This stage has taken way too much time & the vacuum created in between replenishment is leaving IAF nos short.
If the same engines are facing delivery issues , how the reserve engines order would have fared any better when the oem GE has a limited yearly capacity & a country wise priority distribution system? You can order 10 years ago but the final delivery date will be what GE commit to & you can do nothing except charge previously agreed LD penalty (which is already provisioned in the original contract). At best HAL can call in force majure or cancel the contract citing delays but in this case, we know there is no alternative other than blacklisting GE from future programs. Both options are detrimental to us.
Point is, there is no scope of plan B when it comes to jet engines or specifically American jet engines. Our designers willingly chose American engines possibly because they wanted it very much. We know for scientific knowledge gaining our scientists want every possible source based product to see what feature is good in it so they can learn it and add to future indi system eeither by reverse engineering or via Jv building. They want all the best possibly features merged into the indigenous product developed. That may have been the reason behind choosing American engines, to fill knowledge gaps. Possibly why tech transfer is a Govt mandate in many foreign source deal.
Govt has not even committed to other options so this point is moot, Mk2 is exhibit x, other options are exhibit y z etc. The shortfall is real & you need plan ready several years ago so gaps are plugged in time. I do not see Govt being serious here despite repeated IAF attempt. IAF can not sign a major contract without Govt green lighting major jet procurement. That green light has not come at any point in the past 12 years.
Now suddenly Su57 is being considered 8 years after pulling out. In both cases pull out then again under consideration, it happens with direct Govt mandate & nod for it. IAF get the blame because Govt that is the political leadership face of the country can not afford bad PR light shining on them. So the blame part get shifted to IAF for pulling out of FGFA then again being considered 10 years later.
IAF can only forward the procurement case to MoD, which file is chosen for green light is a political & bureaucratic decision from the top where the political (the different RM, RRM etc) & bureaucratic element (govt official in MoD who do what they are told by RM RRM level people) affect the final outcome. Yes LCA order was pushed by one RM but enforcing that order in time was not done by the subsequent RMs in chair & further delays happened in subsequent programs due to not even clearing development fund. IAF can plead repeatedly but have very little influence if the top official/RM/RRM/PM is adamant that LCA mk2 won't get funded until the local production of F-414 decision is cleared.
Even funnier part is, people in the office won't take blame for what the previous official before him/her did. One official is only responsible for decision making/work during his/her 2-3 years tenure. No responsibility is taken as collective.
The point is not that. We all are aware of it. The point is the political class viewpoint of always seeing the armed forces with caution & wield enough power so as to keep their influence under par. The collective political, diplomatic & to some extent business class in any country want the power for themselves & aside from a foreign power the only other foe they are likely to face is the own armed force. In this regard all of Modi RaGa & any other top politics person would agree. This inherent distrust forms the basis of never trusting the army.
Same reasoning go for minimum credible deterrence policy choice because if you have too many of something, some of it would get controlled by the user at some point that might be used to blackmail your own powerplay.
PLA never tried to overtake gov, and the state of our air force is also due to our economic level. China didn’t have a gleaming air force in 2005 when it was $3-4 trillion GDP infact they were almost at our level only wtr technology. China's GDP had a meteoric rise hence you can see that effect on their air force and other areas.
The current gov and bureaucracy do not believe China will wage a direct war with India, due to the difficult terrain and the fact both are nuclear armed but conflict with Pakistan is seen as possible as the political leadership in Pakistan depends on this conflict to stay in power which is not the case for the CCP. Whether this will happen remains to be seen.
I think in 10 years IAF will be in a much stronger state, definitely enough to defeat Pak and maybe to survive infront of PLAAF. Incoming MK1A, Mk2, AWACS, satellites and air defence systems will make IAF be more capable in a decade. The only issue is the lack of 5th generation stealth platforms.
Last edited:
PLA case is quite unique, it is wholly controlled by the communist party and for a change their political leadership is determined to take the country ahead. This does not mean there is no corruption or anything, that can equally exist. But the will to change the stagnant system & take the country forward matters a lot. I do not see the same effort or will among thee political leadership of our country, not in the same wavelength. There is some will for the past 10-12 years but not matching the main adversary.
If we are stuck with a Pak centric approach we will remain in a small shallow pool because the larger/collective powers will use Pak to counter & control our effort time to time. Basically bring down to a lower level of competition then beat with experience.
No one is stopping progress of our aero programs except us, by being dependent on other powers. China learned it much faster than us.
If you look at the number of design iterations it took for Tejas Mk1 to evolve into the definitive Mk2 version, you can well imagine the analysis paralysis at IAF HQ. Rather than choosing an incremental roadmap, Mk2 was turned into a whole new MWF class fighter.
Granted threat perceptions dictate design requirements which change over time. But for an AF that is already down to 29 sqns, it is an open invitation for more trouble down the line.
That is not all. In 2018, the IAF held up clearance for Mk1A at the last minute to demand even more changes (reprofiled canopy, DMG, new MC, etc). These were non-critical changes that could have been integrated post induction. Contrast that with the Rafales which were inducted without ISE mods integrated.
Look the whole idea behind LCA mk1 (as it was originally conceived) was to provide a point defence interceptor with secondary ground attack capability. It does that job well. On the industrial side, we need to build critical production mass before transitioning to Mk2/AMCA.
In any case, we're replacing about 400 late-model MiG-21s with just 220 Mk1As.
We've been over those issues in the past. The LCA program was far too ambitious for Indian industry.
But our troubles began the day Kaveri was decoupled from the Tejas program, ostensibly to speed up induction. That locked us in with GE and gave the US leverage over a critical program.
But as they say, hindsight is always 100%. So I won't argue this point any further.
There is no doubt that the current RM is incompetent. Meanwhile the IAF Chief is now talking about having done his 'homework during MMRCA' while the MRFA RfP is yet to be released.
Last edited:
yeah, in this regard the sole argument centers around what would have been beneficial as order & follow on order. It is of course better to have first 83 batch Mk1a and then this 97 batch as mk2; had the Mk2 program progressed on time. ADA people themselves cited various timelines but again there was strange unforeseen clause like local mfg of F 414 was tied with Mk2 fund release, essentially the government itself delayed the whole Mk2 project. But IAF is not allowed to call out the supreme power on this.
As with numbers, if the mk1a 83 batch is found satisfactory, no more major change needed, why not place another repeat order 7-8 years down the line? Same can be applied to Mk2 case as well. making money available is the Govt side duty, if they choose to spend it on other schemes & freebie subsidy it is their conscious choice of neglecting the military need. Again IAF or the armed forces have little say on this. China pulling ahead in numbers due to this, they continue building.
Here the Govt will was a major factor. Govt is one sly customer, it has its own will and it spends money where it see fit. This govt also can change every 5 years or sometimes less. It runs the country so it has eyes & ears everywhere. I think they knew very well pitfalls of not building test facilities or sanctioning not enough fund for engine development. A domestic engine success was not the priority as much as getting a license mfg or off the shelf buy (which also need foreign govt approval, they will offer you stuff but not the one you want , USA case in point).
So the idea was always to leverage whatever progress GTRE show as an incentive to cut a better deal from a foreign power by saying look we have achieved this, if you do not give us engines we will go all the way in our program & you will miss out on big business opportunity, this is your last opportunity. Eventually this worked one way or another. Higher up powers always knew it is impossible to make jet engines out of the way they funded the program. This crafted effort only shifted the blame onto somewhere else.
MRFA done enough sorties by now tbh to be again rfp issue & whole drama repeat.
"A bird in hand is worth two in the bush"
There is no LCA Mk2 while Mk1A is in active production
If anything I hope they order more Mk1As if Mk2 is delayed for Full scale production
There is no LCA Mk2 while Mk1A is in active production
If anything I hope they order more Mk1As if Mk2 is delayed for Full scale production
Ordering is in our own hand. Its the easiest part in the whole process.
All the engines are off the shelf bought. So the actual delivery will be 100% dependent on GE capacity & annual supply rate.
All the engines are off the shelf bought. So the actual delivery will be 100% dependent on GE capacity & annual supply rate.
As per current timelines, Mk1A production is expected to end in 2032. By then, Mk2 will hopefully be ready for production. GoI might have taken that into consideration. Although I agree it was asinine to withold funds till the F-414 deal was signed. The retarded babooze acted as if they were paying out of their own pockets. The RM remained a mute spectator.
The thing is MiG-21 is no longer in service which makes Mk1A a bigger priority in my view. M2000 and MiG-29s will continue to fly till 2032 which gives Mk2 some breathing space.
However, word on the street is that the IAF has revised its minimum fighter sqn target to 55 sqns. So, the projected 201 Tejas Mk2 requirement may well be expanded in future.
Imo, this present GoI only wants domestic MII manufacturing and not domestic IP creation. There is no other way to explain the move to grant Indian company status to local subsidiaries of global OEM. That is just glorified license production with little ToT of real value.
I'm afraid if the DRDO reforms go through as planned, it could irrepairably hurt IDDM progs. Worse, the DRDO chief could be divested of powers to sanction R&D projects altogether.
Do not tamper with DRDO
It was in 1980 that then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi agreed to create a Department of Defence Research & Development (DDR&D) within the Ministry of Defence.
www.deccanherald.com
As per current timelines, Mk1A production is expected to end in 2032. By then, Mk2 will hopefully be ready for production. GoI might have taken that into consideration. Although I agree it was asinine to withold funds till the F-414 deal was signed. The retarded babooze acted as if they were paying out of their own pockets. The RM remained a mute spectator.
The thing is MiG-21 is no longer in service which makes Mk1A a bigger priority in my view. M2000 and MiG-29s will continue to fly till 2032 which gives Mk2 some breathing space.
However, word on the street is that the IAF has revised its minimum fighter sqn target to 55 sqns. So, the projected 201 Tejas Mk2 requirement may well be expanded in future.
Imo, this present GoI only wants domestic MII manufacturing and not domestic IP creation. There is no other way to explain the move to grant Indian company status to local subsidiaries of global OEM. That is just glorified license production with little ToT of real value.
I'm afraid if the DRDO reforms go through as planned, it could irrepairably hurt IDDM progs. Worse, the DRDO chief could be divested of powers to sanction R&D projects altogether.
Do not tamper with DRDO
It was in 1980 that then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi agreed to create a Department of Defence Research & Development (DDR&D) within the Ministry of Defence.
That will break the backbone of any hopefull homegrown pvt led R&D in defense. A stupidity of the highest order.
Only pvt players without hindered by reservation and govt hiring firing rules can effectively bring talent. Especially the new age startups