LCA Tejas Mk1 & Mk1A - News and discussions

HariPrasad

Active member
Dec 5, 2018
322
192
Surat
TBH Mk1/1A is a lot smaller than J10/F16 and is L-MRCA. J10 is M-MRCA with higher thrust engine, higher payload, fuel capacity, bigger AESA radar and more hard points.
So it’s unfair comparison. As said above Mk2/MWF is the real competition of J10 category MRCA. It has a good chance to outperform J10 in almost all performance parameters.

In a simulated battle between J11 and Saab Gripen C, Griprn won all the BVR fights against J11 though J11 prevail in close combat. Same thing will happen between J10 and Mk1A. So far as AESA is concern, KLJ 7 is a shit and only as good as ELTA 2032 PESA with detection range of 170 km for 5 Sq meter target. UTTAM is a far better radar. J10 C will gave have advantage over Tejas because TVC but that will be offseted with HMD , high instantaneous turn rate and deadly Paython 5. which can be directed towards J10 without Tejas' nose pointing towards J10.
Using Tejas will be too costly for war. We will throw Kadi Ninda and Ghor Ninda missiles in response to thousands of CMs and BMs flying into India in the first 30 minutes of any conflict.

We are comparing 2 planes, from where dose BM comes in?
 

HariPrasad

Active member
Dec 5, 2018
322
192
Surat
With quite a lot of optimization, Mk2 will be the one to beat.
Just the reduction in radome size brings so much overall improvement.

How would it happen? can you please explain? In my opinion, we should negotiate for GE414 EPE engine with US so that MK2 can be absolutely @$$ kicing.
 

AbRaj

Senior member
Dec 6, 2017
2,490
1,826
Republic of Wadiya
In a simulated battle between J11 and Saab Gripen C, Griprn won all the BVR fights against J11 though J11 prevail in close combat. Same thing will happen between J10 and Mk1A.
That’s wild imagination at best. LCA Mk1 is inferior to Gripen C in every parameter.

Gripen was better only in BVR due to its much more advanced Radar,SPJs and BVRAAM against older versions of J10 and that too in training mode. So no one knows the real performance of both.
In WVR J10 was way more superior to Gripen.
So far as AESA is concern, KLJ 7 is a shit and only as good as ELTA 2032 PESA with detection range of 170 km for 5 Sq meter target. UTTAM is a far better radar.
Again it’s an assumption and not the fact.
Very wild assumption TBH.
J10 C will gave have advantage over Tejas because TVC but that will be offseted with HMD , high instantaneous turn rate and deadly Paython 5. which can be directed towards J10 without Tejas' nose pointing towards J10.
Perhaps you are intermixing HOBS missile with HMD, as HMD is available with both. J10 uses same HMDS and HOBS missiles as J20.
Also Python is not confirmed. ASRAAM is what is in news.
 

Ashwin

Agent_47
Staff member
Administrator
Nov 30, 2017
5,176
8,547
Bangalore
praneethfranklin_20211123_203450_0.jpg
 

STEPHEN COHEN

Senior member
Dec 4, 2017
7,403
4,548
Mk1A and J-10C are more or less similar in a BVR fight, but the Mk1A will be inferior to the J-10C in WVR.

Sir , in a WVR , dont you think that Low Speed Maneuvering is more important along with Climb Rate

Because WVR is all about getting in the Right position for a First shot

If you can turn your plane quickly at a low speed , then you can get into the right firing position which is in my opinion from 10 O clock to 2 O clock quadrant , relative to the enemy

 

AbRaj

Senior member
Dec 6, 2017
2,490
1,826
Republic of Wadiya
Sir , in a WVR , dont you think that Low Speed Maneuvering is more important along with Climb Rate

Because WVR is all about getting in the Right position for a First shot

J10 has higher thrust engine and is Canard Delta configuration which provides better manoeuvrability than Cranked Delta of LCA.
And no, Dogfight is much more than just 1st turn. There are numerous tactical and evasive manoeuvres designed to deny the enemy the better ITR advantage.
For simple understanding, watch dogfight between M2000( better ITR, poor STR) with F16( Better STR, Ok ITR) on DCS with some knowledgeable pilots.

PS: low speed recovery is an safety feature that has nothing to do with any type of BVR or WVR combat.
It’s like saying Disk brakes will make Tata nano a Racing Car.
 
Last edited:

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
14,098
10,617
India
Sir , in a WVR , dont you think that Low Speed Maneuvering is more important along with Climb Rate

Because WVR is all about getting in the Right position for a First shot


Yeah, but the J-10C has more power and greater agility than the LCA Mk1/A. The J-10 also comes with a very advanced CCM and HMDS. Even with the ALSR, the J-10C has better minimums and maximums to exploit anyway. In any case, while the J-10C is the better platform for a WVR fight, pilot training is much more important and that's where we have the advantage.

The LCA Mk2 will be a step up over the J-10C.
 

STEPHEN COHEN

Senior member
Dec 4, 2017
7,403
4,548
@randomradio
@AbRaj

J 10 would be the Aggressor and Tejas being a interceptor will be the defender

Now If you read these two
Below Mentioned articles together , It says that Low Speed Maneuvering is Important in WVR

The Low Wing Loading and Climb Rate is already well known

For instance the MiG 21 pilot says that , The MiG 21 climbs very fast and Swoops down on the enemy below like an Eagle

This is exactly how Abhinandan got his Kill

Tejas too has been designed like the Mirage 2000. IE Low Wing loading and a rapid climb rate

ITR and HMDS will also be useful in a WVR ie Dog fight

Tejas must get at a higher altitude against the J 10 , then it will shoot it down


 

AbRaj

Senior member
Dec 6, 2017
2,490
1,826
Republic of Wadiya
@randomradio
@AbRaj

J 10 would be the Aggressor and Tejas being a interceptor will be the defender
In dogfights, it’s not much of relevance.
Now If you read these two
Below Mentioned articles together , It says that Low Speed Maneuvering is Important in WVR
Every Pilot tries to force the conditions suitable for him and his machine. F16/western fighter designs are optimised for high speed rate fights while Russians design focus much on nose authority at slower speeds. Each has its own advantage. But the higher TWR is always desirable.
You bleed too much energy, you will probably gonna loose.
The Low Wing Loading and Climb Rate is already well known

For instance the MiG 21 pilot says that , The MiG 21 climbs very fast and Swoops down on the enemy below like an Eagle
It’s an old design with high TWR and poor manoeuvrability. It’s pretty much the only thing Mig 21 can do when facing another fighter jet, that too just for few minutes as it’s range is extremely limited. It’s called Shoot and Skoot tactic by Soviets. Not a real dogfight IMO.
Tejas too has been designed like the Mirage 2000. IE Low Wing loading and a rapid climb rate
Mirage 2000 (?) and Mig 21 are two entirely different types of aircraft’s. Comparing two is like comparing Bajaj platina with TVS Apache 200 RTR.
M2000 was designed as a multirole air superiority fighter. It’s a much more capable dogfighter and probably was the second best design after F16 to dogfight.
Mig 21 was just a third gen soviet point defence fighter.
ITR and HMDS will also be useful in a WVR ie Dog fight
It is. And that’s what makes M2000 a capable dogfighter. Downside is Delta wing bleeds too much energy and therefore depends on superior nose authority to shoot the enemy during initial higher energy state.
Tejas must get at a higher altitude against the J 10 , then it will shoot it down


True again. But it’s not how things happen.
Before engaging, both pilots try to gain as much energy as possible by climbing up.

Jet with higher power reserves can gain energy rapidly during any stage of the dogfight which is crucial for manoeuvrability of the jet.

PS: Some Lawhori *censored* was saying that LCA pilot was doing combat manoeuvres at Dubai air show without afterburners to make tighter turns. That *censored* doesn’t know that higher speed creates more drag and thus helps in combat manoeuvres. And that’s why most pilots prefer to use afterburners most of the time during dogfights.
@randomradio Is my reasoning is correct ? Or I’m missing something?
 
Last edited:

HariPrasad

Active member
Dec 5, 2018
322
192
Surat
That’s wild imagination at best. LCA Mk1 is inferior to Gripen C in every parameter.

Gripen was better only in BVR due to its much more advanced Radar,SPJs and BVRAAM against older versions of J10 and that too in training mode. So no one knows the real performance of both.
In WVR J10 was way more superior to Gripen.
Can you explain how? No one knows the real performance yet you claim that B is better than A? Many open source information is available in KLJ 7. It is an inferior AESA like almost all defense stuff of China. It lacks many advance features search while track etc. If you want to discuss it, open a new thread.

It was J11 to whom Gripen defeated in BVR combat not J10. J11 is a twin engine TVC fighter with much more agility than J10. J10C is a single engine fighter with lower T/W ratio and maneuverability.

Again it’s an assumption and not the fact.
Very wild assumption TBH.
What I have quoted is from open source information like any other information you quoted. One can't have double standards. Accept it somewhere and reject it elsewhere.

Perhaps you are intermixing HOBS missile with HMD, as HMD is available with both. J10 uses same HMDS and HOBS missiles as J20.
Also Python is not confirmed. ASRAAM is what is in news
I said it is HMDs with python 5 which is already been integrated and tested with Tejas. Python is best WVR missile to which you can fire at enemy plane without even pointing it towards enemy because of its great maneuverability. You can not do it with other missile. Chinese shitty missile are no match to Python 5. Python 5 is something which gives an edge to Tejas in BVR. Tejas will easily prevail over J10 (Not J10 C) in WVR combat. While J10 C will have TVC advantage, Tejas will have superior WVR missile which will be very difficult to dodge.

Mk1A and J-10C are more or less similar in a BVR fight, but the Mk1A will be inferior to the J-10C in WVR.

That is what I said but integration of Python 5 will make it a match to J10 C in WVR combat as well because Indian pilot will be able to fire it without pointing its nose to J10 c. J10C's advantage will be neutralized with integration of python 5.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
14,098
10,617
India
@randomradio
@AbRaj

J 10 would be the Aggressor and Tejas being a interceptor will be the defender

Now If you read these two
Below Mentioned articles together , It says that Low Speed Maneuvering is Important in WVR

The Low Wing Loading and Climb Rate is already well known

For instance the MiG 21 pilot says that , The MiG 21 climbs very fast and Swoops down on the enemy below like an Eagle

This is exactly how Abhinandan got his Kill

Tejas too has been designed like the Mirage 2000. IE Low Wing loading and a rapid climb rate

ITR and HMDS will also be useful in a WVR ie Dog fight

Tejas must get at a higher altitude against the J 10 , then it will shoot it down



Whatever advantages the M2000 and LCA have, the J-10 is as good or even better because it not only has a high performance engine, it also has canards. The overall performance specs of the J-10 should be much better than the LCA Mk1A. It's also much more mature, after all the Mk1A is still a paper airplane.

It's difficult to say if the J-10C's AESA radar and EW suite are as good or better than what's on the LCA Mk1A. At the very least, the J-10 makes up for any deficiencies using its greater size and power. And the J-10C has IRST, which gives it a significant advantage over Mk1A in WVR, especially over the Himalayas.

The LCA should demonstrate better performance on the ground in terms of maintenance and turnaround, owing to its more modern airframe and engine. This will allow us to compete with lesser number of aircraft.

However by the time we get the Mk1A in enough numbers, at 10-15 years old, the J-10C would have become slightly outdated, and if not a J-10D, the PLAAF could very well be operating a next gen SE aircraft in the same class as the Checkmate by then. It's also about time for their J-10As to get upgrades. So it's best to just compare the Mk1/A with the PAF, also due to the fact that they will be positioned mostly along the Pak border.

In dogfights, it’s not much of relevance.

Every Pilot tries to force the conditions suitable for him and his machine. F16/western fighter designs are optimised for high speed rate fights while Russians design focus much on nose authority at slower speeds. Each has its own advantage. But the higher TWR is always desirable.
You bleed too much energy, you will probably gonna loose.

It’s an old design with high TWR and poor manoeuvrability. It’s pretty much the only thing Mig 21 can do when facing another fighter jet, that too just for few minutes as it’s range is extremely limited. It’s called Shoot and Skoot tactic by Soviets. Not a real dogfight IMO.

Mirage 2000 (?) and Mig 21 are two entirely different types of aircraft’s. Comparing two is like comparing Bajaj platina with TVS Apache 200 RTR.
M2000 was designed as a multirole air superiority fighter. It’s a much more capable dogfighter and probably was the second best design after F16 to dogfight.
Mig 21 was just a third gen soviet point defence fighter.

It is. And that’s what makes M2000 a capable dogfighter. Downside is Delta wing bleeds too much energy and therefore depends on superior nose authority to shoot the enemy during initial higher energy state.

True again. But it’s not how things happen.
Before engaging, both pilots try to gain as much energy as possible by climbing up.

Jet with higher power reserves can gain energy rapidly during any stage of the dogfight which is crucial for manoeuvrability of the jet.

PS: Some Lawhori *censored* was saying that LCA pilot was doing combat manoeuvres at Dubai air show without afterburners to make tighter turns. That *censored* doesn’t know that higher speed creates more drag and thus helps in combat manoeuvres. And that’s why most pilots prefer to use afterburners most of the time during dogfights.
@randomradio Is my reasoning is correct ? Or I’m missing something?

Yeah, pretty much.

That is what I said but integration of Python 5 will make it a match to J10 C in WVR combat as well because Indian pilot will be able to fire it without pointing its nose to J10 c. J10C's advantage will be neutralized with integration of python 5.

The PL-10 should be as good as the Python V.
 

AbRaj

Senior member
Dec 6, 2017
2,490
1,826
Republic of Wadiya
Can you explain how? No one knows the real performance yet you claim that B is better than A?
Go to the websites of HAL and SAAB and read it yourself.


.OTOH Chengdu j10 doesn’t have any official website.
Many open source information is available in KLJ 7. It is an inferior AESA like almost all defense stuff of China. It lacks many advance features search while track etc. If you want to discuss it, open a new thread.
What does ‘Open Source’ mean here ?
Brochures at DefExpos ? Gustimates by some web magazines? Or Claims by basement warriors ?
PS: KLJ 7 is not a AESA and PAF and SELEX both claim Grifo radar on JF 17.
So good luck with finding anything reliable.

It’s hilarious to compare (so confidently) a product, OEM of which doesn’t give any specs barring few pamphlets, with a product that is shown only as a demo and is yet to be unveiled even by its OEM.


It was J11 to whom Gripen defeated in BVR combat not J10. J11 is a twin engine TVC fighter with much more agility than J10. J10C is a single engine fighter with lower T/W ratio and maneuverability.
My bad. You are right.
What I have quoted is from open source information like any other information you quoted. One can't have double standards. Accept it somewhere and reject it elsewhere.
Again same old ‘Open Sources’. Looks like everybody is having a J10 and KLJ in their garages and they are disassembling it every day and reporting on Internet forums.
I said it is HMDs with python 5 which is already been integrated and tested with Tejas. Python is best WVR missile to which you can fire at enemy plane without even pointing it towards enemy because of its great maneuverability. You can not do it with other missile. Chinese shitty missile are no match to Python 5.
Python 5 is a WVRAAM with HOBS capability like R73/74M, ASRAAM, AIM 9X, IRIST or even PL 10.
Only thing differs is their ability to get cued from HMDS, which was first achieved by Soviets and not Israelis. Python used to be superior in pulling out High Gs due to the availability of large control surface. Modern SRAAMS like IRIST and AIM 9X achieve that more efficiently by TVC.

Python 5 is something which gives an edge to Tejas in BVR. Tejas will easily prevail over J10 (Not J10 C) in WVR combat. While J10 C will have TVC advantage, Tejas will have superior WVR missile which will be very difficult to dodge.
Both Python and SD 10 are similar class of missile, and since no official/authentic data is available for SD 10 performance, I cannot compare the two.
I’m not good at running imaginary horses anyway.
That is what I said but integration of Python 5 will make it a match to J10 C in WVR combat as well because Indian pilot will be able to fire it without pointing its nose to J10 c. J10C's advantage will be neutralized with integration of python 5.
LoL, Even SD 10 with HMDS of J10 is capable of doing just that.
Python is not a Bramhastra/God given weapon. Why so much Hero worship for a HOBS missile that too is considered technologically inferior to newer generation of SRAAMs like AIM 9X and IRIST.
 

STEPHEN COHEN

Senior member
Dec 4, 2017
7,403
4,548
@randomradio
@AbRaj

So in your opinion , if we face an air Raid from across the LAC ,
Which plane we should scramble

If F 16s could be successfully stopped by MiG 21 , then why cannot J 10 be stopped by LCA Tejas

For CAPs too we cannot use Rafales and Sukhois and Mirage 2000

In this respect , Pakistani strategy is simple and Clear

They want to have many JF 17s as BARCAP and stop all IAF intruders
If j10 is that good ,why Pakistan took a while for ordering them(assuming they are ordering them now).
WHY they even entered with JF17,they could have gone for j10 straight away.

Pakistan was waiting for an indigenous Chinese Engine

Al 31 is not allowed for Pakistan by RUSSIA
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Lolwa

AbRaj

Senior member
Dec 6, 2017
2,490
1,826
Republic of Wadiya
@randomradio
@AbRaj

So in your opinion , if we face an air Raid from across the LAC ,
Which plane we should scramble

If F 16s could be successfully stopped by MiG 21 , then why cannot J 10 be stopped by LCA Tejas
My choice? Neither. SAMs like Spyder or any other MRSAM and LRSAM(B8) are better and cost effective to handle such threats, specially when coupled with MANPADS like Stingers or SA7. It’ll be a nightmare for the intruders to handle such a wide variety of threats from different directions.
Plug the gaps with whatever you have, be it Su30,Mig29 or LCA.
It’s all depends on pilot skills and situations at that time. For example if your LCA is fighting under MRSAM umbrella, even most modern blocks of F16 can be easily shot down.
Even if no SAM cover is available, a skilled pilot can still kill the technologically superior aircraft using good tactics and situational awareness.
There is a reason we still fly Mig 21s.
For CAPs too we cannot use Rafales and Sukhois and Mirage 2000
Why not ? I believe Su 30 and M2000 are used routinely for CAP duties along with Mig 21 and 29.
Using Rafale to scan larger area in conjunction with M2000 is not a bad idea either. At least during skirmishes.
In this respect , Pakistani strategy is simple and Clear

They want to have many JF 17s as BARCAP and stop all IAF intruders
Correct. But they use F16 too for CAP duty during high alert.
Al 31 is not allowed for Pakistan by RUSSIA
Al 31 for what ? JF 17 is too small for Al 31.
 
Last edited:

Lolwa

Well-Known member
Feb 6, 2020
1,482
984
Delhi
That’s wild imagination at best. LCA Mk1 is inferior to Gripen C in every parameter.

Gripen was better only in BVR due to its much more advanced Radar,SPJs and BVRAAM against older versions of J10 and that too in training mode. So no one knows the real performance of both.
In WVR J10 was way more superior to Gripen.

Again it’s an assumption and not the fact.
Very wild assumption TBH.

Perhaps you are intermixing HOBS missile with HMD, as HMD is available with both. J10 uses same HMDS and HOBS missiles as J20.
Also Python is not confirmed. ASRAAM is what is in news.
Python is tested. Python and derby will be the primary weaponry of the tejas. Python 5 is already tested on tejas.
r-73,asraam,r-77 and astra will be added on later.
Right now at its present state Tejas can take down all of Pakistani inventory except the blk 52's. In Chinese inventory everything except the J-11 BSH, J-10BS, J-16,Su-35 and J-20
 

Sathya

Senior member
Dec 2, 2017
2,534
1,508
India
My choice? Neither. SAMs like Spyder or any other MRSAM and LRSAM(B8) are better and cost effective to handle such threats, specially when coupled with MANPADS like Stingers or SA7. It’ll be a nightmare for the intruders to handle such a wide variety of threats from different directions.
Plug the gaps with whatever you have, be it Su30,Mig29 or LCA.
It’s all depends on pilot skills and situations at that time. For example if your LCA is fighting under MRSAM umbrella, even most modern blocks of F16 can be easily shot down.
Even if no SAM cover is available, a skilled pilot can still kill the technologically superior aircraft using good tactics and situational awareness.
There is a reason we still fly Mig 21s.

Why not ? I believe Su 30 and M2000 are used routinely for CAP duties along with Mig 21 and 29.
Using Rafale to scan larger area in conjunction with M2000 is not a bad idea either. At least during skirmishes.

Correct. But they use F16 too for CAP duty during high alert.

Al 31 for what ? JF 17 is too small for Al 31.

He said Pak could not buy J10 because of Al 31engine.
Russia didn't allow it .
So Pakistan were waiting for Chinese engine.
------------
PL 10 is Python 4 right?

How would it happen? can you please explain? In my opinion, we should negotiate for GE414 EPE engine with US so that MK2 can be absolutely @$$ kicing.

MWF TRM sees increase 900 odd..
But nose cone is reduced in diameter.
This reduces Drag by about 6 % I think.

Uttam mk2 has GaN modules, repositioner,
And forwardly pushed closer to nose cone, creating space enough for IRST.

Source : mostly from Indranil tweet.
( damn I am forget many equipments name)
 
Last edited:

Lolwa

Well-Known member
Feb 6, 2020
1,482
984
Delhi
He said Pak could not buy J10 because of Al 31engine.
Russia didn't allow it .
So Pakistan were waiting for Chinese engine.
------------
PL 10 is Python 4 right?
Pl 10 is based on upgraded pl 8 which was based on python 2-3 series
 

AbRaj

Senior member
Dec 6, 2017
2,490
1,826
Republic of Wadiya
He said Pak could not buy J10 because of Al 31engine.
Russia didn't allow it .
So Pakistan were waiting for Chinese engine.
I don’t believe in that rumour. They are ok with Rd-33 for FC1 but have problems with Al-31 for J10 ?
More likely reasoning for opting for JF17 was its Price. J10 comes with high price tag which makes it unattractive for countries like Pakistan.
------------
PL 10 is Python 4 right?
7F358476-E822-450D-BFE0-1D312543E1BC.png


7D5AF77C-84F5-46F4-AEB3-5F1D809CA069.png
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Sathya