LCA Tejas Mk1 & Mk1A - News and discussions

Sathya

Senior member
Dec 2, 2017
2,707
1,600
India
The internal LRU changes will be difficult but AESA and pod can always be added to the Mk1 imo.

They are going to upgrade all mk1 to Mk1A standards later..
These modified Mk1 samples may serve for that modification purpose too..
If we upgrade 2 aircraft / year, we ll finish all in 2040. Like mirage 2000 upgrade.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
14,983
10,992
India
The internal LRU changes will be difficult but AESA and pod can always be added to the Mk1 imo.

I'm not sure about the IOC models, but I'm sure FOC can be converted to Mk1A, it will only lack some airframe changes. But I guess it will increase the weight and make it less useful.
Agreed, @Gautam sometime back told the standardized part which can be inter changed , started manufacturing from FOC only I think.

I'd actually like to see the IOC models phased out in exchange for Mk2 by the late 2030s. It will be a pretty good run, 20+ years.
 

Ankit Kumar

Team StratFront
Nov 30, 2017
4,555
4,316
Bangalore
We just need pl-15,cm400 akg and harpoon equivalent to be integrated and the tejas will be enough to handle all of PAF.
Astra Mk1 will be more than enough on it. More than enough.


The only time a fighter pilot will need and actually fire at a target that's 100 km away is when it's a tanker or awacs.

Dual pylons for Astra Mk1 and it's a killer. No serious air combat force in the world will fire a bvr at a target beyond 40-50km away. ANYONE claiming to fire a 150-300km bvr at a fighter sized target will not be able to differentiate between a A320 and B737 standing on ground.
 

Lolwa

Senior member
Feb 6, 2020
1,688
1,055
Delhi
Astra Mk1 will be more than enough on it. More than enough.


The only time a fighter pilot will need and actually fire at a target that's 100 km away is when it's a tanker or awacs.

Dual pylons for Astra Mk1 and it's a killer. No serious air combat force in the world will fire a bvr at a target beyond 40-50km away. ANYONE claiming to fire a 150-300km bvr at a fighter sized target will not be able to differentiate between a A320 and B737 standing on ground.
I'm talking about A2G and we need astra mk2 integration. Tejas is a very underrated design. It will be able to handle everything except for the j-20 and j-10C's in the neighborhood.
Right now jF-17 has a lot of stand off options so does the tejas but the jf-17 has the yj-83 and cm400 akg. We have the rampage being integrated and brahmos Ng. But for the time being integrating harpoon/exocet and KH-35 would be a good stop-gap. Although we really need to develop something like a cm-400 akg a cheap aero ballistic standoff missile.
 

Lolwa

Senior member
Feb 6, 2020
1,688
1,055
Delhi
Astra Mk1 will be more than enough on it. More than enough.


The only time a fighter pilot will need and actually fire at a target that's 100 km away is when it's a tanker or awacs.

Dual pylons for Astra Mk1 and it's a killer. No serious air combat force in the world will fire a bvr at a target beyond 40-50km away. ANYONE claiming to fire a 150-300km bvr at a fighter sized target will not be able to differentiate between a A320 and B737 standing on ground.
Now that I think about the Rudram 3 is the cm400 akg equivalent. The difference being it's double the range and maybe more maneuverable.
images - 2022-07-20T042739.702.jpeg
images - 2022-07-20T042601.472.jpeg
images - 2022-07-20T042516.894.jpeg

See how similar the designs are after the inter stage.
I guess this was the entire reason Rudram 3 is being created.
Although I think only the MWF will have it unlike for the jf-17
images - 2022-07-20T043232.964.jpeg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sathya

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
14,983
10,992
India
Astra Mk1 will be more than enough on it. More than enough.


The only time a fighter pilot will need and actually fire at a target that's 100 km away is when it's a tanker or awacs.

Dual pylons for Astra Mk1 and it's a killer.

Rather than the extra range, it's the second pulse on the PL-15 that's important, because the missile will begin accelerating after the seeker locks on. So Astra Mk2 is gonna be more important.

No serious air combat force in the world will fire a bvr at a target beyond 40-50km away. ANYONE claiming to fire a 150-300km bvr at a fighter sized target will not be able to differentiate between a A320 and B737 standing on ground.

Kills at that range will be normal in tomorrow's wars. Back in the 80s and 90s, what was 40-50Km back then is 300Km today, because even the best radars could only track fighters from less than 80Km away. Because kills are made based on what the radar sees. Old radars could only see up to 100Km effectively, the same is now over 400Km tracked. So anything that can be tracked from 400Km away can be killed with BVR.

The only difference is the pilot gets more time to react because of the range, so missiles per target will be an important metric in the future for long range engagement. The alternative of course is to use stealth to get closer and lower the reaction time.
Although we really need to develop something like a cm-400 akg a cheap aero ballistic standoff missile.

Rudram-2 is beign developed for that.
 

Ankit Kumar

Team StratFront
Nov 30, 2017
4,555
4,316
Bangalore
I'm talking about A2G and we need astra mk2 integration. Tejas is a very underrated design. It will be able to handle everything except for the j-20 and j-10C's in the neighborhood.
Right now jF-17 has a lot of stand off options so does the tejas but the jf-17 has the yj-83 and cm400 akg. We have the rampage being integrated and brahmos Ng. But for the time being integrating harpoon/exocet and KH-35 would be a good stop-gap. Although we really need to develop something like a cm-400 akg a cheap aero ballistic standoff missile.
The only thing Tejas will not be able to handle is a F35/F22 at 50km. If it gets into wvr, it very well can handle everyone.

For A2G in next 2-3 years we will see our own Aircraft launched anti ship and land attack sub sonic cruise missiles. Will arm the LCA fleet.
 

Ankit Kumar

Team StratFront
Nov 30, 2017
4,555
4,316
Bangalore
Kills at that range will be normal in tomorrow's wars. Back in the 80s and 90s, what was 40-50Km back then is 300Km today, because even the best radars could only track fighters from less than 80Km away. Because kills are made based on what the radar sees. Old radars could only see up to 100Km effectively, the same is now over 400Km tracked. So anything that can be tracked from 400Km away can be killed with BVR.

The only difference is the pilot gets more time to react because of the range, so missiles per target will be an important metric in the future for long range engagement. The alternative of course is to use stealth to get closer and lower the reaction time.
Untill the bvr is hypersonic and the targetting AESA so good that it spoofs the rwr of targetted aircraft, bvr battle will always happen at 40-50 km range.

Because Air dominance is not about a single on single elements. And IFF has a range too. Even the most contemporary ones have a limited range.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sathya

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
14,983
10,992
India
Untill the bvr is hypersonic and the targetting AESA so good that it spoofs the rwr of targetted aircraft, bvr battle will always happen at 40-50 km range.

Because Air dominance is not about a single on single elements. And IFF has a range too. Even the most contemporary ones have a limited range.

The longest range kill made recently was 150Km via S-400. And that's harder than using AAMs. So we already have precedent.

IFF confirmation is not needed in every situation. Like the post-Balakot skirmish, where everything across the border could be shot down. Today, it's more or less the physical limitations of the missile itself.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: jetray