HAL LCA Tejas

helmutkohl said:
Tejas competing with the JF-17 in Argentina

https://www.airdatanews.com/indian-fighter-tejas-intensifies-dispute-over-argentine-air-force-order/
Click to expand...


Well. I would re-phrase this headline better into "Tejas is hoping to compete with the JF-17 in Argentina". In fact, they should better concentrate on their own AF, service introduction of the Mk.1A, getting Mk. 2 ready instead of hyping any potential sale, where the Tejas might fit as if they are competitive even if no-one is really intersted.
 
It's a very serious offer. That and the superior engine should give them an edge regarding the Sino-Pakistanese offer.
 
Last edited:
TomcatViP said:
On 5 April 2023, the first production Tejas LCA-T Mk1, serial LT5201, took to the air for a 35 minute flight. This trainer is the first of eight aircraft that were ordered in the first batch of 40 Tejas LCA Mk.1 fighter aircraft, consisting of 32 single seat and 8 dual seat.
Click to expand...

https://www.scramble.nl/military-news/first-flight-tejas-trainer-for-indian-air-force
Also

https://bulgarianmilitary.com/2023/...ll-apparently-not-go-into-production-on-time/
Click to expand...
im a bit rusty on this topic, but i think its not as the article depicts it...
HAL as of 2023 has 3 production lines, LCA division 1 (the original where most aircraft came out), LCA division 2 (inaugurated in 2021) and the recently inaugurated Nasik Plant on april 7.

As far as i can understand, from the two operational production lines, one is stuck with the trainers and the other might be prepared to work with the Mk.1A order. This third facility might come into help, not only for the 83, but also for another order (50) that we were hearing about recently.
 
Its amused me how much theyve been trying to doublethink the engine announcement in Indian media. The Indian MoD were saying they wanted 100% tech transfer to India by GE or nothing while GE wanted to hold onto the tech for manufacturing the hot gas flow components of the engine and supply them in kit form from the US and now its 'We have 80% tech transfer, this is amazing and everything we ever wanted'. Its up from the 60% tech transfer licensed production they already had but its certainly not what they wanted.
 
Last edited:
WatcherZero said:
Its amused me how much theyve been trying to doublethink the engine announcement in Indian media. The Indian MoD were saying they wanted 100% tech transfer to India by GE or nothing while GE wanted to hold onto the tech for manufacturing the hot gas flow components of the engine and supply them in kit form from the US and now its 'We have 80% tech transfer, this is amazing and everything we ever wanted'. Its up from the 60% tech transfer licensed production they already had but its certainly not what they wanted.
Click to expand...
How does this level of technology transfer compare with the deal between GE and SAAB for the same engine manufactured in Sweden and installed in SAAB Gripen?
 
WatcherZero said:
Its amused me how much theyve been trying to doublethink the engine announcement in Indian media. The Indian MoD were saying they wanted 100% tech transfer to India by GE or nothing while GE wanted to hold onto the tech for manufacturing the hot gas flow components of the engine and supply them in kit form from the US and now its 'We have 80% tech transfer, this is amazing and everything we ever wanted'. Its up from the 60% tech transfer licensed production they already had but its certainly not what they wanted.
Click to expand...
Hot section components are specifically mentioned under Category XIX of the US Munitions List and thus easily denied.
 
Currently Mk1A production is due to finish in 2028 while Mk2 production wont begin until 2032 so HAL were lobbying for an order of 60 to equip four squadrons to tide the production line over, IAF seems to have accepted this and want to order an additional 100 (they are understrength on fighters anyway) though it still requires government budgetary approval.
 
I personally quite like the look of the 2 seater over the single.
but any reduction in fuel capacity/range as a result of having as second seat?
 
Damnit. Apparently the Indian entertainment industry is as clueless about missiles as ours is. Looking at you, Behind Enemy Lines!
 
Remember we are dealing with people who think X-wing space fighters should move through space like a p-47. Enjoy the spectacle you nerds. ;-)
 
TMA1 said:
as i said earlier it is wise for smaller nations to diversify their weapons systems.
Click to expand...
That raises your sustainment costs significantly, because now you need more supplies per plane for each type, and you have more types to have supplies in.

Even the USAF only keeps 3.75 types of fighters active. F-15s, F-16s, some F-35s, a relatively small number of A-10s, and an even smaller number of F-22s. The overwhelming majority of the fleet is F15s and F16s, which share engines.


TMA1 said:
better would be building your own kit. I think India is wise in developing their own weapons. their major issue for Tejas is lack of indigenous engine and sensors. buying from French and Russian in the mean time as stop gap is smart.
Click to expand...
Building your own kit requires a certain size economy to be able to afford, and for most of Europe their economies are too small individually.

Small production runs also make for expensive stuff, see the costs of a Mitsubishi F-2 compared to a late 1990s F-16 (Yes, I know that's not a perfect comparison, an F-2 is NOT an F-16).
 
Scott Kenny said:
Building your own kit requires a certain size economy to be able to afford, and for most of Europe their economies are too small individually.

Small production runs also make for expensive stuff, see the costs of a Mitsubishi F-2 compared to a late 1990s F-16 (Yes, I know that's not a perfect comparison, an F-2 is NOT an F-16).
Click to expand...

$4.2bn in development costs (with US responsible for contributing a further 40%) Just under $100m per airframe falling to $90m though that was all in cost, F-16 block 50 was around $34m per airframe at the time. F-2 did have some advancements over the F-16 though, 25% greater wing area, longer fuselage for more fuel, two extra weapon stations, some stealth composites and an AESA radar. Early on in development was even going to have canards as well. Will all that factored I would say it was probably closer to 50% more expensive than just buying US though 60% of the cash would be recycled back into the Japanese economy meaning from their perspective it was probably ultimately a marginal difference.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom