ADA Tejas Mark-II/Medium Weight Fighter

Nothing against micromanagement when these changes cost in crores, but approval should be speedy.

Retractable IFR probe for MK2

View: https://x.com/ang3lkenny/status/1893212959993627096

View: https://x.com/alpha_defense/status/1893237571817480201

Yes , I really couldn't get this part . What's the GoI doing sanctioning funds for an assembly jig irrespective its cost ?!

One would have thought this is part of the development costs of the Mk-2 sanctioned to ADA & supervised by the MoD.

Is it beyond the scope of the budgeted amount which is to say is it an additional cost or is the development of the Mk-2 being monitored at the highest level ?
 
Yes , I really couldn't get this part . What's the GoI doing sanctioning funds for an assembly jig irrespective its cost ?!

One would have thought this is part of the development costs of the Mk-2 sanctioned to ADA & supervised by the MoD.

Is it beyond the scope of the budgeted amount which is to say is it an additional cost or is the development of the Mk-2 being monitored at the highest level ?

Iirc mk2 was supposed to feature fixed refueling probe just like lca mk1a and rafale. This decision to use retractable probe should have came much later hence additional funding maybe .

Just a hunch.
 
I think side DAS is not that important. Of course it butchers overall view but a missile can't approach from side and attempt to get a hit. It would always be in a straight line to plane and hence the MAWS would always pick them up.
It seems you are confusing b/w DAS & MAWS. DAS is an arrangement of MAWS & fixed IRST functions
Apart from fixed SAMs, the mobile ones & MANPADS can pop up anywhere. In a good IADS these mobile SAMs will have real time info of enemy jets & can/will try to ambuh the targets.
Apart from common/generic startegies & tactics, pilots are also taught specific ones against each type of target. A stealth jet can sneak & exploit blind spots, that's the 5gen philosophy.
And now with networked sensors the 6gen would be super sneaker. 👟:doh::LOL:
If 2 MAWS pair is used on top & bottom then considering overlap, their FoV could be 120+/- degrees still creating big side blindspots.
 
I think side DAS is not that important. Of course it butchers overall view but a missile can't approach from side and attempt to get a hit. It would always be in a straight line to plane and hence the MAWS would always pick them up.
Missiles dont CHASE from behind, mostly they intercept by calculating the intersection like below image. Thats why one needs MAWS especially on side profile.
1740372249207.webp
 
Yes , I really couldn't get this part . What's the GoI doing sanctioning funds for an assembly jig irrespective its cost ?!

One would have thought this is part of the development costs of the Mk-2 sanctioned to ADA & supervised by the MoD.

Is it beyond the scope of the budgeted amount which is to say is it an additional cost or is the development of the Mk-2 being monitored at the highest level ?
Bean counting babus, mnrega attitude work culture, disinterested airforce - china must be laughing its a** off at us & Modiji vishwaguru dreams
 
If you are a non-stealthy jet having IRST & Targetting pods you don't need EOTS to do their same job. 😑
Yes, that guy mentioned EOTS which i pointed.
But as many people say that many components are same with AMCA. So the EOTS could have been implemented with regular cover like UAVs have, freeing a hardpoint. The system has become more compact & lighter. It would be analogous to hanging the Rafale's OFS suite upside down 🙃
We're implementing IRST on top of nose, so it can't cover below. The fixed DAS has to do that.
In F-35 they implemented IRST function in EOTS below on chin, so the DAS has to cover upper area.
 

Latest Replies

Featured Content

Trending Threads

Back
Top