LCA TEJAS MK-I & MK-IA: News and Discussion

oh damn it was supposed to be "How does our tejas mk1a compare with...."
My mistake

AFAIK Tejas is strongest in having lowest stall speed & turn radius, although turn-rate is also close to especially for ITR & can sustain turns better than Mirage-2k with lesser energy burn.

Advantage of smaller radius...
1725441983898.png


Advantage of lower speed (even against higher rate)...
1725442038963.png
 
Last edited:
the Su30MKI and the MiG 29 have beaten the Mirage 2000 in WVR combat ad nauseum in IAF hands - and all three birds have pilots who vehemently defend their respective fighter.
For Su 30 it is clear. Far less for Mig.
Su30 is unstable and fitted with classical tail AND canards : amazing !
Mig29 is stable (no FBW), limited to 7.5G. Its sole (but so potent) advantage is short range missile linked to the pilot helmet. In a canon only fight I doubt Mig to be better.
 
Just a silly doubt
SAAB mentions that the Gripen's combat radius to be 1300 km whereas HAL Tejas is around 500. How is that possible when they both use the same GE engine F404 and have almost similar fuel capacity?
 
With external fuel tanks, the Gripen E is said to possess an 810-mile (1,300 kilometer) combat radius when carrying a load of six air to air missiles

From Wiki
Gripen C internal fuel 3000L
Tejas Mk1A internal fuel 3060L
Gripen E internal fuel 4360L
 
Last edited:
Just a silly doubt
SAAB mentions that the Gripen's combat radius to be 1300 km whereas HAL Tejas is around 500. How is that possible when they both use the same GE engine F404 and have almost similar fuel capacity?
If your source is something like below then it's Gripen-E 's combat radius with F414, not LCA equivalent Gripen-C with F404.
With external fuel tanks, the Gripen E is said to possess an 810-mile (1,300 kilometer) combat radius when carrying a load of six air to air missiles
 
brochuritis and gross omission of the fact that it is done with 2 exterior fuel tanks.With external fuel tanks, the Gripen E is said to possess an 810-mile (1,300 kilometer) combat radius when carrying a load of six air to air missiles
then any idea whats the combat radius of tejas with 2 EFTs?
 
For Su 30 it is clear. Far less for Mig.
Su30 is unstable and fitted with classical tail AND canards : amazing !
Mig29 is stable (no FBW), limited to 7.5G. Its sole (but so potent) advantage is short range missile linked to the pilot helmet. In a canon only fight I doubt Mig to be better.
MiG29 is limited to 7.5G? Since when?
The Fulcrum can pull 9G as long as you have gas or the pilot breaks his back - to quote Air Marshal Harish Masand.

It sustains 9G in other words.
 
then any idea whats the combat radius of tejas with 2 EFTs?
No idea. OEM's do not seem to be keen on publishing comprehensive data on load/fuel range permutations.

Where Philippines is concerned, they have a medium term requirement for nearly 50 fighters.
Buying perhaps 12 x Mk1A for maritime strike because it has Brahmos integrated and buying a different type to meet the MRCA requirement of the PAF is a non-starter IMO. I guess that the cost of operating 2 types makes that an impossibility. Disappointing for Mk1A fans. Mk2 might have been rated the best fighter to fill both requirements but it does not exist.
 
Last edited:
No idea. OEM's do not seem to be keen on publishing comprehensive data on load/fuel range permutations.

Where Philippines is concerned, they have a medium term requirement for nearly 50 fighters.
Buying perhaps 12 x Mk1A for maritime strike because it has Brahmos integrated and buying a different type to meet the MRCA requirement of the PAF is a non-starter IMO. I guess that the cost of operating 2 types makes that an impossibility. Disappointing for Mk1A fans. Mk2 might have been rated the best fighter to fill both requirements but it does not exist.
When the competition is between the Gripen & the Viper where does the Mk-1a come into the equation ? I'm guessing the Gripen is just a smokescreen as well to convey a semblance of a competition or to pull down the costs of the Vipers with an eye possibly on getting the US to subsidise it. This competition if it was ever one to begin with is for the F-16 to lose .
 
When the competition is between the Gripen & the Viper where does the Mk-1a come into the equation ? I'm guessing the Gripen is just a smokescreen as well to convey a semblance of a competition or to pull down the costs of the Vipers with an eye possibly on getting the US to subsidise it. This competition if it was ever one to begin with is for the F-16 to lose .
Where does the Mk-1a come into the equation? HAL is offering Mk1A to the Philippines.



Like you, I think F-16 would be the default choice but SAAB seems to be doing well marketing the Gripen E to meet the requirement.
 
Where does the Mk-1a come into the equation? HAL is offering Mk1A to the Philippines.



Like you, I think F-16 would be the default choice but SAAB seems to be doing well marketing the Gripen E to meet the requirement.
LCA being offered by HAL doesn't automatically make it a contender , does it ? Or is it your contention that merely because HAL has offered the LCA it automatically becomes a contender ? Has Philippines invited HAL to participate in the tender ? If not what's the brouhaha all about ?
 
LCA being offered by HAL doesn't automatically make it a contender , does it ? Or is it your contention that merely because HAL has offered the LCA it automatically becomes a contender ?
Indeed. I do not think Mk1A is a contender so I think it is pointless offering it.
Has Philippines invited HAL to participate in the tender ? If not what's the brouhaha all about ?
It is widely reported in the international media that the Philippines has invited offers for fighters;.

The Indian press and media tend to wildly inflate the prospects of Mk1A being selected by countries in the market for fighters, painting it as a strong contender when it is not. I caution against taking the hype seriously. For example, I question this report:

 
Indeed. I do not think Mk1A is a contender so I think it is pointless offering it.

It is widely reported in the international media that the Philippines has invited offers for fighters;.

The Indian press and media tend to wildly inflate the prospects of Mk1A being selected by countries in the market for fighters, painting it as a strong contender when it is not. I caution against taking the hype seriously. For example, I question this report:

I think the media the World over has a tendency to hype things & events . The only difference being the subjects they choose to hype. Nobody here took the news of the LCA bagging the Philippines contract seriously save yourself.
 
I think the media the World over has a tendency to hype things & events . The only difference being the subjects they choose to hype. Nobody here took the news of the LCA bagging the Philippines contract seriously save yourself.
As it happens I did not believe it even though it is a business publication.
 
Last edited:
Excellent observation. Stable design and limited to 7.5G. I think Soviet must know basic mathematics before designing A air superiority fighter.
It was not an air superiority fighter (it was the Su27 role). Mige 29 is more a powerfull point defense fighter. See its autonomy....
 
MiG29 is limited to 7.5G? Since when?
The Fulcrum can pull 9G as long as you have gas or the pilot breaks his back - to quote Air Marshal Harish Masand.

It sustains 9G in other words.
It was not the case of, for exemple, the Mig29 of the ex east german air force.
 

Latest Replies

Featured Content

Trending Threads

Back
Top