HAL LCA Tejas: Updates, News & Discussions

[kaku]

1020 TRMs.

Please stop comparing the Tejas to the F-16 - they are not, and were never meant to be in the same class.

Looks like Indians are biggest enemies of themselves, and dont want to do hardwork. Indeed they are never meant to be in same class, but lets compare.

1) Databus :- The databus used by F-16 Block 70/72 is 1553, but for integrating with radar Lockheed have used ethernet based databus for providing high resolution SAR images to Center Pedestal Display.


As we know Mk1A use 1553 databus for all connections. While LCA Mk2 will use ethernet based databus for all data tranmissions, including Radar, IRST,LDP, HMDS, and even SDR for D/L.

Ethernet interface/databus for LCA MK2​

2) Radar :- For the fact I know, in F-21, SABR was only coming with frequency hopping rather than ultra low side lobe waveform of Uttam. Also Uttam is coming with dedicated SLC/SLB antenna, to work in heavy EW environment, which was non existent in export variant of SABR. Furthur, there were heavy restriction on NCTR modes. Also if you want to compare T/R modules, I have did it in previous posts, and even tried to calculate peak power of radar on Tejas Mk1A.

3) Airframe life- Tejas airframe was designed for 12,000 hours, while F-16 was 6000/8000 hours. Right now Tejas is undergoing stress test, where it already certified for 1000 hours, and work in undergoing in MAFT to certify it initially for 3000 hours, and then 5000 hours. Ultimately, NAL is confident to certify it for 9000 hours or beyond.

For propulsion, from what I read from different forums and articles, F404/F414 have a hot section life of 2000 hours, and after that it require overhaul. While technical life is of 4000 hours.

The F414 has a 2000-hour hot section life and a 4000-hour specification life for all other engine rotating components and structure. Critical rotating disks, shafts and engine structure have been designed using GE's robust, damage-tolerant design practice. This delivers a three-fold improvement in low cycle fatigue compared to previously used design methods.

F414

www.globalsecurity.org

With constant T5,engine operability and hot section life are maintained. In actualoperation, the F404 control concept has been extremely successful. Although fleet average age is over 1000 flight hours,engine performance and stall-free operability remain outstanding and the full 2000 hour hot section life is expected to beachieved.

https://watermark.silverchair.com/v002t02a006-90-gt-149.pdf?token=AQECAHi208BE49Ooan9kkhW_Ercy7Dm3ZL_9Cf3qfKAc485ysgAABIEwggR9BgkqhkiG9w0BBwagggRuMIIEagIBADCCBGMGCSqGSIb3DQEHATAeBglghkgBZQMEAS4wEQQM6ELYKOAg05lTOc4jAgEQgIIENDwxhwH7q6n4jtkPXBrV-lYCjWzFjr9oqQPtow_NHM9P-vtWTp9BPQjMtDQrUF5EakckS5ZodBndLDYPQMr7rAjBk9ejld-h9fb_MBY-cFhZWsp1bRNr26CIqigcyEU3R-kZxUAPLhzvDhUzEKNEL2YPJIRWJDnZj2tfonpraR2O_Zwm1or1VtjPnvfVcGtI_lDgHtYNXIi1FNX1fhT9VUopvsbthkbXIwAnO27Qe9XDzD8JgvysjmmoF7jCcW_nlR3nAO0MtxkOlcD4hCXMJfF6T6f1yh2Klg9za2XlhQjpHC_bPauaJfLNoVNzBJJHrB0hEIk_7WNd8MMfP_PXdk5M3R6hdZaYSNawWV69t2-1XNVfdIlW_S78fuE80QdPMgxay8K4iiWpqsUSAVGhKOjeTcEk-GdKL8oFam48ccluepyKhfir_Qy9iCRbACcNmUwzm-7jZLU4mUbnVcaSIzrS5nc6TMcPZ-va1_SAEp_4CuFvs5Y2WYLFDYZ1xWU4LbmPVh9DamNRHXx8n7WSW5rm7Eq_nsGZq92fKV0jV2sBx4wnU0d4PoeNL-OfjJO7czg20DHnihwxB0_UG73Hg1vdqaEwTE2S6P8LENEdAXpLh1tUUfE3Eh6XzdD5PqZrFHd8z0vhcJ1nM6n9vduOToJ_Ihb2uRp168Dawf5O6HPJfsEETHLpAvHclSCz6yIIlCmSkMg_Snry1JPeoifJpkUbLQDLJ4N_6apdgBf6De63JCQ8kkqZQ4QnuOIWgBJjG5sl2RrYdmkFzU5d4mIXxjdTwT9y0XFrBPhxfl0bZmJCMGW6x9AvbsUa0O5HtT7AOxV6vZMjJB3dxnvuLgMx25n59_2V1fYzue4KyOs6h71YpXYmYK4-4TXHZiDo7XqdLxalpkXj73a1E4cLtAgwcLnotXuC3kQGCH88me6g-227TGlyW5RA0XrCjtqjWbY2WzkJW3hHdHNMGSMORT4ccaibceXSuVITWRQSViFeWAH0L_7UAGUnY2WGmbVjgtTg0NtL5slsm5C2LiaOicVyf7jD0PVKsAJItBoOB1GsK2xJTJDJe5mC34FI4-4Uflqphe-jvPX3DFLWZm_CZe6uqkUXzNcWvAJgysy0-YI_rw5lqu3QfUeGsyDaUY7eBbQYwhru5aFI4BkNmibDiGXBvpPQBW5daiY-ORSutjGCra1ePz8_0WwDp5YA0DwkaWooOMqF9973GV-Ewt-0IyYV0Z5vfSt45nk7Q_pYq0aIUhNOOznndLEi4l6tg8UDCw-bVp1Eap7XyAGtRYIR_ouxAasYkjf_-Ym9bBH1Gd7nOiGI7KfWTeNgdcBakui-K0TdAuK99hxVCQRSzRkg-LlN9qJhKrZjqyHrhdnz512pnPlKHkSbUpMBdUcwzdcZnl0Ia4rOtpLTkSwb6NBey2mkJZyJtbnb

The hotsection life of F110 and F100 is around 1500 hours.

3) EW Suite:- F-16 developed new DRWR and DRFM based jammers.


While Tejas Mk1A use GaN based DRFM jammed and digital wide band RWR (1-40 GHz).

New Digital RWR (1-40 GHz)
​

4) NCW Capabilities :- Block 70 is equipped with MIDS LVT, which provide IP based MANET, and link 16 for D/L.

MIDS for Block 70​

This is similar to BNET, which is equipped in Tejas Mk1A, and SDR-1 for Mk2.

IP MANET SDR for Tejas Mk1A​

IP MANET SDR for Mk2​

For Tactical D/L, F-16 use Link-16, while we are on IAF's ODL. Capability wise SDR and D/L is almost similar.



5) Weaponary and Payload :-

I dont think we need go into , Astra vs AAMRAAM or Tara vs JDAM. But on payload, obviosly Mk1A is inferior, not only because of light weight, but also 1 extra pylon go into carrying ASPJ pod. And this only be overcome by LCA Mk2.


Disclaimer :- I am only comparing with export variants of F-16, as we dont know how much USAF's versions are capable of, but most likely that is more capable than export variants.

 

[kaku]

Block-70 with its current kit will pick out Tejas MK1A earlier , get to a higher energy state for its BVR launch much earlier and be able to deploy more effective countermeasures earlier.

Highly doubt it.

 

[kaku]

Tejas Mk2 could be compared to Gripen.

Gripen E's databus is 1553B, and Raven is not a LPI radar.

https://www.leonardo.us/hubfs/Raven%20ES-05%20HQ%20%28mm07819%29_web.pdf

Internally LCA Mk2 going to be a different beast entirely.

 

[vikNerv]

Looks like Indians are biggest enemies of themselves, and dont want to do hardwork. Indeed they are never meant to be in same class, but lets compare.

1) Databus :- The databus used by F-16 Block 70/72 is 1553, but for integrating with radar Lockheed have used ethernet based databus for providing high resolution SAR images to Center Pedestal Display.
View attachment 35137

As we know Mk1A use 1553 databus for all connections. While LCA Mk2 will use ethernet based databus for all data tranmissions, including Radar, IRST,LDP, HMDS, and even SDR for D/L.
View attachment 35138

Ethernet interface/databus for LCA MK2​

2) Radar :- For the fact I know, in F-21, SABR was only coming with frequency hopping rather than ultra low side lobe waveform of Uttam. Also Uttam is coming with dedicated SLC/SLB antenna, to work in heavy EW environment, which was non existent in export variant of SABR. Furthur, there were heavy restriction on NCTR modes. Also if you want to compare T/R modules, I have did it in previous posts, and even tried to calculate peak power of radar on Tejas Mk1A.

3) Airframe life- Tejas airframe was designed for 12,000 hours, while F-16 was 6000/8000 hours. Right now Tejas is undergoing stress test, where it already certified for 1000 hours, and work in undergoing in MAFT to certify it initially for 3000 hours, and then 5000 hours. Ultimately, NAL is confident to certify it for 9000 hours or beyond.

For propulsion, from what I read from different forums and articles, F404/F414 have a hot section life of 2000 hours, and after that it require overhaul. While technical life is of 4000 hours.

F414

www.globalsecurity.org

https://watermark.silverchair.com/v002t02a006-90-gt-149.pdf?token=AQECAHi208BE49Ooan9kkhW_Ercy7Dm3ZL_9Cf3qfKAc485ysgAABIEwggR9BgkqhkiG9w0BBwagggRuMIIEagIBADCCBGMGCSqGSIb3DQEHATAeBglghkgBZQMEAS4wEQQM6ELYKOAg05lTOc4jAgEQgIIENDwxhwH7q6n4jtkPXBrV-lYCjWzFjr9oqQPtow_NHM9P-vtWTp9BPQjMtDQrUF5EakckS5ZodBndLDYPQMr7rAjBk9ejld-h9fb_MBY-cFhZWsp1bRNr26CIqigcyEU3R-kZxUAPLhzvDhUzEKNEL2YPJIRWJDnZj2tfonpraR2O_Zwm1or1VtjPnvfVcGtI_lDgHtYNXIi1FNX1fhT9VUopvsbthkbXIwAnO27Qe9XDzD8JgvysjmmoF7jCcW_nlR3nAO0MtxkOlcD4hCXMJfF6T6f1yh2Klg9za2XlhQjpHC_bPauaJfLNoVNzBJJHrB0hEIk_7WNd8MMfP_PXdk5M3R6hdZaYSNawWV69t2-1XNVfdIlW_S78fuE80QdPMgxay8K4iiWpqsUSAVGhKOjeTcEk-GdKL8oFam48ccluepyKhfir_Qy9iCRbACcNmUwzm-7jZLU4mUbnVcaSIzrS5nc6TMcPZ-va1_SAEp_4CuFvs5Y2WYLFDYZ1xWU4LbmPVh9DamNRHXx8n7WSW5rm7Eq_nsGZq92fKV0jV2sBx4wnU0d4PoeNL-OfjJO7czg20DHnihwxB0_UG73Hg1vdqaEwTE2S6P8LENEdAXpLh1tUUfE3Eh6XzdD5PqZrFHd8z0vhcJ1nM6n9vduOToJ_Ihb2uRp168Dawf5O6HPJfsEETHLpAvHclSCz6yIIlCmSkMg_Snry1JPeoifJpkUbLQDLJ4N_6apdgBf6De63JCQ8kkqZQ4QnuOIWgBJjG5sl2RrYdmkFzU5d4mIXxjdTwT9y0XFrBPhxfl0bZmJCMGW6x9AvbsUa0O5HtT7AOxV6vZMjJB3dxnvuLgMx25n59_2V1fYzue4KyOs6h71YpXYmYK4-4TXHZiDo7XqdLxalpkXj73a1E4cLtAgwcLnotXuC3kQGCH88me6g-227TGlyW5RA0XrCjtqjWbY2WzkJW3hHdHNMGSMORT4ccaibceXSuVITWRQSViFeWAH0L_7UAGUnY2WGmbVjgtTg0NtL5slsm5C2LiaOicVyf7jD0PVKsAJItBoOB1GsK2xJTJDJe5mC34FI4-4Uflqphe-jvPX3DFLWZm_CZe6uqkUXzNcWvAJgysy0-YI_rw5lqu3QfUeGsyDaUY7eBbQYwhru5aFI4BkNmibDiGXBvpPQBW5daiY-ORSutjGCra1ePz8_0WwDp5YA0DwkaWooOMqF9973GV-Ewt-0IyYV0Z5vfSt45nk7Q_pYq0aIUhNOOznndLEi4l6tg8UDCw-bVp1Eap7XyAGtRYIR_ouxAasYkjf_-Ym9bBH1Gd7nOiGI7KfWTeNgdcBakui-K0TdAuK99hxVCQRSzRkg-LlN9qJhKrZjqyHrhdnz512pnPlKHkSbUpMBdUcwzdcZnl0Ia4rOtpLTkSwb6NBey2mkJZyJtbnb

The hotsection life of F110 and F100 is around 1500 hours.

3) EW Suite:- F-16 developed new DRWR and DRFM based jammers.
View attachment 35144

While Tejas Mk1A use GaN based DRFM jammed and digital wide band RWR (1-40 GHz).



View attachment 35145

New Digital RWR (1-40 GHz)
View attachment 35146​

4) NCW Capabilities :- Block 70 is equipped with MIDS LVT, which provide IP based MANET, and link 16 for D/L.
View attachment 35147

MIDS for Block 70​

This is similar to BNET, which is equipped in Tejas Mk1A, and SDR-1 for Mk2.
View attachment 35148

IP MANET SDR for Tejas Mk1A​

View attachment 35149

IP MANET SDR for Mk2​

For Tactical D/L, F-16 use Link-16, while we are on IAF's ODL. Capability wise SDR and D/L is almost similar.

View attachment 35151

5) Weaponary and Payload :-

I dont think we need go into , Astra vs AAMRAAM or Tara vs JDAM. But on payload, obviosly Mk1A is inferior, not only because of light weight, but also 1 extra pylon go into carrying ASPJ pod. And this only be overcome by LCA Mk2.


Disclaimer :- I am only comparing with export variants of F-16, as we dont know how much USAF's versions are capable of, but most likely that is more capable than export variants.

I really wish they had developed wing tip pylon capable design but i suppose its too much for a light fighter.

 

[Joe Shearer]

@Joe Shearer @Musings : Could you make this thread more focused on the Tejas and its technical aspects, instead of the endless comparisons and barbs and trolling?

Yes, point taken. Give it a couple of hours, please.

 

[HRK]

a. We've got Block 52's too
b. Our Older Vipers have gone through MLU, genius.
c. Four Decades old, huh? How's your inventory looking, huh? Heard you're still flying the Flying Coffins. Those Jags must be brand-spanking-new, huh. Didn't the Mirage 2000s' arrive 4 Years after our F-16's...?

Those dated Engines & Battered Airframes sure made shortwork of your awesome Vayu Sena back in 2019.

I know, I know, "...agar Rafale hota".

But hey, your SAM (Surface to Air Missile) system is good. Atleast it works..., I meant that. I mean afterall, it took out a SAR Mi-17 & killed/barbequed, what - 7 Jawans.

Tairi MA baithi thee negotiation table pay when we were getting those "junk" F-16s'?

If they were junk, why cry about 10 Years ago?

Why does your ch00t Minister of sExternal Affairs mind when US provides us with spares?

Pata hai na...kay ye PAF hai - koi handicap Air Force nahe like yours.

Aoo, test kar lo same Squadron ko. Lug-pata jaey ga.

@Windjammer @Areesh @Dalit @Falcon26 @FuturePAF @GriffinsRule @HRK @HAIDER @Hakikat ve Hikmet @Khansaheeb @Maarkhoor @Mrc @Path-Finder @Vortex @White and Green with M/S @Yasser76

My sincere advise troll don't seek logic or knowledge but attention, stop responding them, it will kill their reason on this forum .....
Tejas may be a latest reincarnation of any of their deity ..... who cares.

They could remain happy forever by accepting it as a Devine gift to their Air force

 

[harpy1]

Not an F-16 engine
One of the engines used in the superhornet

Tejas Mk1 is maybe comparable to 80% of what sits in a block-2

Tejas Mk1A is comparable to Block-3 in some ways except EW or the new single seat F/A-50

Tejas Mk2 could be compared to Gripen.

The F-16V is beyond any of these aircraft

To keep it relevant to South Asia
The comparison is between Tejas v paf F16 block 30/52 not block v
Which the Tejas will never face thankfully
In this South Asian context encounter Your F16 and Tejas in Bvr scenarios my edge goes to Tejas it's RCS is less than half of your falcons the cockpit tech is mordern and the Ew suites jammers are superior.

However in dogfight the str the energy and range means your falcons have the edge ..

In both scenarios it's close call because even the earlier f16 are excellent fighters

Block 70 f16 wins easy

 

[Chandragupt Maurya]

No… just no

You have no idea what the RCS of the block-70 is with its current updates and you probably don’t want to take the earlier F-16s as ballpark.

Block-70 with its current kit will pick out Tejas MK1A earlier , get to a higher energy state for its BVR launch much earlier and be able to deploy more effective countermeasures earlier.

The RCS of the F-16 is 5 square meters, and it’s not possible to significantly change the RCS of a fighter jet without altering its geometrical shape. In contrast, the RCS of the Tejas is just 0.5 square meters. Additionally, the UTTAM MK2 Gallium Nitride AESA radar, which is to be used in the Tejas MK1A, is more powerful than the Northrop Grumman AESA radar in the F-16 Block 70.

 

[pikku]

I am really excited about Tejas Mk2. What is the latest update on it?

 

[harpy1]

I am really excited about Tejas Mk2. What is the latest update on it?

First roll out mid summer next year
First flight six months later
Four prototypes to be built in two years
Initial clearance target 2028/2029
Imo ambitious I say post 2030

 

[vkdindian]

First roll out mid summer next year
First flight six months later
Four prototypes to be built in two years
Initial clearance target 2028/2029
Imo ambitious I say post 2030

First thing first. Let HAL deliver the first few units of Tejas MK IA.

Then only can we start taking their words with any seriousness for future plans.
MK II, TEDBF and AMCA can be full of surprises by our very own institutions. Saying this with a heavy heart.

 

[Vortex]

If you want to prove something between aircrafts, then firstly simply compare

1) Avionics
2) Sensors
3) Airframe and propulsion service life and TBO
4) Airframe RCS- Normal,LO or VLO
5) Payload
6) NCW capabilities
7) Maintainability

But obviously they are incapable of doing basic analysis, and have to ping others.

But irony is, who he pinged, even those are incapable of doing simple analysis.

We didn’t heard « agar tejas hotay… »

 

[Chandragupt Maurya]

First thing first. Let HAL deliver the first few units of Tejas MK IA.

Then only can we start taking their words with any seriousness for future plans.
MK II, TEDBF and AMCA can be full of surprises by our very own institutions. Saying this with a heavy heart.

IAF purchased more than 800 MiG-21s, and the Tejas MK1A is intended to replace them. I am confident that more orders will come in the future in a staggered manner, and the IAF will operate over 350 Tejas MK1A aircraft.

 

[Chandragupt Maurya]

To keep it relevant to South Asia
The comparison is between Tejas v paf F16 block 30/52 not block v
Which the Tejas will never face thankfully
In this South Asian context encounter Your F16 and Tejas in Bvr scenarios my edge goes to Tejas it's RCS is less than half of your falcons the cockpit tech is mordern and the Ew suites jammers are superior.

However in dogfight the str the energy and range means your falcons have the edge ..

In both scenarios it's close call because even the earlier f16 are excellent fighters

Block 70 f16 wins easy

When claiming that one fighter jet is better than another, the comparison should be based on a one-on-one analysis of the technical specifications of those jets and how they would perform against each other in both BVR and WVR dogfights. In comparing the Tejas Block MK1A with the F-16 Block 70, I find that the Tejas is superior in both BVR and WVR dogfights.

 

[harpy1]

When claiming that one fighter jet is better than another, the comparison should be based on a one-on-one analysis of the technical specifications of those jets and how they would perform against each other in both BVR and WVR dogfights. In comparing the Tejas Block MK1A with the F-16 Block 70, I find that the Tejas is superior in both BVR and WVR dogfights.

I'm.not agreement
The block 70 has f35 level cockpit
The best Aesa radar and beest Ew suites sensor fusion that USA has
The new airframe is far more modern and the TWR and STR are way bigger and better.
In a dog fight and Bvr mark1a. Will.losre energy fast