HAL LCA Tejas: Updates, News & Discussions

[Michael]

If you claim that HAL Tejas is "behind the times," you should be able to elaborate on that statement with more technical details.

Do you know what the configuration requirements were when HAL Tejas was in its planning stage before the 1990s? I believe you don’t. While delays have occurred, they were not solely due to HAL; the Indian Air Force (IAF) also contributed by frequently changing its requirements.

Initially, HAL Tejas was never designed to carry an AESA radar, and even today, most fighter jets in China and Pakistan do not feature AESA radars. This is without even considering other electronic and advanced systems.

If you are calling Tejas "behind," I assume you are referring to fifth-generation fighters. However, HAL Tejas was developed for a specific category and role—it was never intended to compete at the level of fifth-generation aircraft.

Of course.

You can continue with your point, I have no intention of arguing with you on this issue.
One of the opponents of India's propaganda on the 2.5 front, China. We have now put our R&D efforts into 6th Gen fighters.

You can certainly continue to work on your project of upgrading the airframe of the 3rd Gen light fighter to what you call the 4.5th Gen fighter.

I have no problem with that.

 

[SiliconBit (silicon0000)]

If you claim that HAL Tejas is "behind the times," you should be able to elaborate on that statement with more technical details.

Do you know what the configuration requirements were when HAL Tejas was in its planning stage before the 1990s? I believe you don’t. While delays have occurred, they were not solely due to HAL; the Indian Air Force (IAF) also contributed by frequently changing its requirements.

Initially, HAL Tejas was never designed to carry an AESA radar, and even today, most fighter jets in China and Pakistan do not feature AESA radars. This is without even considering other electronic and advanced systems.

If you are calling Tejas "behind," I assume you are referring to fifth-generation fighters. However, HAL Tejas was developed for a specific category and role—it was never intended to compete at the level of fifth-generation aircraft.

I agree that the Tejas the IAF received is far more advanced than what was initially conceived. I also believe that the promised/published specifications of the Tejas Mk1A make it comparable to the JF-17 Block 3. But ultimately, all of that is useless if the IAF doesn't find it worthy and as per promised/published specifications.

 

[Raj-Hindustani]

India plans to crank up Tejas production to stem IAF’s depletion in fighters | India News - The Times of India

India News: India plans to increase Tejas jet production with deliveries of GE aero-engines starting March. Hindustan Aeronautics (HAL) aims for 20 jets per year,

timesofindia.indiatimes.com

Source of news is Indian and of Feb 6, 2025.

GE has now promised to begin the delivery next month, with 12 engines to be delivered in 2026, and 20 every year thereafter, another official said.

They haven't announced a number for 2025. In 2026, it's 12 engines, and then 20 engines per year after that. So, how is HAL going to produce the number of jets they've committed to—24 per year starting in 2025?

20+ from 2027 and complete the delievery before 2030

 

[Yasser76]

I am looking for a technical discussion rather than an emotional one.

I criticise HAL and am completely unhappy, specific details on delivery delays, but if someone claims that Tejas is technologically our outdated and behind compared to other fighters, I would appreciate detailed insights and a proper discussion instead of vague statements.

People keep saying it’s not good technically—my question is, how?

No, you have made it clear you have no interest in facts. If for you a 4th/4.5th Gen plane that is not even in service yet is cutting edge, lets agree to leave it there.

Rest of neighbourhood is moving to or has moved to 5th/6th Gen.

 

[SiliconBit (silicon0000)]

20+ from 2027 and complete the delievery before 2030

I would be glad if you share simple calculation how that's (delivery of jets) possible with these engine numbers (before 2030)?

 

[hembo]

Why can’t I call the JF-17 Block 3 a "dead star" when it operates with almost the same technology?

I'm confused—how can the same technology be considered outdated in one aircraft while being happily inducted in another?

There's no need to justify ego—please focus on the technology and provide evidence through comparisons with other aircraft in the region, rather than simply dismissing it as "not worthy."

Death Star, not Dead star, buddy. A star war reference you might have missed.

 

[Raj-Hindustani]

I agree that the Tejas the IAF received is far more advanced than what was initially conceived. I also believe that the promised/published specifications of the Tejas Mk1A make it comparable to the JF-17 Block 3. But ultimately, all of that is useless if the IAF doesn't find it worthy and as per promised/published specifications.

Let them fly first—not delivered yet; you concluded not worthy.

Example: If someone says the Arjun tank is a failure, I would completely agree with them.

However, most of the arguments I come across are emotionally driven, lacking logical reasoning. HAL Tejas Mk1 and Mk1a was never meant to be a high-profile, aircraft—it was specifically designed as an interceptor role, primarily operating within Indian airspace with ground support to intercept incoming threats.

People discussing 5th and 6th generation fighters should focus on the AMCA program and criticize HAL for its delays in AMCA Thread, rather than misjudging Tejas based on unrealistic comparisons.

 

[Yasser76]

Death Star, not Dead star, buddy. A star war reference you might have missed.

Typo, well done for pointing it out though, now try and contribute to the thread..."buddy"....

 

[Yasser76]

Let them fly first—not delivered yet; you concluded not worthy.

Example: If someone says the Arjun tank is a failure, I would completely agree with them.

However, most of the arguments I come across are emotionally driven, lacking logical reasoning. HAL Tejas Mk1a was never meant to be a high-profile, multi-role aircraft—it was specifically designed as an interceptor, primarily operating within Indian airspace with ground support to intercept incoming threats.

People discussing 5th and 6th generation fighters should focus on the AMCA program and criticize HAL for its delays in AMCA Thread, rather than misjudging Tejas based on unrealistic comparisons.

You write so much, but actually say so little.

 

[hembo]

Typo, well done for pointing it out though, now try and contribute to the thread..."buddy"....

Why TF are you worked up? I pointed out to the other poster that he missed your quip about death star, an ominous weapon, and he inferred wrong.

 

[SiliconBit (silicon0000)]

Let them fly first—not delivered yet; you concluded not worthy.

Example: If someone says the Arjun tank is a failure, I would completely agree with them.

However, most of the arguments I come across are emotionally driven, lacking logical reasoning. HAL Tejas Mk1 and Mk1a was never meant to be a high-profile, multi-role aircraft—it was specifically designed as an interceptor role, primarily operating within Indian airspace with ground support to intercept incoming threats.

People discussing 5th and 6th generation fighters should focus on the AMCA program and criticize HAL for its delays in AMCA Thread, rather than misjudging Tejas based on unrealistic comparisons.

Dear I didn't said anything about Arjun or Failure. I simply asked how is it possible that GE is providing less engine and HAL produce more jets. That's why I asked calculation.

 

[Raj-Hindustani]

Dear I didn't said anything about Arjun or Failure. I simply asked how is it possible that GE is providing less engine and HAL produce more jets. That's why I asked calculation.

Bro, delayed and false commitments are a major problem—I have already criticised HAL as much as I can.

but as of now, they have already built 5 HAL Mk1a aircraft, waiting for engines

HAL Chairman cum Managing Director DK Sunil said the first engine would arrive by March and the US major promised supplying 12 such engines in this calendar year.

Next year might every month - 2 engines

Aero India 2025 | HAL to supply 180 LCA Tejas Mk1A by 2031-32

HAL Chairman cum Managing Director DK Sunil said the first engine would arrive by March and the US major promised supplying 12 such engines in this calendar year.

www.deccanherald.com

 

[Michael]

Let them fly first—not delivered yet; you concluded not worthy.

Example: If someone says the Arjun tank is a failure, I would completely agree with them.

However, most of the arguments I come across are emotionally driven, lacking logical reasoning. HAL Tejas was never meant to be a high-profile, multi-role aircraft—it was specifically designed as an interceptor, primarily operating within Indian airspace with ground support to intercept incoming threats.

People discussing 5th and 6th generation fighters should focus on the AMCA program instead and criticize HAL for its delays in AMCA Thread, rather than misjudging Tejas based on unrealistic comparisons.

Having national pride is good. However, excessive ultra-nationalism will only victimize oneself.
I suggest you learn more about it first.

and even today, most fighter jets in China and Pakistan do not feature AESA radars. This is without even considering other electronic and advanced systems.

China's J-10C, J-16/D, J-20, J-35, and J-15T/D are all AESA radars. Some older fighters, such as the J-10B and J-11B, have also been retrofitted with AESA radars. Many of China's large and medium UAVs are also fitted with AESA radars. As for how many of these fighters China has, you can check for yourself.
PAF's JF-17B3 and J-10CE, both AESA radars.
==========================================
GaN technology is very common in China, it's not some secret high tech. The vast majority of cell phone chargers used in China are GaN technology chargers.
AESA is also a very common technology in China. We have man-portable tactical reconnaissance radars, civilian detection radars ......

 

[Raj-Hindustani]

Having national pride is good. However, excessive ultra-nationalism will only victimize oneself.
I suggest you learn more about it first.

China's J-10C, J-16, J-20, J-35, and J-15T are all AESA radars. Some older fighters, such as the J-10B and J-11B, have also been retrofitted with AESA radars. Many of China's large and medium UAVs are also fitted with AESA radars. As for how many of these fighters China has, you can check for yourself.
PAF's JF-17B3 and J-10CE, both AESA radars.
==========================================
GaN technology is very common in China, it's not some secret high tech. The vast majority of cell phone chargers used in China are GaN technology chargers.
AESA is also a very common technology in China. We have man-portable tactical reconnaissance radars, civilian detection radars ......
These things are very common in China. Our e-commerce platforms make it easy to buy these things.

I have never compared HAL Tejas with China's J-10C, J-16, J-20, J-35, or J-15T fighters. I have always maintained that we need better fighters to balance against China and secure our airspace.

That being said, hundreds of aircraft in the Chinese Air Force are still flying with older-generation technologies.

I am not an ultra-nationalist, and you will never find my posts reflecting that mindset. I have repeatedly stated that HAL Tejas Mk1A, equipped with AESA radar and BVR missiles like Astra 1 (110 km range) and later Astra 2 (140+ km range), along with ground support, will play a role an interceptor aircraft.

Modern warfare has evolved—it’s no longer just about one-on-one aerial combat between fighter jets. For example, even if J-10C, J-16, J-20, J-35, or J-15 enter Indian airspace, HAL Tejas Mk1A, with proper ground support, will have significant tactical advantages.

I don’t expect Tejas Mk1A to enter Chinese airspace for dogfights—its role is designed around defensive operations and air superiority within Indian territory.

 

[hussain0216]

Why can’t I call the JF-17 Block 3 a "dead star" when it operates with almost the same technology?

I'm confused—how can the same technology be considered outdated in one aircraft while being happily inducted in another?

There's no need to justify ego—please focus on the technology and provide evidence through comparisons with other aircraft in the region, rather than simply dismissing it as "not worthy."

But the JF17 has been in service now for almost 20 years and has defended Pakistani skies