India HAL Tejas Program

crixus

Contributor
Messages
1,021
Reactions
1,160
Nation of residence
Canada
Nation of origin
India
Nuclear Capable weapons platforms have a computer system that is capable of disabling the fail-safe device and arming the warhead. While any jet can physically carry a nuclear weapon - only a select few actually have the means to arm one

Nuclear weapons require a special code entered to start the arming sequence. Without this code, the safety features are not disabled and the weapon will not function. This is to prevent accidental detonation of the weapon if the aircraft has an accident
I am sure this is one the reasons the price tag of Rafales is more then the , same plane bought by Egypt and Greece
 

Rajendra Chola

Committed member
Messages
252
Reactions
88
Nation of residence
Canada
Nation of origin
India
I am sure this is one the reasons the price tag of Rafales is more then the , same plane bought by Egypt and Greece
Not exactly. Whatever be the system for the Nuclear role, it will be an individual system designed and manufactured in India. It may be just integrated with mission computer for limited diagnostics.

Moreover some Mirages and Jags are with SFC. Mirages will be returned to normal operational duty with Rafale taking over that role most likely.
 

Zapper

Experienced member
India Correspondent
Messages
1,717
Reactions
10 939
Nation of residence
United States of America
Nation of origin
India
I am sure this is one the reasons the price tag of Rafales is more then the , same plane bought by Egypt and Greece
Primary reason for cost difference being our Rafales are maxed out in terms of specs while Egyptian Rafales are more like a base version
 

Nilgiri

Experienced member
Moderator
Aviation Specialist
Messages
9,752
Reactions
118 19,753
Nation of residence
Canada
Nation of origin
India
@Nilgiri @Zapper Bro, I want to know which India Air Force fighters that can carry Nuke.......

Pretty much all of them that have any serious A2G capacity (i.e excludes things like Mig 21 etc that are nearly pure interceptor only).

Certain ones are prioritised over others (given their more optimised A2G role), like Mirage 2000, Jaguar, Mig 27 (retired) and now Rafale.

Others have a greyer low-priority capacity that might be augmented with time (i.e like Brahmos ALCM with MKI given brahmos can be nuke-tipped)

....but generally Indian doctrine optimises a few specific platforms to handle it better (to have ready if its even needed past sea and ground elements to begin with) and delegate other platforms to what they are far better suited for in the overall conflict parameters.
 

Nilgiri

Experienced member
Moderator
Aviation Specialist
Messages
9,752
Reactions
118 19,753
Nation of residence
Canada
Nation of origin
India
Primary reason for cost difference being our Rafales are maxed out in terms of specs while Egyptian Rafales are more like a base version

Yes and all the offsets in the larger IND-FRA strategic partnership that are essentially long term investments that are not attached to just rafale.

There is also lot of one time costs setting up weapons arsenal etc.

Some of those will be "savings" if India goes for more rafale orders...as they become more recurring cost with no investment needed anymore.

Ordering just 36 with offsets package as it is, is about this cost in the end....as Rafale is quite expensive (given its limited production run overall) to begin with.
 

Gessler

Contributor
Moderator
India Moderator
Messages
887
Reactions
44 1,996
Nation of residence
India
Nation of origin
India
Why not every type of fighter can carry Nuke ? What is inside Rafale that make it Nuke capable fighter ?

Nuclear Capable weapons platforms have a computer system that is capable of disabling the fail-safe device and arming the warhead. While any jet can physically carry a nuclear weapon - only a select few actually have the means to arm one

Nuclear weapons require a special code entered to start the arming sequence. Without this code, the safety features are not disabled and the weapon will not function. This is to prevent accidental detonation of the weapon if the aircraft has an accident

There are few other considerations as well.

The carrier platform has to be very survivable so it has the best chance to get to the target location in one piece. At one point in time, among IAF fleet it was Jag & M2K, in foreseeable future it will be Rafale. Survivability simply meaning the active & passive measures to detect & evade threats. This could include the ability of flying at extremely low altitudes to penetrate air defences. Something the Sukhois can't really do well.

Also, the electronics onboard a N-delivery aircraft have to be specially hardened/shielded against EMPs as the plane could be fairly close to detonation, this is especially true in case of nuclear gravity bombs* which do not have 'standoff range'. Considering so many India-Specific Enhancements (ISEs) are not mentioned in public domain, I'd think this was part of ISEs contract - to bring the Indian Rafales' electronics to the level of the ASMP-A carrying Force de Dissuasion F3s.


*First-generation example of Indian air-dropped nuke with SAFF (Safing, Arming, Fuzing, Firing system):

dc7b13e478ab14d851380baab8ccd90eae68639de150d39fffdd4edacabc0593.jpg


Current air-delivered gravity nukes are believed to be third-generation, but the fundamentals of survivability, arming & EMP-protection will remain the same.
 

Zapper

Experienced member
India Correspondent
Messages
1,717
Reactions
10 939
Nation of residence
United States of America
Nation of origin
India
Makes no sense except for a TD on future platforms since Growler or an EW fighter jet's primary requirement is range and endurance.

Also,what exactly is a mockup model since it looks like additional pods and Rudram (anti-radiation) missile will be added on the external hardpoints. Can't they integrate those onto one of the existing test beds?
 

Rajendra Chola

Committed member
Messages
252
Reactions
88
Nation of residence
Canada
Nation of origin
India
Makes no sense except for a TD on future platforms since Growler or an EW fighter jet's primary requirement is range and endurance.

Also,what exactly is a mockup model since it looks like additional pods and Rudram (anti-radiation) missile will be added on the external hardpoints. Can't they integrate those onto one of the existing test beds?

Could have developed this model on Su30 seeing as we developed the primary architecture. But not sure about Russian reservations on them.

Tejas range with 2 drop tanks are pretty big. I believe it's 2000km +. And you still have 5 pylons with 2 drop tanks. Even if 3 ASPJ are carried on 3, I still don't think they can't carry BVR on their final edge pylons. Maybe 2 Asraams. Or do not need to have anything. They will need escorts anyway.
 

Zapper

Experienced member
India Correspondent
Messages
1,717
Reactions
10 939
Nation of residence
United States of America
Nation of origin
India
Could have developed this model on Su30 seeing as we developed the primary architecture. But not sure about Russian reservations on them.
Russia shouldn't necessarily have any reservations on Su-30 mods since we shelved the Super Sukhoi upgrade and going with staggered upgrades by DRDO/HAL. All these sub-systems have been developed by DRDO's arms. While Su-30MKI is license built, it has more Indian content than what some of our neighbors claim their fighter jet programs as JVs

View attachment 39565

View attachment 39566
Tejas range with 2 drop tanks are pretty big. I believe it's 2000km +. And you still have 5 pylons with 2 drop tanks. Even if 3 ASPJ are carried on 3, I still don't think they can't carry BVR on their final edge pylons. Maybe 2 Asraams. Or do not need to have anything. They will need escorts anyway.
That'll significantly reduce it's battle load...better to use AWACS instead
 

Rajendra Chola

Committed member
Messages
252
Reactions
88
Nation of residence
Canada
Nation of origin
India
Russia shouldn't necessarily have any reservations on Su-30 mods since we shelved the Super Sukhoi upgrade and going with staggered upgrades by DRDO/HAL. All these sub-systems have been developed by DRDO's arms. While Su-30MKI is license built, it has more Indian content than what some of our neighbors claim their fighter jet programs as JVs

View attachment 39565

View attachment 39566

That'll significantly reduce it's battle load...better to use AWACS instead

An Growler do not go into battle. Its an EW system.providing bubble to the air group. The only issue is assets are required to provide protection.
F18 Growler do not carry weapons. It could carry when required. But most of the times it doesn't.
 

crixus

Contributor
Messages
1,021
Reactions
1,160
Nation of residence
Canada
Nation of origin
India
An Growler do not go into battle. Its an EW system.providing bubble to the air group. The only issue is assets are required to provide protection.
F18 Growler do not carry weapons. It could carry when required. But most of the times it doesn't.

Never heard Russians or Europeans/French have any platform which is eqivalent to Growler
 

Zapper

Experienced member
India Correspondent
Messages
1,717
Reactions
10 939
Nation of residence
United States of America
Nation of origin
India
An Growler do not go into battle. Its an EW system.providing bubble to the air group. The only issue is assets are required to provide protection.
F18 Growler do not carry weapons. It could carry when required. But most of the times it doesn't.
1644287117044.png


With the potential EW capabilities the Tejas can potentially project, it will have to enter into enemy airspace...can't have the same range as an AWACS platform ofcourse and with that limitation, battle load to some extent is a must.

As this handle rightly pointed out...you might use Tejas as a TD for such developments but isn't realistic to deploy such platforms in active encounters

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Zapper

Experienced member
India Correspondent
Messages
1,717
Reactions
10 939
Nation of residence
United States of America
Nation of origin
India
@Rajaraja Chola I would prefer to develop pods capable of controlling CATS Warrior UAVs or the likes effectively and act as the mothership with secondary controls handled by local AWACS & ground stations.

1644287831941.png


Secondly, you don't see USAF using any Growler variants since that role is primarily taken over by AWACS. If ADA/IAF wants a Growler version, it's best reserved for AMCA or TEDBF for IN
 

Lonewolf

Contributor
Messages
511
Reactions
297
Nation of residence
India
Nation of origin
India
Makes no sense except for a TD on future platforms since Growler or an EW fighter jet's primary requirement is range and endurance.

Also,what exactly is a mockup model since it looks like additional pods and Rudram (anti-radiation) missile will be added on the external hardpoints. Can't they integrate those onto one of the existing test beds?
Def expo 22
 

Lonewolf

Contributor
Messages
511
Reactions
297
Nation of residence
India
Nation of origin
India
@Rajaraja Chola I would prefer to develop pods capable of controlling CATS Warrior UAVs or the likes effectively and act as the mothership with secondary controls handled by local AWACS & ground stations.

View attachment 39569

Secondly, you don't see USAF using any Growler variants since that role is primarily taken over by AWACS. If ADA/IAF wants a Growler version, it's best reserved for AMCA or TEDBF for IN
Tejas with growler configuration can make it more easier for point interception roles , enemy will lose bvr advantage due to a fighter jet with good ew capability is there to defend , and remaining tejas in the point defense role will take care of the attack formation of enemy .

And we already have GaN module fit for ew role , so using them won't cause much stress on limited electric power . Plus the aspj are being drag optimised for operation at higher speed and not damage maneuvers which your awacs can't provide . @Zapper with awacs you can't do much manuvers if enemy lauches bvr against u and operating cost of awacs is much more than a tejas
 

Zapper

Experienced member
India Correspondent
Messages
1,717
Reactions
10 939
Nation of residence
United States of America
Nation of origin
India
Tejas with growler configuration can make it more easier for point interception roles , enemy will lose bvr advantage due to a fighter jet with good ew capability is there to defend , and remaining tejas in the point defense role will take care of the attack formation of enemy .

And we already have GaN module fit for ew role , so using them won't cause much stress on limited electric power . Plus the aspj are being drag optimised for operation at higher speed and not damage maneuvers which your awacs can't provide . @Zapper with awacs you can't do much manuvers if enemy lauches bvr against u and operating cost of awacs is much more than a tejas
You don't take AWACS into a hot zone...it stays at the safety of your airspace beyond the reach of enemy radars, missile ranges and AD systems while has an extremely powerful and long range EW suite to see long distances. During Balakot, PAF effectively used their AWACS to keep our Sukhois at bay while also simultaneously jamming the Mig-21 which is why the pilot didn't know he entered enemy airspace despite the ground control station trying to warn him

In regards to Tejas, it really depends on the range these jamming pods can project coupled with the AESA. As posted in one of the above pics, the current PESA radar range is limited and will definitely have to wait for Uttam AESA to say the least
 

Follow us on social media

Top Bottom