You know the operating parameters and other features of both radars?
Indian Military News, Reports, Data, etc.
- Thread starter bd popeye
- Start date
The Tejas MK1A is 1000 kg lighter than the Tejas MK1, which has led to an increase in payload capacity by 500 kg, extended range, and significantly enhanced maneuverability. The differences will be evident in the upcoming air shows performances of the Tejas MK1A. In the next few days, HAL is expected to release the specifications of the Tejas MK1A, which I will quote here on this forum.
The fact that the Mk1A can achieve a 1000kg weight saving really shows how poorly designed the Mk1 was.
Weight reduction in the Tejas MK1A has been achieved through the use of even more advanced composite materials and titanium alloys, which has also significantly raised the cost. The Tejas MK1 costs 43 million USD per unit, whereas the Tejas MK1A costs 80 million USD per unit. HAL plans to continue reducing the weight of the Tejas. the Tejas MK1A can carry 5.3 tons of weapons across 9 external hardpoints, a capability unmatched by any other light fighter in the world.
The F-16 can carry 7,700kg of weapons across 9 external hardpoints. In addition, bragging about how expensive a tejas to try and praise it is just.. illogical. Please stop blatantly lying in your posts.
The F-16 is not a light fighter, and naturally, costs will rise with enhancements in specifications. Although HAL will aim to minimize costs, an increase in price with more advanced specifications is inevitable. Rafales are priced at $400 million each, while JF-17s cost $25 million each yet Countries like Egypt and Qatar chose Rafales over JF-17s because the latter cannot replace advanced fighters like the Rafales or Eurofighter Typhoons.
Last edited:
It's a light fighter. One of the most important and widely produced light fighters in the world. Don't keep blabbering nonsense please.
What is it’s weight? and naturally, costs will rise with enhancements in specifications. Although HAL will aim to minimize costs, an increase in price with more advanced specifications is inevitable. Rafales are priced at $400 million each, while JF-17s cost $25 million each yet Countries like Egypt and Qatar chose Rafales over JF-17s because the latter cannot replace advanced fighters like the Rafales or Eurofighter Typhoons.
Please keep in mind the forum rules on system comparisons, they always inevitably lead to flamewars and needless back and fourth.
And if the F-16 is a medium weight fighter, then the Rafale is even more.
So why bragging that other countries chose the Rafale over the JF-17 - and as such assuming it is not that capable - when both are different classes of fighters and none of the mentioned countries was even considering the Thunder as an alternative to Rafales? Or do you put the Tejas in the same class as a contender to the Rafale in IAF service?
That’s in fact the problem with your posts … you randomly pick any argument that fits your line regardless how off or even wrong it is and not only that you try to portray Indian systems or whatever India uses as top-notch while at the same time to belittle anything from China or the JF-17! Try at least to use correct categories when you compare anything…