Tejas Mk1A Redesign Suggest Possible Improvements in Situational Awareness, Navigation and Performance

The Tejas Mk1A fighter aircraft (designated LA5033) is in active development, and recent observations reveal several intriguing structural modifications compared to its Mk1 predecessor.

These changes offer a glimpse into the ongoing improvements that will shape this upgraded variant of India's indigenously developed multi-role fighter.

Potential Enhancements to Situational Awareness​

• Missing RWR Sensors: The vertical tail of the Mk1A appears to lack the Radar Warning Receiver (RWR) sensors seen on previous Mk1 models. This absence suggests either a relocation of these sensors or the integration of an entirely new RWR system. Either change would potentially enhance the Tejas Mk1A's ability to detect and respond to threats more effectively.

Communication and Navigation Upgrades​

• New APU Air Intake Antenna: A previously unseen antenna now resides within the Auxiliary Power Unit (APU) air intake. This modification hints at either upgraded communication systems or potential enhancements to identification friend-or-foe (IFF) capabilities.
• SDR Antenna Repositioning: The Forward V/UHF antenna has been repositioned, signaling possible adjustments to communication and navigation systems. The Mk1A may also utilize the B-NET Software Defined Radio (SDR) seen on previous Mk1 variants. This SDR, likely procured from Israel, is widely known for delivering secure communications.

Engine Enhancements for Optimal Performance​

• Possible 3-Door Auxiliary Air Intake: The most significant change is a potential redesign of the auxiliary air intake system. Speculation centers on a 3-door configuration that could optimize airflow to the engine, particularly at high altitudes. Such a change could lead to increased engine power and overall performance improvement.
• AESA Radar Integration: As previously confirmed, the Tejas Mk1A will incorporate the ELM-2052 Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radar from Israel. This upgrade provides superior range, tracking, and detection capabilities compared to previous radar systems used on the Tejas platform.

Important Note: The 3-door auxiliary air intake design, while a compelling possibility, remains to be officially confirmed. Further details and announcements from Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) will be essential in verifying these structural modifications.

Conclusion​

The observed changes on the Tejas Mk1A LA5033 prototype speak to HAL's commitment to improving the aircraft's capabilities across several key areas.

These refinements have the potential to enhance the Mk1A's situational awareness, communication, navigation, engine performance, and overall combat effectiveness due to advanced avionics integration.

 

[Akshat]

I was watching an interview of a retd group captain of IAF, and a defence writer regarding tejas development. IAF and HAL had decided to go for continuous upgrades at the beginning rather than upgrading the jet at mid life refit in 20 years. That is why tejas is entering mass production so late. The changes IAF demanded, took time to develop, and the option was there to mass produce tejas mk1 10 years ago, without upgrades, but IAF decided to incorporate these changes from the start, instead of adding them much later in mid life refit, sort of like what we are doing with super sukhoi.

So things like hot restart sound like an upgrade to you? If HAL fails to deliver even the most basic features, of course no one would buy such a jet.

 

[Tanishq Bafila]

IAFs Never Ending Demands may impact Delivery schedule Further.Question is when will b This Two Tejas MK1A will b delivered . all New Feauture developed will b tested so it may delay Further handing First Two Tejas MK1A over to IAF.

There are reports that IAF recently asked for some structural upgrades & this will impact the delivery by few months & the whole program by 6 months....

We will get to know about the truth in upcoming weeks when defence journalists on twitter will have a chat with HAL / ADA / IAF officials

 

[Akshat]

both army and IAF doe this kind of stuff. There was a CAG report on arjun project. You can read it if you want, it is very depressing. Navy is the only one which has got its act together. I think it is because, navy designs its own ships. It has its own directorate of naval design. Also, navy officers generally are of science and engineering background. Cant say same thing about army and IAF people.

Please read the report in detail. It clearly says that all the additional features army asked were after DRDO missed the deadlines. It is indeed depressing.

 

[Akshat]

yes, certification of some new features is pending. IAF asked for those recently.

As per the liars HAL?

 

[Akshat]

We need all Mk1as ordered by 2030 ASAP. At least to face P0rks and their JF17 Block 3.

Why 2030 when the deadline is 2028?

 

[beencensured]

Basically, army had given a set of requirements to DRDO. When DRDO designed and built the tanks according to the requirements, the tank was very heavy. It was in the category of abrams and leopard 2 and merkava tanks. Basically a heavy MBT. The army complained that the tank was tok heavy and it would be difficult to transport it across the many bridges over canals in rajasthan, and other weight related issues.

The army then went on to buy 1000+ T90 tanks. Many of which were imported directly.

The irony is that the T90 tanks did not meet the requirements that the army had given to DRDO. The CAG report pointed this out. Basically some sort of shady deal was done to profut the russians. Maybe some army guys engaged in corruption. No investigation was done.

A similar thing has happened with ak203 joint production. The rifles are facing manufacturing issues, and are tok expensive to produce in India. It would be much cheaper to buy them from russia. It is a big failure. Right now some compromise is being sorted out.

Watch about $500 Russian drone killing $10 million m1a1 Abram tank.

 

[Apocalypse gupta]

Watch about $500 Russian drone killing $10 million m1a1 Abram tank.

You need more than just 1 FPV drone to kill a tank. You can disable it if you got a lucky hit with 1 drone though. In most cases if tank is diabled, the crew just get out and run away. If tank catches fire, then it can be destroyed. But, you can attempt to recover the damaged tank at a later time.

 

[Apocalypse gupta]

As per the liars HAL?

You can go and verify if they are lying. HAL is a PSU, it is under direct control of MoD. They cant just lie about stuff like this. Do you see the IAF complaining about HAL in last 5 years. Keep your bias to yourself.

 

[Saptarshi Ray]

As per the liars HAL?

Why are you so stupid? Keep your idiotic comment to yourself.

 

[Sandeep]

It's great that they have developed the upgraded jet and it will be put on the frontline but now they have to manufacture them in large numbers in a quick amount of time. At the same time we need to increase the indigenous content to above 90% as we can't keep making foreign expensive imports.

 

[Pad UwU]

Never ending changing of specs LMAO 😹😹😹

 

[Deepak Hegde]

IAF will have little idea of supply chain, it is expected. But it is also expected that HAL, being a industrial manufacturing house, would know of and sensititize IAF of the delay this approach of hot-patching in middle of a product lifecycle would entail. Considering we are dangerously low on aircraft inventory for the armed forces.

I hope it was all a conscious decision and there is some method to all this madness.

NO method, only madness !

 

[bonito]

IAFs Never Ending Demands may impact Delivery schedule Further.Question is when will b This Two Tejas MK1A will b delivered . all New Feauture developed will b tested so it may delay Further handing First Two Tejas MK1A over to IAF.

As I predicted earlier, Sep 2025. As currently trainer jets are in production

 

[bonito]

IAF will have little idea of supply chain, it is expected. But it is also expected that HAL, being a industrial manufacturing house, would know of and sensititize IAF of the delay this approach of hot-patching in middle of a product lifecycle would entail. Considering we are dangerously low on aircraft inventory for the armed forces.

I hope it was all a conscious decision and there is some method to all this madness.

But time and again air chief in press puts a statement "hope Tejas delivery stick to timelines". What does that mean ? Are these changes unilateral decisions ? Doesn't IAF know they have asked for modifications causing extension to delivery timelines?

 

[Akshat]

Why are you so stupid? Keep your idiotic comment to yourself.

Too bad you can’t handle the truth.

 

[Akshat]

You can go and verify if they are lying. HAL is a PSU, it is under direct control of MoD. They cant just lie about stuff like this. Do you see the IAF complaining about HAL in last 5 years. Keep your bias to yourself.

CAG has given in writing that DRDO lies to MoD itself about its projects. Do you see MoD or any armed force complaining about that? All these DPSUs and DRDO are pure liars and beyond anyone’s control at this point. That’s why all are being dismantled. Piece by piece.

 

[sky-high]

You can go and verify if they are lying. HAL is a PSU, it is under direct control of MoD. They cant just lie about stuff like this. Do you see the IAF complaining about HAL in last 5 years. Keep your bias to yourself.

Crooks think from sitting on fool's chair about mission critical certifications as jokes.

The recent failure of the Tejas engine proves that there exists gaps in health check monitoring system. Fools think it's easy as their daily wash routine.

Ignore these fools

 

[charminar_waale_ismail_bhai]

But time and again air chief in press puts a statement "hope Tejas delivery stick to timelines". What does that mean ? Are these changes unilateral decisions ? Doesn't IAF know they have asked for modifications causing extension to delivery timelines?

Who knows the timelines? Not that the delivery timelines are published somewhere by either HAL or the IAF. Its all hearsay at best.

 

[Shankys]

You know the answer ?

The bulge is due to what is called a bubble canopy design. The canopy glass has a blown out shape in the form of a bubble, that means there is more headroom for the pilot's head and his bulky helmet to move. This way the pilot can move his head further out and see more all around. Why in the back? Because backwards and sideways visibility are the most restricted, hence more room there to look around a and check your 6 O'clock, 8 O'clock and 4 O'clock positions.

 

[Akshat]

But time and again air chief in press puts a statement "hope Tejas delivery stick to timelines". What does that mean ? Are these changes unilateral decisions ? Doesn't IAF know they have asked for modifications causing extension to delivery timelines?

They haven’t. It’s a hit job by HAL.