There are assertions in the query that warrant careful handling. The article cites Zee Media Bureau and mentions that the Indian Air Force is reportedly deploying the Israeli X-GUARD towed decoy on the TEJAS MK-2, with claims about prior use on Rafale aircraft and a sensational anecdote about Pakistan misreading a decoy as a downed Rafale.

These kinds of claims should be treated with caution unless corroborated by official sources or independent, reputable defence journalism. The following report presents the information as described in the source material while noting that verification from authoritative channels is advisable for a definitive understanding.

The Indian Air Force has reportedly decided to deploy the Israeli X-GUARD towed decoy on the TEJAS MK-2 fighter jet. The purpose of this system is described as enhancing lethality while protecting the aircraft from adversary radars.

The decoy is portrayed as AI-enabled and fibre-optic, designed to spoof radar and missile guidance rather than merely jam signals. The emphasis is on active protection, integrating with the aircraft’s electronic warfare suite to improve survivability in contested airspace. If confirmed, this would mark a notable step in advancing self-protection capabilities for India’s next-generation indigenous fighter.

Proponents describe X-GUARD as a lightweight, reusable towed decoy that can be extended during flight and stowed after mission completion. The flexibility of a retractable mechanism is highlighted, along with the claim that the system maintains both electrical and fibre-optic continuity throughout flight.

In theory, such a decoy could present a moving target to enemy radar systems, complicating tracking and engagement and potentially reducing the likelihood of missiles homing in on the aircraft. The technology is positioned as a key enabler of deeper penetration into defended airspace, where electronic warfare and decoys play an increasingly central role in mission success.

Defensive survivability is framed as a central objective of this development. The X-GUARD is described as logical to combine with an aircraft’s modern radar, sensors, and weapon systems to bolster overall combat effectiveness.

By providing an additional layer of protection, it is suggested that the TEJAS MK-2could perform more aggressive or longer-range operations within heavily defended regions. The claim is that this integration would elevate the TEJAS MK-2 from a capable fighter to a more robust platform capable of operating with greater resilience under enemy air defences.

The report references prior use on Rafale aircraft during a named operation described as Sindoor, with a narrative suggesting that the decoy helped India evade Pakistani radars and air defence systems. The account claims that a Pakistani response resulted in the decoy being shot down, but that India nevertheless achieved its strategic aims.

Such anecdotes contribute to a broader lore about decoys and electronic warfare in modern air combat, where misinterpretation and rapid dissemination of claims can occur in the fog of operation and media reporting. Independent verification of these events would be necessary to separate promotional claims from demonstrable outcomes.

If the deployment on the TEJAS MK-2 proceeds, it would reflect a broader trend in Western and allied air forces: prioritising active self-protection measures that integrate with advanced sensors and weapons to increase aircraft survivability.

The expectation is that X-GUARD, when integrated with a contemporary electronic warfare suite, can defeat or complicate the engagement of advanced tracking radars, including categories such as monopulse and LORO systems. The extent of countermeasures effectiveness depends on the evolving architecture of radar seekers, missile guidance, and the counter-countermeasures available to opposing air defences.

Operationally, the decision would carry implications for mission planning, logistics, and maintenance. A retractable towed decoy system adds complexity to the airframe’s integration requirements, with considerations for power, data link reliability, and mechanical reliability under various flight regimes. 

Training for aircrew and ground personnel would be essential to maximising the system’s potential while ensuring safe and timely deployment and stowage. The system’s durability, maintenance cycles, and reusable nature would factor into life-cycle cost analyses and platform availability planning.

The broader strategic context involves India’s ongoing emphasis on electronic warfare and aircraft self-protection as core elements of future air combat operations. If proven effective, the X-GUARD would position the TEJAS MK-2 within a defensive paradigm that complements its sensors and weapons with an active, mobile decoy capability.

This would be consistent with efforts to balance platform cost, survivability, and mission adaptability across diverse theatres and threat environments. The extent to which this capability would influence air superiority, deterrence, or tactical decision-making remains contingent on verification, field performance, and the evolving threat landscape.

The reported decision to integrate the X-GUARD towed decoy on the TEJAS MK-2 represents an ambitious attempt to enhance survivability and effectiveness in contested airspace. The claims link to historical use on Rafale aircraft and assert significant advantages against sophisticated radar systems. 

However, readers should view these assertions with measured caution until official confirmation and independent testing provide a clear, verifiable assessment of the system’s performance and strategic value. The outcome will likely shape how India’s indigenous fighter programs and allied electronic warfare efforts are understood and evaluated in the coming years.

IDN (With Agency Inputs)