ADA Tejas Mark-II/Medium Weight Fighter

[no smoking]

Please if you have read histoy then you will know how after ussr falls china started making discovery. Russia helped china a lot initially to and so did other nation initially to make it stand where it is now. they reverse engineered russian engines too and those things do help to eventually reverse engineer american one. they have lots of scientist from russia who helped them and still working for them.

You got whole thing wrong: when Chinese started WS10 in 1986, its core was based on CFM56. At the time, Chinese didn't even have any AL31. The first WS10 was assembled in 1993 while the first AF31 was delivered to China in 1995. Even today, there is not a single AF31 engine is produced in China. Russians even rejected to setup a maintenance facility in China, how much chance do you think Russian would allow their engine designer to work for Chinese?

Did Russian scientists help in building up Chinese engine? Yes, indirectly, such as developing better material for blades, better switch for control, etc.

Did Russian scientists help in reverse engineering Russian engine? Hell no, Russians prohibited it.

I am sorry i cannot quote the name right now if you can google i did read that years back so i remember.

So far I only found license producing engine by India. You have to understand, that is not reverse engineering.

It is no flag waiving and it does have lots of scientific and nationalistic meaning. you should have seen the reaction of world every scientist dreams to explore and explore more and this was one step to give hope to Indians bringing positivity which is what human life is about.

The same technologies used in your moon adventure, NASA help deep space navigation and repeat the experiment others already did? I don't see how the world was thrilled about your scientific results but your low budget.

We did learn how to produce but not how to make. It is definitely good for us but at the same time i believe it doesn't mean we can make engine because we produce one

So, you agree with me.

Agreed just quoted what DRDO said i have faith in them despite what people say about them and i have met a few .those people are mad about what they do i wish they get it provided criticism from media stop and funds are released on time.

Their history turns out that they often overstate their progress.

It's not going to be soon our politics and foreign policy is screwed right now. I do not know why but last gov tried to make distance from russia which is our only trusted friend when the time was good for them they helped us we should have done the same to be on their side. perhaps dollar is more charming than rubles.

They simply diversifying.

after 1993 all defence projects have been given enough money to do what they want.

I doubt that. Base on the public defence budget of India since 1993, your defence projects were clearly under funded.

Agree with you. Change is the law of nature specially when you are not in good shape you should change fast to become better.

No, I mean failures. The more you fail, the more you try and the more you improve.

One question are you Australian or chinese?

Chinese in Australia.

 

[I_PLAY_BAD]

Hello everyone,
I am new to this forum.
Regarding this topic I would like to know why manufacturing an all-good TEJAS is a daunting task for us. Though we initiated it 30 years back still our IAF is not fully satisfied with the specifications. I know the needs evolve continuously but other countries are able to achieve it. As a regular visitor of PDF I really envy their mindless rhetoric about JF-17 and they feel really proud and elevated about this 'achievement'.
Enlighten me please !

 

[tejas warrior]

Hello everyone,
I am new to this forum.
Regarding this topic I would like to know why manufacturing an all-good TEJAS is a daunting task for us. Though we initiated it 30 years back still our IAF is not fully satisfied with the specifications. I know the needs evolve continuously but other countries are able to achieve it. As a regular visitor of PDF I really envy their mindless rhetoric about JF-17 and they feel really proud and elevated about this 'achievement'.
Enlighten me please !

"I know the needs evolve continuously but other countries are able to achieve it"

Tell me how many countries can produce a fighter on their own ? And How much time they take ?

You also must understand when India started work on LCA, we didn't had ecosystem supporting this as this was their first product.

 

[I_PLAY_BAD]

"I know the needs evolve continuously but other countries are able to achieve it"

Tell me how many countries can produce a fighter on their own ? And How much time they take ?

You also must understand when India started work on LCA, we didn't had ecosystem supporting this as this was their first product.

I am aware India has spent more time than any other country to build an indigenous fighter jet. But still we are behind. There may be many countries like France, Germany, Sweden, UK, USA, China, Pakistan (pardon me but i have to accept it as they are going to export JF-17 to the Sri lankan armed forces) who are manufacturing and exporting air crafts. Yes, most of the countries are not direct threat to us but what about China, Pakistan ? China is on the verge of finalizing its fifth gen fighter jets. And we are looking at a country which is capable to mass produce it and share it happily with its RANDI (Research and Development International) Pakistan. Is it not imperative to us to speed-up and concentrate more on fighter jets manufacturing instead of bargaining with friend countries ?

 

[ersakthivel]

This is supposed to be tejas thread, The paste two pages of discussion have no relevance to this thread at all.

 

[ersakthivel]

Hi IDF .... been years since i logged in and took part in Tejas fiasco .. i remember i was in my school when i first got to know about this machine and its been 10+ years since then ...

Hopefully the Cindrella will be finally in sky .

Though not in favor of this jet but we need to manufacture some of these to create industry base in manufacturing in India. specially considering the avionics package is reasonably good. With amca a distant dream rafale being costly enough to rip the defese budget apart , I wish a more capable jet or a rip off of mig- 29 perhaps with twin GE engine and israeli or rbe 2 radar with iris t missile and astra / derby/mica /python/meteor .it will save time and effort both to copy mig 29 and bringing a fearsome jet in sky. But then again it seems ada/drdo doesn't wish to work hard and hal as always I bet on their lazy asses.

It will be interesting though if IAF ask to stop this programme the way they said to stop the never ending development of sitaara jet trainer which resulted in costing lives of many pilots flying older jets.

When the serving Airforce chief says that IAF has full confidence in the fighting ability of tejas , how does it become a fiasco?

Time frames on tejas program and comparison to other global programs was already done to death, repeating it again will make this thread garbage,

"I wish a more capable jet or a rip off of mig- 29 perhaps with twin GE engine and israeli or rbe 2 radar with iris t missile and astra / derby/mica /python/meteor .it will save time and effort both to copy mig 29 and bringing a fearsome jet in sky. "

is this how jet planes are designed? news to me,,,,,,,,,,

And do you have any design package to make this new rambo jet with new age tech like RSS, fly by wire, low wing loading, low frontal RCS enabled?

 

[ersakthivel]

It is no an easy thing to play around with a design specially since the size of Tejas-1 is very small not much they can do.

But there hope is on GE - 414 higher thrust to make things better. Though the energy it leaks during turns i doubt can be improved much even with this.

Also when ADA/DRDO say that the jet is made up of composite it does not mean that the quality of composite used for Tejas are as good as used by Rafale.

Simply speaking higher thrust, increase in internal fuel and reduction of weight by 400 - 500 kg is what they are targeting.
But the increase in weight of the engine and increase in size of aircraft will neutralize the effect of increase thrust but the mk2 will still perform better than tejas mk1.

By that time we may hear the news that ADA/DRDO are counting on the improved GE engine with say 110KN thrust.

of course you can count on pak sites and DDMs to spread such news in future.

tejas and gripen have almost the same length, In fact tejas has more wing area than gripen.

Have you ever heard of high ITR and low wing loading specs?

Tejas and gripen has almost the same length. Do you know that or not?

How come you have suddenly certified rafale composites better than tejas composites?

if tejas composite tech is good enough for indian climate , what is the purpose of comparing it with rafale's?

Which energy is leaking where? Dont visit too many energy leaking PAK sites to get all sort of wrong info!!!

Recent news is with EADS consultancy on landing gear HAL says it can produce a ton lighter tejas which can satisfy IAF requirements, with in 2 years . So no need for 110 Kn engine on tejas any day.

 

[Rowdy]

Will the tejas mk II version possess the ability to supercruise?

The power plant needs a pressure ratio of more than 27:1 for tejas to achieve supercruise source :

The GTRE's design envisions achieving a fan pressure ratio of 4:1 and an overall pressure ratio of 27:1, which it believes will permit the Tejas to "supercruise" (cruise supersonically without the use of the afterburner

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GTRE_GTX-35VS_Kaveri#Design
Now the F414 specs:

• Maximum thrust:
• 13,000 lbf (57.8 kN) military thrust
• 22,000 lbf (97.9 kN) with afterburner
• Overall pressure ratio: 30:1
• Thrust-to-weight ratio: 9:1[27]
• air mass flow:77.1kg/s

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Electric_F414
So the MkII should be able to supercruise, assuming the obvious that it has better design & aerodynamics and lighter weight.

 

[tharun]

Can tejas these types of small diameter bombs

 

[Yumdoot]

I don’t think Tejas Mk-2 will ever supercruise except probably in a dive. Nor do I think it is important for Tejas. The wiki essay seems to have been written by an enthusiast and carries a lot of erroneous or useless fluffy information. For example Kaveri never did 82 KN as wiki claims. The latest reports of 2011 circa mention 75 KN tops. Nor does Kaveri have more thrust than F404, as wiki claims. Besides the FPR of 4:1 is there on the EJ200 engine. OPR is 26:1 for even the interim F404 that is being used on Tejas Mk-1. But do the aircrafts powered by these engines super-cruise?

We simply have to accept that the IAF demands could only have been fulfilled by designing a Non-Gripen. IOW by a blunt design. Only a blunt design can provide the radome space that IAF needed. Basically Tejas is not designed to go fast. It is designed to fly under severe limitations HI-HO + give the best sensor coverage for its class + be as stealthy for an inexpensive-by-design aircraft as it can ever get + be easy to handle in low level ingress + have capability to take on challenger fighters all through its envelop.

Anyhow for smaller aircrafts without any possibility of internal storage of weapons the whole idea of supercruise seems rather questionable. What will you do by super cruising if you need to drop EFT and weapons to do that. That would present a really funny case – “I can supercruise but I don’t have weapons to do anything once I reach there and in any case I ain’t gonna fly very far on super cruise” . If you have the weapons then where do you keep them – on the outside – right? In which case would any sensible smaller jet be able to super cruise. In any case what is the super cruise like 1.6/1.7 mach – No. Now if you need a higher FPR of around 4:1 (compared to 3.5:1 for M88-2) for super-cruising then this will cause a higher SFC. Now how much fuel do these smaller jets carry? What is the point of super cruise in a small jet that can only hang its weapons non-stealthily and does not carry enough fuel to operate with higher FPR.

Would it not be helpful instead of make sure your smaller jet can ingress nape of the earth, does not reflect too much radar energy, has a LPI radar, has a mapping capability radar and BVR+WVR missiles to protect itself while returning. Would it not help better to give it sensors that can target+shoot, as far as its challenger and still have the capability in the merge to dogfight its most capable challenger. This is exactly what Tejas is currently.

 

[3The Crossbow]

When the serving Airforce chief says that IAF has full confidence in the fighting ability of tejas , how does it become a fiasco?

confidence in what read his full statement and previous one too. It goes by it is good because we have to go indigenous nothing else.

And bottom line is Tejas mk2 is still a paper plane and will taken 4-5 years to even come on sky.
tejas mk1 A/p improved one is also in paper only.

Time frames on tejas program and comparison to other global programs was already done to death, repeating it again will make this thread garbage,

Hmm we can give excuses money didn't came this did not happened and blah blah.
but the fact remains started in 83 the whole process was running at snail pace. during 2004 - 2006 it was relized by ada /drdo iaf that this jet cannot meet the specification nor kaveri is going to happen in coming years but still continued to push tejas on iaf. by that they could have tried to go for twin engine jet.

"I wish a more capable jet or a rip off of mig- 29 perhaps with twin GE engine and israeli or rbe 2 radar with iris t missile and astra / derby/mica /python/meteor .it will save time and effort both to copy mig 29 and bringing a fearsome jet in sky. "

is this how jet planes are designed? news to me,,,,,,,,,,

This is how jf-17 is designed ripped off from from f-16 and mig 21 even tejas is based on mirage. if u have a proven platform try to improve that and perhaps take russian help in designing an indian mig 35 .

And do you have any design package to make this new rambo jet with new age tech like RSS, fly by wire, low wing loading, low frontal RCS enabled?

RSS is sangh and is quite old lol

DID i said stealth no i never did .... low rcs ? i don't think its going to make huge diff as missiles will be hanging out until it is reduced very significantly

It's not rambo but it is what china does. Take a platform which is proven improve on it develop avionics and tech for the platform and keep on updating it.

the bottom line is deliver first before chest thumping.

 

[ersakthivel]

confidence in what read his full statement and previous one too. It goes by it is good because we have to go indigenous nothing else.
And bottom line is Tejas mk2 is still a paper plane and will taken 4-5 years to even come on sky.
tejas mk1 A/p improved one is also in paper only.

All planes are paper planes till they fly. tejas mk1 itself with its class leading combo of low RCS and high radar tracking range with 80 Km Astra is way better than mig-21,23,27 and even the upgraded mirage-200o in BVR combat.

Only mig-29 has bigger radar , but it has three to four times higher clean config RCS, so when you take the combo of clean config RCS and BVR -radar tracking range there isnt much difference,

All this just for the now fully developed tejas mk1 , not for "PAPER PLANES" like tejas mk2 and mk1A ,

Hmm we can give excuses money didn't came this did not happened and blah blah.
but the fact remains started in 83 the whole process was running at snail pace. during 2004 - 2006 it was relized by ada /drdo iaf that this jet cannot meet the specification nor kaveri is going to happen in coming years but still continued to push tejas on iaf. by that they could have tried to go for twin engine jet.

.

This is how jf-17 is designed ripped off from from f-16 and mig 21 even tejas is based on mirage. if u have a proven platform try to improve that and perhaps take russian help in designing an indian mig 35 .


RSS is sangh and is quite old lol
DID i said stealth no i never did .... low rcs ? i don't think its going to make huge diff as missiles will be hanging out until it is reduced very significantly.

I

It's not rambo but it is what china does. Take a platform which is proven improve on it develop avionics and tech for the platform and keep on updating it.


the bottom line is deliver first before chest thumping.

1.CONFIDENCE IN ITS FIGHTING ABILITY IS THE IAF chief's FULL QUOTE. IF YOU HAVE ANY DIFFERENT SOURCE TO PROVE THAT IAF CHIEF SAID THAT "ONLY TO GO INDIGENOUS " PROVE IT.

2.No one gave any excuse . The funds for building two TDs were released in 1993 and IOC-2 and production orders firmed up in 2013. twenty years is the norm for Relaxed Static Stability, 4 channel fully digital fly by wire , composite 4.5th gen fighter program anywhere in the world.

3.BY RSS I meant Relaxed Static Stability, you can seriously try your hand at some satire writing column rather than trying to chop mig-29 to produce a low RCS, low wing loadiong, RSS fly by wire fighter, results will be good for every one.

4.t is heartening to see you putting on the thinking HAT for the first time. BVR and WVR missiles in air to air mode without external fuel tanks(which are dropped befopre BVR) doesn't add much RCS should have been known to you, if you are seriously thinking!!!


5.Thats why I asked you to give the design solution for critical high ITR, high TWR(above 1)low wing loading , low RCS combo which is the prerequisite for any modern fighter plane , which is present in tejas ,in the cut and chop solution based on existing fighters you offered, You havent responded means you have no idea about what you are posting here.


6.how can you get low clean config RCS and low wing loading when you cut and chop mig-29 . Even russians dont know how, thats why their mig-35 is so identical in these parametwers to mig-29 and thats why IAF asked it not to enter MMRCA.



7.China can make any type of plane and hype it to any extent. Because no one is going to drag it into any war, Through out its independent history from 1940s , it is always the aggressor and it can pick and choose its enemy and the time for fight, a luxury we indians dont have, thats why all the leading 21st century parameters like RSS, fully digital fly by wire low RCS, high BVR range along with low wing loading to operate in high himalayan air space were built into tejas.

8.Even if we both keep quiet forever ADA is going to update teajs as and when tech is available. Read group captain Suneeth krishna's word that Tejas is ours and we can update it in batches.

No one is thumping any Godzilla chest here. tejas mk1 has already been delivered and ,"IAF has no doubt its fighting potential as per its current chief, who may know that RSS is Relaxed Static Stability."

So stop adding E wate.

Sorry to disturb you,

 

[ersakthivel]

I don’t think Tejas Mk-2 will ever supercruise except probably in a dive. Nor do I think it is important for Tejas. The wiki essay seems to have been written by an enthusiast and carries a lot of erroneous or useless fluffy information. For example Kaveri never did 82 KN as wiki claims. The latest reports of 2011 circa mention 75 KN tops. Nor does Kaveri have more thrust than F404, as wiki claims. Besides the FPR of 4:1 is there on the EJ200 engine. OPR is 26:1 for even the interim F404 that is being used on Tejas Mk-1. But do the aircrafts powered by these engines super-cruise?

We simply have to accept that the IAF demands could only have been fulfilled by designing a Non-Gripen. IOW by a blunt design. Only a blunt design can provide the radome space that IAF needed. Basically Tejas is not designed to go fast. It is designed to fly under severe limitations HI-HO + give the best sensor coverage for its class + be as stealthy for an inexpensive-by-design aircraft as it can ever get + be easy to handle in low level ingress + have capability to take on challenger fighters all through its envelop.

Anyhow for smaller aircrafts without any possibility of internal storage of weapons the whole idea of supercruise seems rather questionable. What will you do by super cruising if you need to drop EFT and weapons to do that. That would present a really funny case – “I can supercruise but I don’t have weapons to do anything once I reach there and in any case I ain’t gonna fly very far on super cruise” . If you have the weapons then where do you keep them – on the outside – right? In which case would any sensible smaller jet be able to super cruise. In any case what is the super cruise like 1.6/1.7 mach – No. Now if you need a higher FPR of around 4:1 (compared to 3.5:1 for M88-2) for super-cruising then this will cause a higher SFC. Now how much fuel do these smaller jets carry? What is the point of super cruise in a small jet that can only hang its weapons non-stealthily and does not carry enough fuel to operate with higher FPR.

Would it not be helpful instead of make sure your smaller jet can ingress nape of the earth, does not reflect too much radar energy, has a LPI radar, has a mapping capability radar and BVR+WVR missiles to protect itself while returning. Would it not help better to give it sensors that can target+shoot, as far as its challenger and still have the capability in the merge to dogfight its most capable challenger. This is exactly what Tejas is currently.

The 75 Kn in kaveri was achieved in bangalore which is close to 1000 meters above sea level. At sea level the same 75 Kn thrust can be co related to around 80 Kn.

It is a common principle that engine thrust peaks at sea level where air density is higher and it reduces as altitude increase.
SO all engines which produce 84 Kn at sea level produce significantly lesser thrust at 1000 meter altitude and all engine thrust is calibrated at 20 deg temp , the kaveri thrust of 75 Kn was acieved at around 30 deg if we take bangalore atmosphere. It is a known fact that higher atmosphericv temp reduces all jet engine thrust by 10 percent

So taken together the 75 kn at close to 30 deg in 1000 meter altitude will translate to higher thrust at sea level and 20 deg temp, which is the norm used by MNC engine makers.

The power plant needs a pressure ratio of more than 27:1 for tejas to achieve supercruise source :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GTRE_GTX-35VS_Kaveri#Design
Now the F414 specs:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Electric_F414
So the MkII should be able to supercruise, assuming the obvious that it has better design & aerodynamics and lighter weight.

SUper crusie has nothing to do with power plant pressure ratio.

it has every thing to do with thrust to weight ratio.

Planes with thrust to weight ratio of more than 1.2 has shown super cruise in real world,

The proposed one ton reduction in tejas mk1A and 98 Kn engine in tejas mk2 gets their Thrust to weight ratio to arounr 1.2,

lets see whether they both super cruise or not.

Also indian hot climate reduce wing lift by ten percent and engien thrust by ten percent roughly. So iot is an open question whether the super cruisers of the world can demo it in hot indian punishing air space,
AFAIK none of the MMRCA contenders claimed to super cruise in indian hot conditions.

if the thrust of the engine is high enough to overcome the supersonic wave drag without employing after burner the plane is said to super crusie, ofcourse high pressure ratio engines are the most obvious choice for super cruise, but it can also be achieved by reducing the fighter weight , with even lower presure ratio engines.

 

[ersakthivel]

View attachment 5898
View attachment 5899
Can tejas these types of small diameter bombs

it can employ multi ejector racks, like any other plane.

 

[Punya Pratap]

I could nt help myself from posting this .... Prodyut Das !! What can I say ??

Experimental Stealthy LCA MK-1?
Published September 3, 2015 | By admin
SOURCE: IDRW NEWS NETWORK (INN) / Prodyut das

Longtime Critic of LCA-Tejas program former Professor of IIT Kanpur Prodyut das in his latest report has made a case to develop Experimental Stealthy LCA MK-1 airframe for research purpose prior to commencement of India’s AMCA Stealth project.

Report prepared by das suggest converting the last six airframes to an LCA Stealth model incorporating the stealth features. six airframes can be built to an “experimental” rather than a “combat” standard to be used for testing Stealth coating currently been developed for AMCA Project.

since it will Experimental airframes then internal weapons bay need not be capable of handling all the weapons planned for use or the stress levels need not go to 9 g etc. The idea is to give everyone –designers, planners, operators much needed “hands on” stealth experience. Because the aircraft is based on a “proven” design a first flight by early 2018 and completion of field testing by early 2020 is expected particularly given the confident enthusiasm being proclaimed for the AMCA project.

These aircraft according to him will explore the following:

i) Stealth effectiveness
ii) Stealth maintainability, particularly in humid and dusty conditions
iii) Manufacturing and airframe ageing effects on stealth deterioration.
iv) Problems of stealth in LLXC profiles.

According to das Since only three countries are in stealth technology it would be arrogant to presume Indian scientist “know stealth”. to make a case for Experimental Stealthy LCA MK-1 he shows a sketch for the possible adaptation of the LCA Mk1 to an LCA Stealth Research Vehicle.

According to his research changes to the fuselage will allow some of the problems mentioned above show up in actual conditions. Similarly should be the approach to developing Sensor fusion. Sensor fusion has applicability even in ordinary strike sorties and so has priority over supercruise. The capability can be developed using a flight of Embraer145s or Dornier228s. These are roomy aircraft and will allow much space for a “breadboard” approach and will confirm the technology and its bugs before final packaging.

CABS and team would be an obvious resource given the work they have turned in on the Embraer AWACS. The obvious advantages of using a proven platform are that the testing is not held up whilst the platform itself is getting rid of its sinuses as happened with the LCA

 

[Illusive]

I could nt help myself from posting this .... Prodyut Das !! What can I say ??

Experimental Stealthy LCA MK-1?
Published September 3, 2015 | By admin
SOURCE: IDRW NEWS NETWORK (INN) / Prodyut das

Longtime Critic of LCA-Tejas program former Professor of IIT Kanpur Prodyut das in his latest report has made a case to develop Experimental Stealthy LCA MK-1 airframe for research purpose prior to commencement of India’s AMCA Stealth project.

Report prepared by das suggest converting the last six airframes to an LCA Stealth model incorporating the stealth features. six airframes can be built to an “experimental” rather than a “combat” standard to be used for testing Stealth coating currently been developed for AMCA Project.

Maybe he is not getting material to criticize LCA these days. What a stupid idea anyway.

 

[harish.kaks]

Is there any Foriegn colloboration in the design phase or production phase of Tejas Mk2. I hope the making of first prototype or LSP-1 of MK2 is in progress.

 

[Yumdoot]

The 75 Kn in kaveri was achieved in bangalore which is close to 1000 meters above sea level. At sea level the same 75 Kn thrust can be co related to around 80 Kn.

I seriously doubt if that expectation scaling would work, except perhaps in monsoon months.

Hope this collection of various sources about what to expect at sea level helps explain why. There was a reason that it was the Indian Navy that plumbed for F-414 engine (IAF just tagged along so it could use F-414 as bahana to delay the Tejas).

Actually even Subs have to tweaked to be able to work in tropical seas (From Wiki):

After being refit and upgraded to sustain the higher temperatures of tropical water,[4] HSwMS Halland took part in a multi-national exercise in the Mediterranean from September 16, 2000. Allegedly, there she remained undetected while still recording many of her friendly adversaries, attracting interest from the participating countries. In early November the same year, she participated in a NATO "blue-water" exercise in the Atlantic. There, she reportedly won a victory in a mock "duel" with Spanish naval units, and then the same in similar duel against a French SSN, a nuclear-powered attack submarine. She also "defeated" an American SSN, the USS Houston.[4]

& of course, moving on to my favourite part ie. Bashing IAF leadership:
http://ajaishukla.blogspot.in/2015/09/indias-light-combat-helicopter.html

In June, the helicopter then faced “hot weather flight trials” around Jodhpur, soaking up desert temperatures of 40-50 degrees Centigrade, when the temperatures inside the cabin approach 60 degrees Centigrade.

40-50 degrees Centigrade with unlimited runway and lighter aircrafts/helos

IAF leadership is fit only for OROP dharna at jantar mantar.

 

[ersakthivel]

I seriously doubt if that expectation scaling would work, except perhaps in monsoon months.

Hope this collection of various sources about what to expect at sea level helps explain why. There was a reason that it was the Indian Navy that plumbed for F-414 engine (IAF just tagged along so it could use F-414 as bahana to delay the Tejas).

Actually even Subs have to tweaked to be able to work in tropical seas (From Wiki):




& of course, moving on to my favourite part ie. Bashing IAF leadership:
http://ajaishukla.blogspot.in/2015/09/indias-light-combat-helicopter.html


40-50 degrees Centigrade with unlimited runway and lighter aircrafts/helos

IAF leadership is fit only for OROP dharna at jantar mantar.

IN's requirement for GE 414 is due to heavier landing gear weight and very short take off requirement needed in career which can only be achieved by GE 414, But IAF tejas doesnt face these constraints.

I read in the blog by prodyut das that it was observed that indian conditions reduce close to 10 percent wing lift and ten percent engine thrust due to higher temp and lower density.

.Das made this point when discussing about high IAF mig-21 losses during take off and landing. He said this lack of thrust and lift coupled with very high wing loading of mig-21 makes take off and landing very dangerous for rookie pilots.

All global jet engine max after burner thrust stated is only for ISDA conditions that is sea level at 20 deg temp.
But the data of 75 Kn released fom GTRE labs for kaveri is at 1000 meter altitude and 30 plus atmospheric temp.

for accurate co relation we need empirical formulae.

 

[sabari]

I have a question for our senior member .
Why does light combet jet need to be single jet engine powered ?
Why shouldn't the light combet jet utilize. the two engine with low power out put in place of one high power engine.