Naval LCA Tejas

[abingdonboy]

http://*****************/attachments/c4o71prvmaazbjl-jpg.3841/



^ the LCA that the IN is actually interested in.

 

[sthf]

View attachment 13862

Interesting canopy and chin on LCA Navy Mk2. Something interesting is cooking.

LCA Navy Mk2 with a one piece canopy (if my eyes are to be trusted) and AMCA with two piece canopy?

What the hell is wrong with these people?

 

[abingdonboy]

LCA Navy Mk2 with a one piece canopy (if my eyes are to be trusted) and AMCA with two piece canopy?

What the hell is wrong with these people?

AMCA will have a one piece canopy

 

[sthf]

AMCA will have a one piece canopy

Not according to their Aero India 2017 renderings. Kindly visit AMCA thread for further details.

 

[abingdonboy]

Not according to their Aero India 2017 renderings. Kindly visit AMCA thread for further details.

It's just renderings, it will have a single piece canaopy don't worry about that.

 

[sthf]

It's just renderings, it will have a single piece canaopy don't worry about that.

There's always hope but their track record points to a completely opposite direction.

I for one dont buy into the BS of frameless canopy. It's the utter stupidity and incompetence that bothers me.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

"It is wrong to say the Navy does not support the LCA ...You are being misinformed by an internal lobby," he said.

The statement made has some real weight ..

 

[Scrutator]

"It is wrong to say the Navy does not support the LCA ...You are being misinformed by an internal lobby," he said.

The statement made has some real weight ..

It is really interesting that Parrikar mentioned an "INTERNAL lobby"!!! That's pretty damning accusation coming from the minister himself that there are lobbies within the government/services working against the indigenous projects!!!

 

[abingdonboy]

"It is wrong to say the Navy does not support the LCA ...You are being misinformed by an internal lobby," he said.

The statement made has some real weight ..

Disturbing isn't it?

The likes of Shiv Aroor who are going on all expenses paid trips to Sweden for SAAB and the US for Boeing and enjoy major Ad revenue thanks to the same OEMs.

 

[abingdonboy]

It is really interesting that Parrikar mentioned an "INTERNAL lobby"!!! That's pretty damning accusation coming from the minister himself that there are lobbies within the government/services working against the indigenous projects!!!

He is talking about the media for sure and the lobbyists employed by foreign OEMs (ie the senior retired brass who are now freelance journalists or employed by think tanks).

 

[ezsasa]

Disturbing isn't it?

The likes of Shiv Aroor who are going on all expenses paid trips to Sweden for SAAB and the US for Boeing and enjoy major Ad revenue thanks to the same OEMs.

Reporters going there and filing reports should be fine, even if it is a fully sponsored trip. publicity is fine.
unwanted part is where they come back and try to influence the decision makers here. lobbying is not fine.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

It is a well known fact that their are various lobbies working within forces, Let it be HAL, OFB or Armed services ..

The defence personnel needs to enter, and remain in the good books of the political class for the simple reason of remaining relevant after retirement. The political class may offer him a governor post or some other prominent post if he has been hand in glove with the establishment over issues of mutual benefit. History reveals that just before their retirement, some big deals have been struck by chiefs of armed forces, some of which were later exposed in the media. These big deals ensure that their post-retirement lives are spent in luxury.

A Good read : http://naradanews.com/2016/12/air-force-chief-sp-tyagi-augustawestland-scam-corruption-cbi/

He is talking about the media for sure and the lobbyists employed by foreign OEMs (ie the senior retired brass who are now freelance journalists or employed by think tanks).

It is really interesting that Parrikar mentioned an "INTERNAL lobby"!!! That's pretty damning accusation coming from the minister himself that there are lobbies within the government/services working against the indigenous projects!!!

Reporters going there and filing reports should be fine, even if it is a fully sponsored trip. publicity is fine.unwanted part is where they come back and try to influence the decision makers here. lobbying is not fine.

 

[Scrutator]

He is talking about the media for sure and the lobbyists employed by foreign OEMs (ie the senior retired brass who are now freelance journalists or employed by think tanks).

The criticism came directly from the Navy Chief - which was accurately reported by most news outlets. There were criticisms of the Navy Chief's statement itself by several DRDO/ADA folks. So, I am not sure if Parrikar was referring to local/foreign journalists.
The Navy Chief's statement was a little mischievous - he referred to the Naval LCA as it is today - even though it was obvious to all that LCA Navy Mk1 was only a TD!!
The right statement (if at all there indeed was a problem with the program) should have been that LCA Navy Mk2 won't meet the Navy's requirement OR that the timeline of LCA Navy Mk2 is not acceptable; but criticizing Mk1 and stirring up the pot is quite weird!!!
There could be number of reasons for this, (if we put the nefarious/suspicious reasons aside) it could be that the Navy feels jealous that Air Force is able to splurge on expensive planes while it is saddled with the cheaper ones!!!

 

[Thrishul]

The criticism came directly from the Navy Chief - which was accurately reported by most news outlets. There were criticisms of the Navy Chief's statement itself by several DRDO/ADA folks. So, I am not sure if Parrikar was referring to local/foreign journalists.
The Navy Chief's statement was a little mischievous - he referred to the Naval LCA as it is today - even though it was obvious to all that LCA Navy Mk1 was only a TD!!
The right statement (if at all there indeed was a problem with the program) should have been that LCA Navy Mk2 won't meet the Navy's requirement OR that the timeline of LCA Navy Mk2 is not acceptable; but criticizing Mk1 and stirring up the pot is quite weird!!!
There could be number of reasons for this, (if we put the nefarious/suspicious reasons aside) it could be that the Navy feels jealous that Air Force is able to splurge on expensive planes while it is saddled with the cheaper ones!!!

Maybe the Navy is reminding DRDO that the Navy is the only arm that has supported DRDO the most and they they will not be ignored anymore when DRDO wants larger orders from the Army and Air force.

 

[Scrutator]

Maybe the Navy is reminding DRDO that the Navy is the only arm that has supported DRDO the most and they they will not be ignored anymore when DRDO wants larger orders from the Army and Air force.

Insisting on twin engined aircraft seems more like a tantrum, when they've the opportunity to get Mk2 custom designed for their needs. LCA Mk2 aircraft will definitely be inferior to Rafale-M or F18; but with the complete armament package (Brahmos NG, Nirbhay, Astra etc.) LCA Mk2 will be as formidable and less expensive than the foreign ones!!

One thing that Indian military leaders still don't understood well is Macro-economics and Public-policy. If they were given some classes on these subjects they would understand that by procuring local armaments, their military budgets will sore enormously!! Because, it make good politics and public-policy for the politicians. If millions of citizens are employed in the defense industry then the government will be forced to keep buying more or newer equipment to keep the jobs. One of the big reasons US keeps building so many ships and planes is because shutting down ship-building yards and other manufacturing facilities results in job losses that makes bad politics!!!

If India truly wants to become an 'expenditure' based economy like most western countries, then the easiest way is to boost defense production(I think Modi understands this well) - the military will then get almost unlimited budgets (because all the money is getting reinvested, and no politician can ever say no to local job creation!!)

Perhaps, the Generals should be mandated to take some Macro-economic/Public-policy courses!!!

 

[Prashant12]

Cmd Balaji (ADA) says LCA Mark 2 prototype expected by 2020. Parallel development for CATOBAR capability dev in parallel for IAC2.

Also mentions that engine ha been identified. AMCA engine consultations are being done with IAF.

Cmd Balaji says 1 metre length extension for Mk-2 likely. MTOW target is in the 16-16.5 ton range.

25 percent increase in internal fuel volume for the LCA Navy Mk-2 is also a design goal.

LCA Navy Mk-2 detailed design will be completed in 18-20 months when plate cutting will begin. Raw material has already been ordered.

https://twitter.com/delhidefence

 

[Scrutator]

Cmd Balaji (ADA) says LCA Mark 2 prototype expected by 2020. Parallel development for CATOBAR capability dev in parallel for IAC2.

Also mentions that engine ha been identified. AMCA engine consultations are being done with IAF.

Cmd Balaji says 1 metre length extension for Mk-2 likely. MTOW target is in the 16-16.5 ton range.

25 percent increase in internal fuel volume for the LCA Navy Mk-2 is also a design goal.

LCA Navy Mk-2 detailed design will be completed in 18-20 months when plate cutting will begin. Raw material has already been ordered.

https://twitter.com/delhidefence

Wow!! How does 22% increase in MTOW (16.5 ton mk2 vs 13.5 ton mk1) square with a mere 15% increase in thrust (414 vs 404 engine)? Something happening that's not explicitly reported? Will GE be delivering 414-EPE or higher thrust Kaveri become available??

I thought Mk2 was gonna have 40% increase in fuel capacity; 25% seems like a slight let down! (or maybe it's 25% above LCA Navy Mk1, which I think has a slightly more fuel capacity than Tejas Mk1)

 

[airtel]

a slightly chined fuselage of LCA mk-2

 

[Bhoot Pishach]

Only Dassualt could tell you the above but I can assure you that a STOBAR Rafale-M is going to be the fastest and simplest option for the IN available (discounting the MiG-29Ks they don't want). The N-LCA has barely started its carrier qualification (it hasn't even conducted an arrested landing just yet).

When a world class OEM like DA that has decades of experience in carrier fighter says they have modelled it and the Rafale is compatible with the IN's carriers I am inclined to buy it.

Thanks for your reply.

As far as I can fathom, any aircraft to takeoff from Ski-jump two parameters are most important i.e. TWR and Wing Loading.

TWR = Available Power in proportion to weight of aircraft to propel it to speed.

Wing Loading = How much weight per sq mtr of wing area has bear to lift aircraft in air. The lower the Wing Loading lesser the effort Aircraft has to exert to lift itself in Air. Higher the Wing Loading higher the Aircraft has to exert to lift itself in Air.

Lower Wing Loading Aircraft needs much smaller Runway to lift itself up from the Runway in comparison to Higher Wing Loading Aircraft having same thrust.

How much superior will be Rafale-M to Tejas MK-2 in above parameters.

Specification of Rafale-M
Empty Weight: 10600 Kg.
Internal Fuel: 4700 Kg.
Total Take-off Weight: 15300 Kg.
(Without any weapons load)

Wet Thrust: (2X75kN) = 150kN

TWR (Without any weapons load) = 0.98

Wing area: 45.7 m² (492 ft²)
So the Wing Loading of Rafale-M with 15300Kg. = 334.7921 Kg/sq.mtr.


Specification of Naval Tejas-MK2
Empty Weight: 7000 Kg.
Internal Fuel: 3158 Kg.
Total Take-off Weight: 10158 Kg.
(Without any weapons load)

Wet Thrust: 98 kN.

TWR (Without any weapons load) = 0.965

Wing area: 38.4 m² (413 ft²)
So the Wing Loading of Naval Tejas-MK2 with 10158Kg. = 264.5313 Kg/sq.mtr.



Rafale-M Naval Tejas-MK2

TWR: 0.98 0.965
(Negligible difference in TWR of both the aircrafts)

Rafale-M Naval Tejas-MK2
Wing Loading: 334.7921 264.5313
(Vast diff of 70.26087 Kg/sq.mtr. in favour of Naval Tejas-MK2)

Hence Rafale-M will be far inferior to Naval Tejas-MK2 in Ski-jump operations.


Please also fathom:

Rafale-M has to support 15300Kg weight with 4700Kg fuel with (50kNx2=100kN) military engine thrust.

And Naval-Tejas-MK2 has to support 10158Kg with 3158Kg fuel with 58kN military engine thrust.

Hence Rafale-M will be far inferior to Naval-Tejas-MK2 in combat range. Because where Naval-Tejas-MK2 will be burning 3158Kg fuel for 50kN and weight 10158Kg while cruising. Rafale-M will be burning 4700Kg fuel with 100kN (Twin Engine) and weight 15300kg while cruising.

Caveat: As Naval-Tejas-MK2’s specifications are not clear till now, I made above calculations on following assumptions.

1) Empty Weight of Tejas in current format + 500 Kgs of weight increase in MK-2 format. i.e. 6500+500 = 7000 Kg empty weight.

2) Fuel Capacity of Tejas in current format + 700 Kgs of increase in capacity due to enlargement of Fuselage and volume increase in fuselage due realignment of landing gear from current fuselage position to wing roots.

3) Wing Area of Tejas Remains the same as on MK-1.

Please correct the above premise where you feel it is wrong.

*My only worry is - Naval-Tejas-MK-1 passes the Arrester Wire Landing without any trouble.

 

[Prayash]

DRDO to develop naval LCA Mark 2