ADA Tejas Mark-II/Medium Weight Fighter

[ersakthivel]

The MMRCA was not an original need . It was born from the 126 Mirage-2000 buy proposal which was shot down because of single vendor situation by MOD in 2004 which may lead to corruption allegation, thus it became MMRCA.

If MOD promptly accepted the 126 mirage-2000 buy from IAF there would be no MMRCA 20 ton class medium fighter in IAF. So how come it has become a burning need all of a sudden now blowing a hole of 20 plus billion in forex outgo?

Now it is clear that tejas mk-2 will exceed Mirage-2000 in all parameters, even Mk-1 is said to handle much better than the Mirage-2000. So tejas mk-2 can easily surpass the original need of MMRCA contract for 124 Mirage-2000 contract.

Even after upgradation the Mirage-2000 will have low thrust weight ratio and lower radar tracking and detection range and much lower long range BVR missiles than even tejas mk-!!!

We could have bought 60 brand new Tejas mk1 for the cost!!! with far more close combat capability even though of lesser range.

When we launch mars mission we line up before swiss for 20 year old pliatus saying we don't have a decent turboprop trainer to match it!!!!

the IAF is still keeping a stony silence on tejas mk-3 proposal from V.K.Saraswath for years. the french could upgrade their mirage-2000 to twin engined Mirage-4000 in four years but IAF has not lobbied with MOD to allocate money for the tejas mk-3 project even after V.k.saraswath's comments on many techs conceptualized for the discarded MCA can be use and it will be much more stealthier all the while,

For the past ten years IAF delayed finalizing ASR for single lcally produced twin engine fighter , whether it is the discarded MCA , or LCA mk-3 proposal. And already release three revised ASRs for AMCA which has made the design sit at NAL forever for airframe designs study for over a decade.

No one inquires why such criminal delay is happening when it comes to issuing ASR for local stuff and then they are progressively upgraded as time goes by while we are ready to relax the specs for T-90 , FGFA and pay mountain of money for not so needed RAAFLE.

meanwhile the navy quietly builds the Arihant , frigates destroyers and even air craft carriers of local design while IAF and Army Q up for TATAR trucks t-90. T-90s Tanks and Pliatus trainers.

But we will funnel billions to Sukhoi even without knowing what is the final RCS of the FGFA which is flying with hotch potch fixtures and old lower power engine as of now!!!!.

 

[rugved]

French and Israeli pilots who have unofficially flown the Tejas Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) have gone gaga over its flying attributes.

Is this in any way cajoling India to finalise the Dassault Rafale deal?

 

[Godless-Kafir]

Actually at Aero India i suggested to a few Junior scientists to lentgen the fuselage and nose.

The Tejas would have been better if the flaps ended like on the F-22 whose elevators ends behind the TVC. That way the aircraft would have been nose heavy and more more manuverable like the su-30 design and they could have added Canards to.

I wonder why the LCAs range is only 300kms compared the JF-17s 2,000km range???? Anyone?

 

[ersakthivel]

Actually at Aero India i suggested to a few Junior scientists to lentgen the fuselage and nose.

The Tejas would have been better if the flaps ended like on the F-22 whose elevators ends behind the TVC. That way the aircraft would have been nose heavy and more more manuverable like the su-30 design and they could have added Canards to.

I wonder why the LCAs range is only 300kms compared the JF-17s 2,000km range???? Anyone?

http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/...8-combat-aircraft-technology-evolution-8.html
more on range comparison here

300Km is combat radius for tejas may be with full load and internal fuel ony not sure , for JF-17 should also be similar,

They both have the same ferry range of 3000 Km,Mirage-2000 and F-16 also have the same ferry range . So in all probability they will have similar combat range and radius .

Also if we take into account the hot weather climate of india in which Tejas figures are based . For hot arid weather the range power and close combat specs are degraded in significant amount for all fighters.

Simply put the range is a function of fuel fraction it is roughly the same across Mirage-2000(bit higher) f-16 , tejas, Grippen and JF-17.

cranked delta does the same job of canards i.e directing the high pressure airflow from vortex generated by lesser swept leading edge of the wing near the wing root on to the upper surface of the wing and stopping the boundary layer separation at high AOA.

This in effect gives a better lift to drag co efficient in all flight regimes providing for higher ITR and decent STR.

It is all related to the total design philosophy of the fighter. Even with no canards only LREX Su-35 far exceeds the SU- 30 with canards.F-22 and FGFA also have no canards . And FGFA is slated to have a same compound delta(not cropped delta like F-16 or SU-30 MKI) with LEVCONS in the exact N Tejas mk-2 planform.

So all modern designs are dropping canards also.

canards have RCS implications and don't allow the wing to get fully stream lined laminar air flow at all flight regimes to allow the wing to perform with max efficiency.

Also pilot induced oscillations will lead to uncontrollable spin and crash like the one that happened on a few Grippen prototypes.

But cranked delta and LEVCONS being part of the wing don't have these problems while at the same time performs the same job of canards vortex generation,

Canards do act as additional control surfaces but the same has been provided on tejas with far bigger control surfaces attached to the wings.

 

[p2prada]

I wonder why the LCAs range is only 300kms compared the JF-17s 2,000km range???? Anyone?

Apples and oranges. You are comparing operational combat radius vs range.

 

[pmaitra]

Actually at Aero India i suggested to a few Junior scientists to lentgen the fuselage and nose.

When was that?

 

[ersakthivel]

fuselage lengthening was suggested by CEMILAC many years ago and it has been taken up in mk-2, as the weight increase it would entail will call for the higher powered Ge 4141 engines,

We don't know whether some cross section smoothening is being carried out in the 40 SP versions without fuselage length increase

there are some reports that the this has been done on of the SP version along with some other mk-2 modifications for weight but not yet confirmed.

 

[ersakthivel]

IMHO the 200 Kg ballast must have been placed simulating excess weight component that will need to be added as new requirements arose which is a standard practice in any test flight program. For example if IRST needs to ne added to Tejas mk-1 . Then we can replace this ballast with IRST equipment .

In the same way this 200 KG extra weight will also replicate the performance of MK-2 .Since in the same way it will simulate the fuselage plug to be added for MK-2 to increase it's weight.

SO he is not far off the mark when he says this. may be he did not give detailed explanations but it is more or less correct.

Riaz Khokar in his critical article about Tejas mk-2 expectations also referred to this 200 KG ballast weight in tejas mk-2 and feigned ignorance of it. he should know any way that it simulates the excess weight that may be added in future if IAf asks for further additions. Since the many weight saving exercise were carried out already reducing the weight of the mk-1 close to a ton this ballast if it is still used in mk-1 will simulate the excess weight of the mk-2.

Who did all the IOCs and FOCs for SU-30 MKI? The sukhoi guys? No. Even before the SU-30 MKI was finished as a product IAF put money into it based on the performance of base line version of Su-30 . Without gettng so many OCs a squadron of less tested F-35 are already opertating. Also russian airforce is gearing up to introduce without insisting on so many changes and 2300 flight tests spanning 14 years ,
Just four or five prototypes of PAKFA are up in the air with older engines originally not meant for it. The new engine for PAKFA is yet toget certification.

Then how can the Russian airforce introduce PAKFA next year with fewer than 1000 sub standard test flights with fixtures on the air frame and old lesser power engines on which it is running now?

SO the author is correct on this count as well.

wiki states the Range 850 KM and ferry range 3000 KM for tejas MK 1.

MK 1 can fly 2X850 Km =1700 KM .

If MK 1 can fly 1700 KM than certainly MK2 with additional 40% fuel can at least fly more than 50 percent long distance.SInce reserve fuel back up levels will be the same for mk-1 and mk-2 along with the fact it is the take off and sharp manoeuvres which eat up most fuel not cruising at a comfortable fuel burn ratio as per design.

After all GE404 is a highly fuel efficient engine and GE 414 IN S 6 goes one step further and it is more advanced than the older engines on RAFALE .



.So MK2 will have close to 75 % of rafale's range in normal design load normal internal fuel condition in which most of the IAF missions are carried out.

You can't go lugging tons and tons of extra fuel (bullock cart level close combat performance config )into heavily defended PAk and Chinese air space defended by F-16 newer blocks and chinese flanker versions in the same way french are flying over next to no defence air spaces of male and Afganisthan. SO even if IAF attempts fly with such heavy external fuel tanks on the first blush of contact with defending fighters those fuel tanks will be dumped.

Fuel capacity of 2 engine Rafale with a few more tons of extra empty weight is 4700 KG against the few tons lesser weight single engine LCA MK2 which has 3000 to 3400 KG of internal fuel.

So for normal combat missions which demand high close combat performance with full internal fuel only tejas mk-2 will have almost close to the same range as RAAFLE.

In addition tejas mk-2 has air to air refuelling in buddy mode as well .

Mk2 can carryout 80 percent of the missions which Rafale can. And we have extra super Sukhois FGFA s to cover the remaining 30 percent. With french already wiggling out of TOT commitments with "HAL ---no good " certificate close to 30 billion dollar expenditure is a sheer waste of money on a redundant acquisition , if you consider the sjy high upgrading price for Mirage 2000 will repeat itself for RAFALE . then we can operate close to 250 tejas mk-2 and 50 extra Super Sukhoi fighters which has complete TOT including engine in our hands,

And last but not the least tejas mk-2 will have even lower wing loading with comparable TWR and a a ten percent higher top speeds of mach-2 meaning that tejas mk-2 has better designed air frame using the latest composite tech with close to 60 percent of it's weight in composites as suggested by CEMEILAC.

it will have the same long range BVRs and same powered ASEA radar with matching antena dia as RAFALE.

Some people are misquoting the clean config RCS of tejas mk-1 as a third of mirage -2000. But the proper quote that can be read from B. harry's vayu piece on tejas is

"tejas will have a third of clean config RCS of the latest 4th gen fighters in design phase. When this comment wa made i only TYPHOON and RAFALE was in the works not Mirage-2000.

So with no canards and more aerodynamic and RCS optimization that will take place for tejas mk-2 along with far lesser physical dimensions than the TYPHOON and RAFALE you can rightfully expect tejas mk-2 to have far lesser clean config RCS than the RAFALE as well.

Also the single engine of tejas mk-2 will release more than 40 percent lesser heat energy into the atmosphere . it means a substantially lesser IRST detection range as well.

So for the close to 20 percent shortfall in range over RAFALE Tejas mk-2 has some very significant advantage over RAFALE in home air space defence as well.

the ASEA for tejas mk-2 is also getting ready with foreign collaboration as well. And tejas mk-2 will always be upgradable with whatever longer range BVRs supplied in future from russia for FGFA as well. As we are doing the avionics and radar integration on FGFA we can port these close to 200 KM range BVRs on tejas mk-2 as well with no hefty fees and least hassles.

Thats what the test pilot Suneth krishna said that tejas is a modular fighter easily upgradable in batches as all it's design knowledge is here.

The weapon load is never a problem we can operate 3 Tejas mk-2 for the cost of one RAFALE with far lesser per hour operation cost as well.

That means fo the same price we will have three RAFALE sized ASEA radars with three EW suits along with 21 pylons carrying close to 30 air to air missile=s if dual rack launch pylons are added in future.

"



SO even though making a few mistakes like naming the HPT 40 as HJT 44 and mistaking the comments of french pilots as test flight comments the author is correct by and large, If at all the author mentioned the rejection by IAF of HPT-35 effort by HAL then there would be more questions to be answered.

 

[ersakthivel]

EMPTY WEIGHT OF TEJAS ( Target Weight was around 6 ton and not 5.5 ton )

TD-1 ------ 6,780 kg with Flight Test Instrumentation
TD-2 ------ 6,670 kg with Flight Test Instrumentation
PV-1 ------- 6,430kg (reduced 350kg of weight)

the above empty weight of Tejas from the link below which quotes WWW.LCA-TEJAS.ORG

PV-1 had flight testing equipment . according to sources these equipments weigh around 300 KG extra . bu no source for that.

Air Marshal Rajkumar wrote about TD1

"It was therefore not very surprising that the aircraft tipped the scales at 6,780 kg with Flight Test Instrumentation (FTI) against a targeted weight of around 6,300kg. Program managers very wisely decided to launch a weight reduction exercise."

regarding PV-1, he wrote

"The airframe weighed 6,430kg when complete which meant the weight reduction exercise had reduced 350kg of weight, a praise worthy achievement."

.

And further B. Harry whose article Radiance of tejas is considered most accurate says this about weight reduction exercise,
Originally projected to achieve 500 KG weight reduction from TD-1's 6780 KG. the designers finally achieved 746 Kg of reduction on PV-1, So it takes the PV-1 weight to around 6 tons. PV-1 still has flight test equipment on board,

Further weight reduction from PV-1 onwards is proposed to be achieved by reducing the number of LRUs by combining many functions into one and removal of telemetry equipment,

And it said that further design optimization was on to reduce the weight of the metal parts further, and it will reach the 5.5 ton empty weight target eventually for Mk-1 is what he says,

Further the Cemilac also issued weight reduction advices with replacing few engine mountings with composites and many other measures,

So if we get the final weight of SP-1 we will see clarity on the issue,

And according to B. harry with further weight optimization tejas is supposed to lift 4 ton external load with 12.5 ton max take off weight and 13.5 ton all up weight,

And considering the Leh take off of LCA with two heavy external fuel tanks in under 12 seconds (at higher altitudes it is tough to lift heavy weight) it is possible it can carry 4 ton external stores with 12.5 ton MTOW and 13.5 ton all up weight. This is for mk-1.

fuel tanks are one 486 KG in front of the plane, 1200 Kg for wing fuel tank, 800 Kg for fuselage fuel tanks totalling 2.5 tons in mk-1

Mtow 12.5 ton with 4 ton weapon load means 12.5-4=8.5 tons-2.5 tons for fuel=6 tons empty weight,

So if any one knows more about about the weight reduction exercise and final empty weight of tejas please post.

This is what i read somewhere about weight reduction in LSP-7 and 8, forgot the link,

the removal of on-board telemetry instrumentation has reduced the 'Tejas' Mk1 LSP-7's weight by 400kg.

Secondly, by re-engineering l of the cockpit-mounted AMLCDs and related sub-systems, 300kg weight in reduced in on LSP-8.

So with a new fuel tank in the extended fuselage plug in front and extra volumes on the center line fuselage tank and substantially large capacity owing to increased wing area due to the need to have the same wing loading will lead to all around fuel weight increase in mk-2 ,


With percentage of composites slated to go up from the present 45 percent in weight to 60 percent in weight in mk-2 there may not be much weight increase is what the designers say. And still further weight reduction exercises are in progress for mk-2.

So we can expect mk-2 to have a much better fuel fraction than mk-1 .

http://www.techeyetech.com/tejas-may-be-battle-ready-by-2015.html
quotes empty weight as 5680 kg and MTOW 13.5 ton for MTow for tejas mk-1,

Is it real?

 

[AVERAGE INDIAN]

LCA Tejas fires a R-73 Infrared Air to Air Missile, scores direct hit

Read more: LCA Tejas fires a R-73 Infrared Air to Air Missile, scores direct hit
Frontier India - news, Analysis, Opinion
Follow us: @frontierindia on Twitter | frontierindia on Facebook

 

[ladder]

LCA Tejas fires a R-73 Infrared Air to Air Missile, scores direct hit

Read more: LCA Tejas fires a R-73 Infrared Air to Air Missile, scores direct hit
Frontier India - news, Analysis, Opinion
Follow us: @frontierindia on Twitter | frontierindia on Facebook

Why have you posted it in mk-2 thread?

 

[AVERAGE INDIAN]

Why have you posted it in mk-2 thread?

because the missile will be used by both MK1 and Mk2 jets , there is no separate arsenal for mk2 as of now and neither is inducted if inducted it will be used by both

 

[ersakthivel]

Tejas LCA sprints towards IAF's frontline squadron | Business Standard

That landmark event will be the award of the Tejas' Initial Operational Certificate (IOC), which will allow the country's first indigenous modern fighter to be flown by regular pilots of the Indian Air Force (IAF). The first Tejas squadron (18-20 fighters) will be based at Sulur, near Coimbatore.

So far, only highly qualified test pilots of the National Flight Testing Centre (NFTC) in Bangalore have flown the Tejas. In the 2,400 test flights since it took to the air in 2001, the NFTC has incrementally flown the Tejas higher, faster and carried out increasingly difficult manoeuvres and weapon firings to test it meets the IAF's requirements.

On Saturday, Group Captain Suneet Verma, a veteran NFTC test pilot, fired an air-to-air missile from the Tejas at an airborne target off the Goa coast, striking the target and taking the Tejas a step closer towards IOC.

While awarding the IOC, Antony will ceremonially hand over to the IAF boss, Air Chief Marshal N A K Browne, the fighter's "Release to Service Document (RSD)", which specifies the capabilities the Tejas has already demonstrated during flight testing.

This includes aerodynamic capabilities like speed, acceleration, climb rate and angle of attack; and also the basic weapons operations already tested on the Tejas, and the fighter's proven radar and sensor capabilities. The Tejas flight-testing programme has been a prolonged and painstaking exercise, since this is India's first modern fighter. The Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA) - a special purpose vehicle of the Defence R&D Organisation (DRDO), set up to manage the Tejas programme - worried that a crash during flight-testing might be a fatal blow to the project itself, and so has handled flight testing cautiously, taking twice the time that experienced countries do.

Once the IOC is awarded, Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL) will build the IAF's first 20 Tejas fighters on a brand new production line in Bangalore. HAL has told Business Standard that it aims to roll out the first two fighters by March 2014, deliver eight fighters by end-2014, and then enhance the production line's capability to 16 fighters a year.

So far, the IAF has committed to just 40 Tejas fighters. Of these, 20 will be built to IOC standards, and the next 20 ordered when Final Operation Clearance (FOC) is obtained. The defence minister has ordered the DRDO to ensure the FOC is not delayed beyond end-2014.

Avinash Chander, the DRDO chief, tells Business Standard the FOC will involve firing a range of different weapons, including missiles and bombs, and testing the fighter for mid-air refuelling.

"With the IAF now enthused about the Tejas, and participating actively in the project, we will surely obtain FOC next year. We could not have completed over 450 test flights this year without close cooperation between the IAF, ADA and HAL," says Chander.

After obtaining FOC for the Tejas, ADA will start work on the Tejas Mark II. The key change is replacing the General Electric F-404 engine that powers the Mark I with the larger, more powerful GE F-414 engine. This will involve re-engineering the Mark I to fit in the bulkier F-414, a technological challenge for ADA.

ADA has also briefed Business Standard that the Tejas Mark II would have more fuel capacity for added range; a retractable mid-air refuelling system; a DRDO-built Airborne Electronically Scanned Array radar; world beating air-to-air missiles; an on-board oxygen-generating system, and a state-of-the-art Electronic Warfare suite to confuse enemy radars and sensors. "Eventually, the IAF is very likely to have at least 200 Tejas fighters in its fleet," says Chander.

 

[Kyubi]

Tejas LCA sprints towards IAF's frontline squadron | Business Standard

Would have been very happy if IAF would have ordered not just 20 but at least 40 until FOC later another 40 .. this would have given impetus to HAL Tejas Mk1 production line. This way HAL could speed up its production line capability.

 

[ersakthivel]

So the air to air refueling probe is to be tested for tejas mk-1 FOC itself.

And now it is being officially stated by ADA that tejas mk-2 will have a DRDO built ASEA radar . SO developmental work must be going on for such a radar.

Also most of the testing for tejas mk-2 will not be as time consuming for Mk-1 as most of the niggling problems have been sorted out in mk-1 itself.And the aerodynamic layout of cranked delta was validated by the many sensors in combo with Air Data System on mk-1 itself, with the aerodynamic layout behaving as predicted in the wind tunnel design specs.

Also most of the weapon firing on mk-2 is expected to mirror tejas mk-1 with no new issues relating to them.

And a ready production line is available to make Mk-2 prototypes with an established eco system of suppliers and a quality assembly line.

I hope now Dassault guys who cawed that HAL is unfit for even receiving TOT for RAFALE should be eating crow.

Almost all of the tech that was to be on F-3 standard for RAFALE is now going to be on tejas mk-2( composite, HMD , air to air refueling, mission computers , weapon release softwares , top notch avionics and fully internal EW suit along with IRST and fly by wire tech are in mk-1 itself) , so what is the motive behind the good for nothing certificate for HAL from Dassault ?

 

[ersakthivel]

Would have been very happy if IAF would have ordered not just 20 but at least 40 until FOC later another 40 .. this would have given impetus to HAL Tejas Mk1 production line. This way HAL could speed up its production line capability.

Many in IAF who spilled crocodile tears for the death of young pilots in Mig-21 crashes are very shy of ordering another 20 Tejas mk-1 that will speed up the replacement of Mig-21 and boost the country's air defence.

 

[Kyubi]

Many in IAF who spilled crocodile tears for the death of young pilots in Mig-21 crashes are very shy of ordering another 20 Tejas mk-1 that will speed up the replacement of Mig-21 and boost the country's air defence.

Sometimes i fail to understand the logic behind retaining junk when it is for sure that the junk in engineering terms will be very unreliable.. I wonder whether the older mig 21's are subjected to reliability analysis....????

 

[ersakthivel]

Sometimes i fail to understand the logic behind retaining junk when it is for sure that the junk in engineering terms will be very unreliable.. I wonder whether the older mig 21's are subjected to reliability analysis....????

Well they were all tested for their air frame life. problems is in finding good quality critical spares for them as their makers have dis continued it's production .

Also the engine of the air frame of mig-21s had issues from their design itself , so it can not be helped.

What aggravated the problem was the very late procurement of advanced jet trainers that made young pilots to be put on this hard but agile to fly Mig-21 with not enough training to handle the power of Mig-21.With human factors too contributing to half of the losses.

 

[Kyubi]

Well they were all tested for their air frame life. problems is in finding good quality critical spares for them as their makers have dis continued it's production .

Also the engine of the air frame of mig-21s had issues from their design itself , so it can not be helped.

What aggravated the problem was the very late procurement of advanced jet trainers that made young pilots to be put on this hard but agile to fly Mig-21 with not enough training to handle the power of Mig-21.With human factors too contributing to half of the losses.

I do agree, but my understanding on the availabilty of parts is rather different.. in this forum it self i came across a thread where there was a report of the russians selling their entire line of production of MIG 21's to us inclusive of parts etc..
[I do not have official report to corroborate this information but i do have a link where u were dicussing this particular isssue.. ]
http://http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/newreply.php?do=postreply&t=45058
If it is true then we could have also improved the quality of parts and probably worked upon the issues (if they were any)with the airframe, engine etc this would have helped in speeding up our R&D and increased our Knowledge database..

Please do correct me if my assumptions are wrong ..

 

[Decklander]

It appears that ac from No-45 sqn will be moved to MOFTU and the LCA MK1 will replace them within this month. I believe about 4 LCAs are ready for delivery within 30 days.