ADA Tejas Mark-II/Medium Weight Fighter

Superdefender

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2016
Messages
1,207
Likes
1,085
But #Immanuel, will you admit atleast that mk. 2 will have very high % of cfc than Rafale, F-18, etc making it ultra light, super manueverable and very strong compared to those?
 

archie

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 20, 2013
Messages
535
Likes
366
Country flag
We are leading exporters in generics - 20+ years old produtlcts

What about new drug discovery ?
How many new drugs have Indian cos discovered
How much money does India's pvt sector spend on new drugs r&d ?


Will our def forces buy 20-30 years old products ?

Not a sane comparison

Go ask new manufacturers.. they will say turmeric is the best antiseptic... in lot of cases wisdom of India is being recognized.. BTW india has been the leading the way of surgeries and medicine for a looooong time...

Do you still think Tejas as a 20 year old product??? when all of the world is looking at it with great interest??
 

Superdefender

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2016
Messages
1,207
Likes
1,085
Why not. Look at Gripen NG. It is comparable to anything in medium catagory. If we make MK2 out of naval MK2 i.e 1.5 m longer than Tejas Mk1 and put 118 KN engine than it shall certainly be comparable to any MMRCA. It will do 9g, AOA may go to 30* or more and It should cruise a mach 2.0 with a range of 3000 KM. Sucess of design lies in proper deign of air intake , Wings, Aerodynamics and keep the weight in check. Last is certainly should not be a problem area any more.
But, AMCA engine will be 116 kN, so how can mk. 2 engine be 118 kN!? And it will cruise at mach 2! Then speed in afterburner=??? Even top speed of Rafale is 1.8 and that of F-35 is 1.6!
 

HariPrasad-1

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2016
Messages
9,624
Likes
21,097
Country flag
We are leading exporters in generics - 20+ years old produtlcts

What about new drug discovery ?
How many new drugs have Indian cos discovered
How much money does India's pvt sector spend on new drugs r&d ?


Will our def forces buy 20-30 years old products ?

Not a sane comparison
Do not ask irrilevent questions and something I never stayed. There was a marely a sell of 20% indian made drugs when we opened up the economy. Now it is almost 100% made in india.

Have i said that we should buy 20 to 30 years old product? Read my post once again. I said that let hem come here and produce without any assurance of purchase.
 

HariPrasad-1

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2016
Messages
9,624
Likes
21,097
Country flag
But, AMCA engine will be 116 kN, so how can mk. 2 engine be 118 kN!? And it will cruise at mach 2! Then speed in afterburner=??? Even top speed of Rafale is 1.8 and that of F-35 is 1.6!
I am not talking about proposed Airforce MK2. I am talking about Airforce version of Naval MK2 which shall be 1 m longer than Proposed Mk2 of Airforce. It will have 20 KN more powerful engine. It shall have ideal length to reduce wave drag. Its dimensions shall be comparable to Gripen NG. I simply urge to drop Proposed MK2 of Airforce and curve out one from Naval LCA Mk2.
 

Superdefender

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2016
Messages
1,207
Likes
1,085
I am not talking about proposed Airforce MK2. I am talking about Airforce version of Naval MK2 which shall be 1 m longer than Proposed Mk2 of Airforce. It will have 20 KN more powerful engine. It shall have ideal length to reduce wave drag. Its dimensions shall be comparable to Gripen NG. I simply urge to drop Proposed MK2 of Airforce and curve out one from Naval LCA Mk2.
Hmm, why are carrier fighters are bigger than their basic versions? F-35C is also bigger than F-35A/B! Will they not take more space in AC? I also support mk. 2 only for Navy, but not for IAF. IAF should involve in mk. 3.
 

HariPrasad-1

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2016
Messages
9,624
Likes
21,097
Country flag
Hmm, why are carrier fighters are bigger than their basic versions? F-35C is also bigger than F-35A/B! Will they not take more space in AC? I also support mk. 2 only for Navy, but not for IAF. IAF should involve in mk. 3.
I DO NOT KNOW WHETHER THEY ARE BIGGER BUT THEY ARE HAVIER FOR SURE AS THE MOT REINFORCEMENT IS NEEDED TO STRENGTHEN CERTAIN PARTS SUCH AS LANDING GEAR AND BODY STRUCTURE.
 

tsunami

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2015
Messages
3,386
Likes
15,936
Country flag
Hmm, why are carrier fighters are bigger than their basic versions? F-35C is also bigger than F-35A/B! Will they not take more space in AC? I also support mk. 2 only for Navy, but not for IAF. IAF should involve in mk. 3.
Larger wing area to increase lift for short take off. More fuel for long range operations.
 

Superdefender

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2016
Messages
1,207
Likes
1,085
Larger wing area to increase lift for short take off. More fuel for long range operations.
Yes, that is required for carriers with STOVL system. But CATOBAR system springs aircrafts out of AC, resulting quick launch and saves fuel. Also no large wing is required as you donot require lift, you are literally thrown out of AC! So why bigger naval aircraft now?
 

tsunami

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2015
Messages
3,386
Likes
15,936
Country flag
Yes, that is required for carriers with STOVL system. But CATOBAR system springs aircrafts out of AC, resulting quick launch and saves fuel. Also no large wing is required as you donot require lift, you are literally thrown out of AC! So why bigger naval aircraft now?
Nope even catobar carrier fighters do need it. You have to understand that if the required minimum speed is not reached then fighter will not fly. So more lift decreases that speed, it is easy to catapult through a fighter which need less takeoff speed.
 

Superdefender

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2016
Messages
1,207
Likes
1,085
Is it true that INS Vikrant will carry 20 x Mig-29K, 15 x N-Tejas mk. 2 and 6 choppers, totalling 41 fixed and rotary wing aircraft (Source: wiki)? INS Vikramaditya, despite of heavier than IAC-1, will carry only upto 36 aircraft (Source: wiki) ! HOW???
 

Rowdy

Co ja kurwa czytam!
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2014
Messages
3,254
Likes
3,061
Yes, that is required for carriers with STOVL system. But CATOBAR system springs aircrafts out of AC, resulting quick launch and saves fuel. Also no large wing is required as you donot require lift, you are literally thrown out of AC! So why bigger naval aircraft now?
Because when you use an arrestor wire, you introduce large amount of stresses. The structure must be able to withstand them.
**********NERD ALERT*************
Here is the same case illustrated with cantilever beams.


Assume M is the moment (also called torque = F.L). The above image shows a small beam element , along whose length the moment increases from M to M+dM.
THE FOLLOWING ASSUMES A CONSTANT DENSITY.
The ability to withstand this moment is depend on the mass (heavier the mass , more "strong") and also how the mass is distributed (is it thin and far away or "tight" and together ) because this is a 3D world baby.
So taking this into account we define the second moment of Area. Which is Q in the above pic. It is just the product of the area with how far it is. so if 2 m^2 is 2 meter away and 1 m^2 is 4 m away , they have the same moment of area and have similar "strength".

Tau here is the shear stress(stress developed when force is parallel to surface.), I (=mr^2)the moment of Inertia which plays the role of mass. b is length and Q is the moment of area (how mass is distributed).
Key thing to remember is we can apply a force but a stress is actually the reaction to the force developed inside the material. Also when the stress crosses a set limit,called breaking stress (which varies with the material), the material will break. For e.g Human skin breaks at a stress of 20 Mega pascles normal to the skin and most materials break at 60% of that value when applied parallel so 20*.6=12 MPa) For Steel it can be as high as 800 depending on the type. so 60% of that when Shearing (applying force parallel to the surface) so it would fracture at 800*.6=480MPa.
Now since Tau (shear stress) is directly proportional to Q(increases with increase in Q) and inversely proportional to I , so you increase I (give more mass) to withstand the arrestor cables and end up decreasing Tau(everything else remaining same) which sounds good (less stress = more strong) but now you have to increase size of wings etc as you need to carry more weight. :( which means increase in Q which means increase in Tau(= easier breakdown) :( :( .
The designers job is to find a balance between these two.
For more info you can read Timoshenko's beam Theory here
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timoshenko_beam_theory
 

garg_bharat

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2015
Messages
5,078
Likes
10,139
Country flag
Catapult system is maintenance intensive. Ski ramp is maintenance free.

Once you install catapult system, you become dependent on the supplier for the life of the ship.

I do not know about IN, but I doubt political establishment is so sure of cooperation of any country in the long term.

IN has learned a lot about Russian ships. To the point that Russian systems can be replaced with Indian systems. Russians have also transferred a great deal of technology to India which has been absorbed by Indian industry.

Western weapons are practically black-box to India. If something goes wrong, only the supplier can fix it.
 

garg_bharat

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2015
Messages
5,078
Likes
10,139
Country flag
LCA Tejas Mark-2 is too early to discuss I think. The issue remains stabilization of production of Mark-1.
Unless IAF starts receiving Tejas in decent numbers, any further models are difficult to imagine.
 

tharun

Patriot
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2014
Messages
2,149
Likes
1,377
Country flag
Increase in length by 1 meter and wing area we can easily get 800km combat radius.........
 

tharun

Patriot
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2014
Messages
2,149
Likes
1,377
Country flag
Using automatic fibre laying machine we can easily make 16-20 tejas every year....to replace mig-21's
But lazy HAL will never do this...atleast private must do....
 

PaliwalWarrior

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2014
Messages
844
Likes
319
Well people were saying that iaf has wisened up and got fully involved in tejas project

And beginning to think and act like Indian navy wrt Indian products

But

The following news does not inspire confidence and runs contrary to the above arguments


http://idrw.org/tejas-mk-ii-needs-to-evolve-into-a-better-platform-for-iaf-source/

Saying that iaf is not interested in tejas mk2 as of now ?

If it were IN it would have been very much interested and pushing for faster development paralelly to tejas mk1 and tejas mk1a

Iaf will suddenly wake up one day and say

Here is what we require from tejas mk2 and look development of tejas mk2 will take a long time

We can't wait and we have urgent requirement

So lets import

They know this govt may or may not be in power iin 2019 so they see a chance to kill tejas mk2 post 2019 and they can again go back to imports

Old habits die hard
 

Latest Replies

New threads

Articles

Top