ADA Tejas Mark-II/Medium Weight Fighter

[shiphone]

NP5 in the making -

Source - IN Metal Video.

 

[johnj]

Answers inlined.
<sg> If Tejas Mk1 was a world class fighter jet, we wouldn't build only 40 of them.
<sg> Is Gripen a world-class fighter jet? Which engine does it have?
The Indian private sector anyway has started manufacturing OEM components for GE engines - which private sector & what OEM components?
<sg> Look at the project profiles of TASL & which OEM components it's making for Lockheed Martin & Boeing.
Engine is the most important part of a aircraft, without local engine we can build a world class fighter jet not the world best.
<sg> Says who? Gripen, LM, Eurofighter, Mitsubishi - none of them manufacture engines yet they manufacture the best fighter jets in the world.
If India can fund nuclear pgrm, then can also fund engine pgrm, and its depends on gov.
<sg> Different field, different challenges plus R&D expenses don't depend on volumes for optimizing cost.

we are buying 123 of them, not 40.
when us put sanctions on sweden ?
LM & Boeing is not GE.
lol, gripen is a jet, not a company & not world best jet, it is rejected by best jets in mmrca.
LM is US company, and using US engine and US funding, Eurofighter is a jet, not a company, and EJ200 developed for EF2000, Mitsubishi- what jet ?
lol, turbofan tech having multiple uses, and its worth multi billion $ business & are so saying Indians are stupid becz they started R&D in turbofan project or developing fighter gets? - if your answer is yes, no more comments.

 

[sakalasiva]

during AI2019 it was called Medium Weight Fighter, but from AI2021, they stared calling it again as LCA-Mk2 instead of MWF. I guess the reason might be IAF. They may have thought that kadi ninda may shove it down their throat and cancel MRFA if he realises that Mk-2 is also in the same category as Gripen-E/F & F-16

Even Gripen E and f16 is considered as light weight category. Since we build LCA which is even smaller than above 2 does not promote them to medium weight category. Likewise mk2 does not give you that range and weapon carrying capacity that are comparable to medium weight fighter.

 

[Hari Sud]

Even Gripen E and f16 is considered as light weight category. Since we build LCA which is even smaller than above 2 does not promote them to medium weight category. Likewise mk2 does not give you that range and weapon carrying capacity that are comparable to medium weight fighter.

The Mk2 is a medium west fighter. Stop dreaming about it being not.

 

[IndianHawk]

Even Gripen E and f16 is considered as light weight category. Since we build LCA which is even smaller than above 2 does not promote them to medium weight category. Likewise mk2 does not give you that range and weapon carrying capacity that are comparable to medium weight fighter.

Mk2 will have 70% of the payload of rafale and similar range to rafale on internal fuel.
It's certainly in medium category.

 

[Okabe Rintarou]

Even Gripen E and f16 is considered as light weight category. Since we build LCA which is even smaller than above 2 does not promote them to medium weight category. Likewise mk2 does not give you that range and weapon carrying capacity that are comparable to medium weight fighter.

Western airforces consider them light weight because they follow the Light-Heavy classification. IAF considers them medium weight because they follow the Light-Medium-Heavy classification. In their book, MiG-21 and LCA are light fighters.
Although technology creep plays a role in all these classifications. For example, IAF's last bomber aircraft that retired in mid 2000s was classified as a "medium bomber". Yet it carried less payload than a "Light" multirole fighter like Tejas. So yeah, at this point its like trying to tell frigates and destroyers apart. Better to focus on capability and role.

 

[silverghost]

we are buying 123 of them, not 40.
<sg> The 83 that IAF is buying is Mk1A not Mk1 and please don't tell me there is no difference between the two. If there was no difference we would be manufacturing Mk1A now not testing Mk1A with changes.
when us put sanctions on sweden ?

<sg>The Mk1, Mk1A, Mk2, and AMCA are all being designed with GE engines in mind. Even if you have an indigenous engine which is = GE in performance - what is the probability that you can replace the GE engines in these existing jets? Does anybody know the answer?

LM & Boeing is not GE.

<sg> Looks like my point eluded you all together. GE specializes in engines & propulsion systems whether the use-case is locomotive, power plants, aircraft, power boats, or ships (even Vikrant uses GE turbines & propulsion). They sell these to anybody who is not sanctioned & is interested in buying their products. This gives them the volumes required to invest tons of money in R&D to develop & improve their engines & propulsion systems. Spending money to design engines for a small no. of fighter jets is prohibitively expensive.

lol, gripen is a jet, not a company & not world best jet, it is rejected by best jets in mmrca.

<sg> Gripen is manufactured by Saab if you need to be pedantic and is being used by Hungary, Poland, South Africa, UK, Thailand, Brazil in addition to Sweden. Brazil is considering buying 30 more Gripen in addition to the one they have purchased, Botswana too, is about to place an order. The only fighter jet that can boast their nos. within the years of 2000-2022 is F16 Blk 60, Blk 70. I think they are world-class.

Gripen stands rejected by IAF because on paper it is too close to Tejas Mk2. BTW, MMRC will go the same way as the other fighter jet procurement processes have gone. Just wait.

LM is US company, and using US engine and US funding, Eurofighter is a jet, not a company, and EJ200 developed for EF2000, Mitsubishi- what jet ?

<sg> LM, GE, and Boeing are all private companies headquartered in the US. They are funded by capital markets & are major defense contractors. They will design & manufacture fighter jets for anybody (who is not sanctioned by the US Govt).

You probably have not heard of Eurofighter GmBH (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurofighter_GmbH) which is why you are making these statements. EJ200 is an engine that has been developed by the collaboration of Rolls Royce, MTU, Avio, and ITP by EuroJet GmBH which was founded in 1986 to pool resources because developing a new engine from scratch was challenging & cost prohibitive.
(BTW, even those guys have built 571 Eurofighters & counting so far - do you envisage us building 600+ of Mk2, AMCA, or TEDBF? They all may need different engines).

lol, turbofan tech having multiple uses, and its worth multi billion $ business & are so saying Indians are stupid becz they started R&D in turbofan project or developing fighter gets? - if your answer is yes, no more comments.

<sg> These are all your conclusions and have nothing to do with what I said in my post.
I have a very simple point: "ADA/HAL should focus on building a world-class fighter jet & not get distracted by other orthogonal challenges". Once they have proven they can do so in substantial numbers & the fighter jets can be compared with the likes of F16 Blk 70, Gripen NG, etc. They can experiment with engine change or whatever else they have in mind.

 

[Indx TechStyle]

The Mk2 is a medium west fighter. Stop dreaming about it being not.

Mk2 will have 70% of the payload of rafale and similar range to rafale on internal fuel.
It's certainly in medium category.

Any fighters below 25 tonnes MTOW are considered light by most standards.

 

[NutCracker]

Even Gripen E and f16 is considered as light weight category. Since we build LCA which is even smaller than above 2 does not promote them to medium weight category. Likewise mk2 does not give you that range and weapon carrying capacity that are comparable to medium weight fighter.

What rubbish , Why Grippen varients appear as contender in both old and current MMRCA tenders ??

And also F-21 in MMRCA2.0

 

[NutCracker]

What rubbish , Why Grippen varients appear as contender in both old and current MMRCA tenders ??

And also F-21 in MMRCA2.0

SAAB and lock Mart can take part in MWF tenders across the world shamelessly , but with what facevalue HAL can take part when our own IAF top ranks are hesitant to call it MWF.

Remind you all that MK2's internal+payload matches to the F-21 by LM.

 

[johnj]

The 83 that IAF is buying is Mk1A not Mk1 and please don't tell me there is no difference between the two. If there was no difference we would be manufacturing Mk1A now not testing Mk1A with changes.
- lol, mk1a is a upgraded version of mk1. for you info, first two sqn[40] for testing & evaluation, google how many ioc jet brought by other similar AF.
<sg>The Mk1, Mk1A, Mk2, and AMCA are all being designed with GE engines in mind. Even if you have an indigenous engine which is = GE in performance - what is the probability that you can replace the GE engines in these existing jets? Does anybody know the answer?
- first of all, mk1, mk1a are same aircraft, for ex. mk1 like first batch of mki and mk1a, mass produced version, and all mki uses same engine and airframe[except first ones]. mk1a is the jet iaf want, and mk1 is the best ada can do, and major difference is fcr, and ioc and foc having more difference than foc with mk1a, means iaf buying 5 type of lca- ioc1, ioc2, foc, foc aesa, trainer and all are different, also iaf using different type of mki also. Ans. all version of mk1 [trainer/ioc1/ioc2/foc/a/etc.. b,c] going to use ge404 in their entire life, no replacement, rest [all mass produced jets] gets new local engine, 5th gen one.

Looks like my point eluded you all together. GE specializes in engines & propulsion systems whether the use-case is locomotive, power plants, aircraft, power boats, or ships (even Vikrant uses GE turbines & propulsion). They sell these to anybody who is not sanctioned & is interested in buying their products. This gives them the volumes required to invest tons of money in R&D to develop & improve their engines & propulsion systems. Spending money to design engines for a small no. of fighter jets is prohibitively expensive.
- this is were you get all wrong, your biggest mistake, if kaveri was a success, right now 200 lca inducted to iaf and use those tech in multiple sector including locomotive, power plants, aircraft, power boats, or ships and currently testing replacement for lm2500, no need for foreign engine, in future.

<sg> Gripen is manufactured by Saab if you need to be pedantic and is being used by Hungary, Poland, South Africa, UK, Thailand, Brazil in addition to Sweden. Brazil is considering buying 30 more Gripen in addition to the one they have purchased, Botswana too, is about to place an order. The only fighter jet that can boast their nos. within the years of 2000-2022 is F16 Blk 60, Blk 70. I think they are world-class.
- yes, gripen is a world class fighter, but not the world best, and mk1a/foc is similar to grippen.

Gripen stands rejected by IAF because on paper it is too close to Tejas Mk2. BTW, MMRC will go the same way as the other fighter jet procurement processes have gone. Just wait.
- IAF rejected gripen becz, IAF only allowed to choose 2 aircraft, lca has nothing to do with it and ef2000 and rafale were the best, also gripen uses ge engine.

LM is US company, and using US engine and US funding, Eurofighter is a jet, not a company, and EJ200 developed for EF2000, Mitsubishi- what jet ?

<sg> LM, GE, and Boeing are all private companies headquartered in the US. They are funded by capital markets & are major defense contractors. They will design & manufacture fighter jets for anybody (who is not sanctioned by the US Govt).
- Sanctions is the key word, so this theory useless for us.Considering your theory, if pak pays, they sell info about India systems which uses their parts.

You probably have not heard of Eurofighter GmBH (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurofighter_GmbH) which is why you are making these statements. EJ200 is an engine that has been developed by the collaboration of Rolls Royce, MTU, Avio, and ITP by EuroJet GmBH which was founded in 1986 to pool resources because developing a new engine from scratch was challenging & cost prohibitive.
- what is the purpose of ej200 ? and when lca/ef2000 pgm started ?
(BTW, even those guys have built 571 Eurofighters & counting so far - do you envisage us building 600+ of Mk2, AMCA, or TEDBF? They all may need different engines).
lol- they all use same engine, first ge ones, then 110KN ones.

lol, turbofan tech having multiple uses, and its worth multi billion $ business & are so saying Indians are stupid becz they started R&D in turbofan project or developing fighter gets? - if your answer is yes, no more comments.

<sg> These are all your conclusions and have nothing to do with what I said in my post.
I have a very simple point: "ADA/HAL should focus on building a world-class fighter jet & not get distracted by other orthogonal challenges". Once they have proven they can do so in substantial numbers & the fighter jets can be compared with the likes of F16 Blk 70, Gripen NG, etc. They can experiment with engine change or whatever else they have in mind.
That why I wrote, No engine, no plane. we lost a decade of development thanks US sanctions, in other words, instead of ge engine and US support, if we choose russian engine and russian support, at least 100 of lca flying by now. here cannibalism is the key word. Do you know how may different type of engine lca mk1 using ? The biggest plus and minus of lca is its engine - reliable when US happy and unreliable when US unhappy.
US consider Pak as allay and India as a market and counter weight against china, and give freebies to pak to counter enemies, but not for india, China is a great market for US and gateway to access market in asia and africa[currently & near future, as long as US keep tech dominance]

I read in the forum, I read Snecma asked for 6 bil $ for JV, I think- they are tying to take maximum benefits, considering India need 1000s of engine for tedbd, amca, lca mk2 etc and caatsa. Also, after s400 deal, goi said, india going to buy nasams 2, and cancelled nasams due to cost. GoI no longer interested in offsets, becz it unable to provide any tech transfer[pointing mainly US]. HAL is manufacturing engines of russian fighters, in future ge414. [IAF brought c17, chinook, ah64 and still operates il76, mi26, arming mi 17] US banned sale of arrow, elm 2052 in first place, and comes top when putting sanctions on India. Only reason US supporting India is due to issue with China.
Indian Armed forced buying US weapons lack of good alternatives, IAF wanted ej200 and goi brought ge414, 99 engine with local/hal manufacturing. IAF like gripen than f16/f21.

 

[IndianHawk]

Any fighters below 25 tonnes MTOW are considered light by most standards.

Medium fighter jet requirement was originally for 126 Mirage jets.

Even in 2006 original mmrca competition IAF invited both f16 and gripen to be part of it.

To be honest whole medium high category is nonsense what matters is swing role capabilities for which aircraft must be capable of carrying decent payload so that it can do multiple mission at once.

 

[Blademaster]

during AI2019 it was called Medium Weight Fighter, but from AI2021, they stared calling it again as LCA-Mk2 instead of MWF. I guess the reason might be IAF. They may have thought that kadi ninda may shove it down their throat and cancel MRFA if he realises that Mk-2 is also in the same category as Gripen-E/F & F-16

LCA Mk2 is not the same plane as LCA Mk1. It is a totally different plane. There is no LEVCONs, they added canards and increased the size of the intakes and elongated the spine and increased the wing area. Totally different plane.

 

[karn]

LCA Mk2 is not the same plane as LCA Mk1. It is a totally different plane. There is no LEVCONs, they added canards and increased the size of the intakes and elongated the spine and increased the wing area. Totally different plane.

They didn't change the wing area. They perhaps changed the wing fuel tanks and strengthened it for more load .. but the wing area and shape are exactly the same.

 

[Blademaster]

They didn't change the wing area. They perhaps changed the wing fuel tanks and strengthened it for more load .. but the wing area and shape are exactly the same.

What about the wing roots and leading edge and trailing edge?

 

[karn]

What about the wing roots and leading edge and trailing edge?

All that may be related to strengthening for load but keeping the same wing shape helps reduce flight validation time.

 

[sakalasiva]

What rubbish , Why Grippen varients appear as contender in both old and current MMRCA tenders ??

And also F-21 in MMRCA2.0

Totally out of context who is speaking about MMRCA or MRFA. We are discussing about whether mk2 is medium category fighter or light category fighter.

 

[NutCracker]

Totally out of context who is speaking about MMRCA or MRFA. We are discussing about whether mk2 is medium category fighter or light category fighter.

Check my next comment , it's not out of context. Both grippen and F-16/f-21 are contenders for past and present MMRCA tenders, while having nearly same spec as MK2.

 

[sakalasiva]

Mk2 will have 70% of the payload of rafale and similar range to rafale on internal fuel.
It's certainly in medium category.

Hmm. There is no well defined parameters for medium category. If IAF want to call mk2 as LCA then we need to follow it. If they want to 25 Ton aircrafts like rafale, AMCA as medium weight category fighters what we need to call the fighters which are 2/3 weight category of them. End of the day it's IAF decision as they are the users.

 

[sakalasiva]

Check my next comment , it's not out of context. Both grippen and F-16/f-21 are contenders for past and present MMRCA tenders, while having nearly same spec as MK2.

Ok what way that thing liked to my comment.