ADA Tejas Mark-II/Medium Weight Fighter

[Sancho]

additional thrust to meet asr?? what how much more thrust you need for 6.5 ton aircrft? a 100kn engine will not be enough for you as you are anti tejas

Lol it's always funny to see Tejas fan boys actually know nothing about the fighter they claim to support. :biggrin2:
It also was very amusing to see who thanked the picture of a Mirage 2000 model, because they confused it with Tejas, until you correctly pointed it out. But once again proof, why fan boys of any fighter with no actual knowledge, can't be taken seriously.

Btw, according to IAF MK2 requires at least 90kN thrust, if not more to meet the ASR. And the GE414 won the competition to supply MK2 with higher thrust.

 

[Kshithij]

and by your assumption tejas stays lca ??? increase in empy weight automatically makes tejas medium weight we dont need your certificate..live in your dream land...

Kaveri engine has 63\98kN thrust. But current F404 has 54\84kN thrust. The increase in thrust is about 17% which means that the MToW must also raise hy same amount to about 16-16.5 tons from current 13.5 tons MToW even with some aerodynamic improvement

I don't see Tejas becoming medium weight at all.

 

[Khalsa_Panth]

Lol it's always funny to see Tejas fan boys actually know nothing about the fighter they claim to support. :biggrin2:
It also was very amusing to see who thanked the picture of a Mirage 2000 model, because they confused it with Tejas, until you correctly pointed it out. But once again proof, why fan boys of any fighter with no actual knowledge, can't be taken seriously.

Btw, according to IAF MK2 requires at least 90kN thrust, if not more to meet the ASR. And the GE414 won the competition to supply MK2 with higher thrust.

The only thign getting higher thrust is the americna prostitutes included as part of package||

Kaveri engine has 63\98kN thrust. But current F404 has 54\84kN thrust. The increase in thrust is about 17% which means that the MToW must also raise hy same amount to about 16-16.5 tons from current 13.5 tons MToW even with some aerodynamic improvement

I don't see Tejas becoming medium weight at all.

These aren't women that you judge by weight, but by role.
Interceptor, Bomber, Air Dominance.

Tejas is 1st. Rafale 2nd. SU30 3rd.

 

[Kshithij]

The only thign getting higher thrust is the americna prostitutes included as part of package||



These aren't women that you judge by weight, but by role.
Interceptor, Bomber, Air Dominance.

Tejas is 1st. Rafale 2nd. SU30 3rd.

All planes nowadays are multirole. Let us not joke ourselves by saying Su30 is not able to bomb but only air dominance. Tejas can also bomb and do air dominance.

 

[darshan978]

Lol it's always funny to see Tejas fan boys actually know nothing about the fighter they claim to support. :biggrin2:
It also was very amusing to see who thanked the picture of a Mirage 2000 model, because they confused it with Tejas, until you correctly pointed it out. But once again proof, why fan boys of any fighter with no actual knowledge, can't be taken seriously.

Btw, according to IAF MK2 requires at least 90kN thrust, if not more to meet the ASR. And the GE414 won the competition to supply MK2 with higher thrust.

the tejas mk1 we are talking about bhai not mk2 and mk2 already has 98kn engine, with 6.5 ton empty weight jets around the world how 85kn engine is under powered according to you and don't refer foolish asr again as it must be made by some dumb persons....

 

[darshan978]

Kaveri engine has 63\98kN thrust. But current F404 has 54\84kN thrust. The increase in thrust is about 17% which means that the MToW must also raise hy same amount to about 16-16.5 tons from current 13.5 tons MToW even with some aerodynamic improvement

I don't see Tejas becoming medium weight at all.

then how mirage 2k is medium weight and participated in mrca competition??

 

[Kshithij]

then how mirage 2k is medium weight and participated in mrca competition??

I am not sure of that. But, the idea of light fighter was in older times where there was clear separation between interceptor, strike etc. In those time, FBW was not available and laser guided bombs were also unavailable and hence there was a need for specialisation. Such specialisation makes no sense now

 

[Sancho]

how 85kn engine is under powered according to you.

Again you prove that you have no knowledge about LCA, otherwise you would know, that it suffers from overweight and drag issues, which makes it not able to mee the speed, turn rate or TWR requirements that were given in the LCA ASR. As any fan boy, you only react out of emotions, instead of informing yourself first and get an understanding what you are talking about.

 

[Vinod DX9]

then how mirage 2k is medium weight and participated in mrca competition??

Which MRCA competetion saw perticipation of Mirage 2000??

 

[Sancho]

then how mirage 2k is medium weight and participated in mrca competition??

It's a medium weight fighter, because it's Maximum Take Off Weight, generally fighters above 15t MTOW weight are considered to be medium class, just as anything above 30ts is considered to be heavy.
The Mirage participated in the MRCA tender, not in the M-MRCA and the early had only an upper restriction of 20t MTOW, while it also alowed a light weight Gripen C/D to join. The M-MRCA was more specific and was only for medium class fighters, just as the SE M-MRCA, or M-MRCA 2.0 now.

 

[Manish Khan]

LCA Tejas: Time to go Indigenous?

By placing an order for 123 LCA Tejas Mk1/1A and a commitment for the Mk-2 variant, the IAF has encouraged indigenous production of combat aircraft. This time, the IAF must not kill indigenous combat aircraft design capability the way it did after the HF-24 Marut project. The LCA Tejas project may have numerous flaws, but the experience gained must be used to develop the Tejas Mk-2 and the next home-grown project – the fifth generation Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA).To cover the shortage of fighter aircraft, the IAF will have to look for foreign vendors under the Make in India scheme. But whoever wins, the single or twin-engine contractor must also be involved in the AMCA project with a commitment to produce it in a finite timeframe.

 

[HariPrasad-1]

You have to compare Gripen E with Tejas Mk2. Gripen E has empty weight of 8tons and f414 engine but MToW of 16.5 tons. This 17.5 MToW is the suspect. How does Tejas have 1 ton more MToW when engine ia similar to F414? How will the eztra payload be adjusted? The 2 hardpoints at wing tips are meant for air to air missile only. So, rest 5 hardpoints carrying close to 5.5tons (0.5tons for wing tip missiles) is a bit outlandish. The Gripen E has 4.5 ton payload in 5 hardpoints which is reasonable. 5.5 ton in 5 hardpoints is impractical

Theoretically speaking, 66 KN engine can carry 16.5 ton payload in ideal condition and I do not know why they are claiming 17.5 Tons. Actually, they should have kept the empty weight low bellow 7.5 tons to make the plane better. LCA Mk1 is 300 kg lighter than Gripen C so Mk2 should be at least 400 Kg to 500 KG lighter and bellow 7.5 tons. That will give it a (16.5-7.5-3.5(fuel)) =5.5 ton useful payload. For MTOW of 17.5 tons, 70 kg dry thrust is required.

 

[Jumbo]

Now onwards, what about LCA Tejas Mk2...……….!

 

[Thrishul]

There is no medium combat version of MK2, both are the same. MK2 with the planned changes increase it's weights into the medium weight class, that's all.

Incorrectly worded my question.
Do we know the length, width and wing are of the MK2, especially the Naval version?

 

[Jumbo]

Incorrectly worded my question.
Do we know the length, width and wing are of the MK2, especially the Naval version?

Try this -------> http://aermech.in/hal-tejas-mark-2-advanced-variant-of-lca-tejasindian-armed-forces/


It says ----->
...............….Modifications to Airframe and Engine
Minor modifications are being made to the LCA Tejas Mk1 airframe to accommodate the slightly larger engine.It will have a length of 14.2 metres (1 metre more than that of the Tejas Mk 1, for incorporating a stretched nose section and a modified fuselage section aft of the cockpit for housing an expanded complement of mission avionics LRUs), height of 4.6 metres (as opposed to 4.4 metres of the Tejas Mk 1, to accommodate an enlarged vertical tail-section) and a wingspan of 8.2 metres, same as that of the Tejas Mk 1, that, however with an increased wing area...……..…………

 

[ersakthivel]

Just that NLCAs LEVCONS are limited to a few positions only, since they are not intended to improve manuverability, but slow speed handling during carrier landings. The Su 57 LEVCONS are far more advanced, since they will be operated in the full flight envelop and coupled with the TVC as well, but it's certainly the canard replacement of the future, as Airbus is showing too.

Please explain me the physics behind, "limiting", LEVCONs to few positions only,,,

There is no such thing as limited position LEVCONs anywhere in the world.

What they did was to, limit the "testing " for NLCA LEVCONs to a few positions pertaining to landings & take offs,

as anything beyond that is out of scope as far as NLCA is concerned.

Now mk2 is a detailed new program, so the scope of LEVCONs will be tested to the full potential or will be replaced with canards.


You as usual interpret it as limited
LEVCONs of LCA,,,,, & unlimited operation of Flanker LREX


Hilarious explanation,,,,

 

[ersakthivel]

The EPE is supposed to use CMC blades instead of metal blades. It will provide higher temperature tolerance than rhenium based superalloy including 3rd generation SCB. But that is a distant dream.

Ceramic Material Coating over SC Blades is more like it, to withstand corrosion & temperature


Iam yet to read ceramic blades completely replacing metal blades.

 

[ersakthivel]

Sadly you still don't understand the basics. The ASR for Tejas didn't asked for a medium class fighter, but for a specific flight performance. So IAF doesn't care about DRDOs pointless claims about MK2 being medium class, but that it offers the performance an actual air defence fighter should have and not something comparable to strike fighters. They wanted a light class fighter, with the performance that MK2 is promising!

Secondly, meeting the original ASR for Tejas, doesn't mean MK2 can meet the ASR for MMRCAs, because as the recent RFI showed, IAF asks for load capabilities and techs, that Tejas doesn't offer.
So no matter what "Maximum Take Off Weight" MK2 will have, it still won't be comparable to MMRCAs in most fields. That's why IAF for 2 decades is saying, we need a Tejas version that meets it's own goals and more capable MMRCAs above it, to protect the country, not one or the other!
And since I belive that this government will remain in power, a cost-effective MMRCA is sadly the most likely choice, be it SE or TE.

ASR,,,
ASR, ,,
ASR,,,

This Rhona, dhona hasn't stopped yet,,,,, crazy.


There is no fighter in the world which complied with design aims 100%.

Some specs in shortfall, some in excess is the norm.

We talked about it endlessly in #Tejas_LCA hash tag in Twitter.
Pulling a few random specs from assorted fighters of different nature & asking Amato fulfill it in a small 6.3ton fighter is height of stupidity,

Which ASR jags, migs & su30 complied with to enter IAF,,,
Suffice to say Tejas MK1A goes far above 80% of IAF Fighters in operation.



ADA Too knows this & is now optimizing mk2 along the lines of gripen E.
GET OFF THIS ASR high horse business.

 

[Kshithij]

Ceramic Material Coating over SC Blades is more like it, to withstand corrosion & temperature


Iam yet to read ceramic blades completely replacing metal blades.

The current blades already have ceramic coatings to enable about 300 kelvin/celsius increase in TET. The SCB blades are unlikely and it is likely to be 2nd generation DS blades.

SC blades have 3 generations. First generation has no rhenium while second and third have 3% and 6% rhenium. The TET increase is 40 degrees every generation. In case of DS, the 1st generation DS is superior to first generation SC blades as blades are rotating with a directional force. The 2nd generation SCB is better than 2nd generation DS by 25-30 celsius/kelvin due to rhenium in SCB. So, overall, the difference between 3rd generation SCB and 2nd generation DS is about 70 kelvin.

But the advantage of DS is that it does not require rhenium and hence not dependent on imported resource. The TET difference of 70 celsius is not much and the engine can be made with some compromise on the lifespan. For comparison, TET of F404 is 1700K, Al31F is 1687K while M88 (which has rhenium) is 1850K. So, a TET of 1750K is enough to give the required thrust with slightly higher TWR than M88 and lower lifespan but good enough for domestic production.

 

[ersakthivel]

Lol it's always funny to see Tejas fan boys actually know nothing about the fighter they claim to support. :biggrin2:
It also was very amusing to see who thanked the picture of a Mirage 2000 model, because they confused it with Tejas, until you correctly pointed it out. But once again proof, why fan boys of any fighter with no actual knowledge, can't be taken seriously.

Btw, according to IAF MK2 requires at least 90kN thrust, if not more to meet the ASR. And the GE414 won the competition to supply MK2 with higher thrust.

Where is the IAF ASR for mk2,,,,

I haven't seen or heard about it anywhere on planet earth,

Does it exist in Mars,,,,,

LOL, funny stuff this ASR Business,,


Be careful about parroting Mk1 didn't achieve ASR ITR, STR Because of drag, extra weight, blah, BLAH, ,,


You should know the basic fact that the extra drag of Tejas due to lax following of area ruling manifests only in supersonic flight regimes,,, it troubles Tejas in going supersonic at sea level according to earlier CEMILAC report

Even this waS resolved after Tejas went supersonic st sea level in Gos hot summer trials, with high temp, & humid conditions.

ITR, STR etc are always specified for subsonic corner speeds, where this so called "drag" doesn't even exist.

6.3 ton empty weight of Mk1 compares favorably with gripen C empty weight,

Also most of the, "advertised" peak ITR, STR figures are applicable only in ISDA standard conditions of sea level & 20 DEG(approx) temp, with far less humidity conditions,

Which are far different from Indian conditions In which Tejas operates,

Still many blokes bluff fashionably, "that due to Mk1 failing to achieve, ASR ITR, STR due to excess drag& weight", IAF is asking for mk2, blah, blah,

Even a cat in ADA lab will laugh its ass off at such stupid statements.