ADA Tejas (LCA) News and Discussions

[Rahul Singh]

but kaveri is not

Most challenging of all so quite natural. But in time it will. Just continue working. I believe HTFE-25 is the beginning a revolution. God willing we will succeed.

 

[cyclops]

Tejas FOC is inching closer...............

 

[Rahul Singh]

Why was hot refueling a FOC requirement if no other IAF aircraft has it?

You would be surprised to know many biases Tejas had to endure before Mr Pariker took control over it.

However, Hot Refuelling was never required on LCA. Apparently, on MK-1A it is.

HOT refuelling was already proven on N-LCA. So it was not much of a challenge to do a repeat on AF Tejas. Anyway, kudos to HAL for the job well done. The sight of Refuelling probe is most heartwarming.

 

[Aghore_King]

Most challenging of all so quite natural. But in time it will. Just continue working. I believe HTFE-25 is the beginning a revolution. God willing we will succeed.

Here is some good news i think...
https://www.latribune.fr/entreprise...pulse-par-le-moteur-m88-du-rafale-769696.html
use Google translate

 

[Chinmoy]

Why was hot refueling a FOC requirement if no other IAF aircraft has it?
We know that aerial refueling is available for multiple of IAF jets. If that is possible, I don't understand why HAL claims this is the first IAF aircraft that has hot refueling.

Hot refueling and IFR are two different objectives with its own jet of issues. IFR is done through probe which is placed well away from the engine. So chances of an accidental fire due to spillage is very less although the chances of static charge fire is always there.

But in case of hot refueling, it is done directly at the fuel intake which lies in the vicinity of the running engine. So the chances of a mishappen increases by many fold.

 

[Narasimh]

Here is some good news i think...
https://www.latribune.fr/entreprise...pulse-par-le-moteur-m88-du-rafale-769696.html
use Google translate

So Macron's visit could bring some good news for Kaveri

 

[Rahul Singh]

NlCA undergoing hot refuelling (a long time ago).

Tejas undergoing hot refuelling.

While in case of NLCA angle of camera shot and ambient temperature clearly caught hot refuelling in action. In case of Tejas (only AF version is called such), the mesh cover on engine intake is creating a certain degree of ambiguity, astonishingly on BR.

To all those who are finding it hard to understand. Mesh cover which for the first time is being seen on Tejas (certainly to avoid FOD) along with auxiliary air intake shall provide enough inflow of air when the engine is kept in idle(during Hot Refuelling it's SOP).

SU-30MKI can even do taxi with mesh cover on. So, I don't think why Tejas can not even keep its engine in idle.

Tejas with normal intake cover. Colour code is enough to differentiate between their functions.

 

[lcafanboy]

L'avion de combat indien Tejas bientôt propulsé par le moteur M88 du Rafale ?

Par Michel CABIROL | 26/02/2018, 6:56 | 227 mots

La prochaine visite d'Emmanuel Macron en Inde pourrait relancer la coopération entre Safran et l'Inde pour motoriser l'avion de combat léger, le Tejas. (Crédits : © Regis Duvignau / Reuters)

Safran et l'Inde seraient près de signer un partenariat pour développer un moteur pour l'avion de combat léguer Tejas à partir du M88 qui motorise le Rafale.

Le moteur M88 bientôt à bord du Tejas? C'est dans le domaine du possible même si avec l'Inde la prudence est toujours de rigueur. Selon nos informations, les négociations entre Safran, soutenu par l'Etat français, et l'Inde (plus précisément le DRDO -Defence Research and Development Organisation) sont en très bonne voie pour motoriser l'avion de combat léger indien (LCA) avec le M88 dans le cadre du programme Kaveri qui doit être ressuscité. Elles pourraient prochainement aboutir et ce nouveau partenariat franco-indien pourrait faire l'objet d'une annonce lors du voyage d'Emmanuel Macron en Inde, le 10 mars prochain.

Motorisé de façon transitoire par General Electric (F404 F2J3), New Delhi souhaitait à l'origine développer un moteur indien. Mais les déboires dans le développement du Kaveri, qui n'a pas répondu aux besoins exprimés, a entraîné un abandon en 2014. Depuis 2016, Safran est à nouveau à la manœuvre pour proposer le M88 dans le cadre d'un transfert de technologies en vue de motoriser le Tejas ("glorieux" en sanskrit) dans la cadre du "Make in India". Cet avion de combat a été lancé dans les années 1980 par New Delhi, puis le design de l'appareil a été arrêté dans les années 1990. Enfin, le premier prototype TD-1 a effectué son premier vol le 4 janvier 2001. Le Tejas a été commande à 123 exemplaires.


The Indian fighting aircraft Tejas soon powered by the M88 engine Rafale?

Saffron and India are close to signing a partnership to develop an engine for the combat aircraft bequeath Tejas from the M88 which powers the Rafale.

The M88 engine soon aboard the Tejas? It is in the realm of the possible even if with India the prudence is always de rigueur. According to our information, the negotiations between Safran, supported by the French State, and India (more specifically DRDO -Defence Research and Development Organization) are well on their way to power the Indian light combat aircraft (LCA) with the M88 as part of the Kaveri program that needs to be resurrected. They could soon succeed and this new Franco-Indian partnership could be the subject of an announcement during Emmanuel Macron's trip to India on March 10th.


Transiently powered by General Electric (F404 F2J3), New Delhi originally wanted to develop an Indian engine. But the setbacks in the development of the Kaveri, which did not meet the needs expressed, led to an abandonment in 2014. Since 2016, Safran is again at the forefront of proposing the M88 as part of a technology transfer in motorized Tejas ("glorious" in Sanskrit) as part of "Make in India". This fighter was launched in the 1980s by New Delhi, then the design of the aircraft was stopped in the 1990s. Finally, the first prototype TD-1 made its first flight on January 4, 2001. The Tejas was ordered to 123 copies.

==============================================================================

"Safran aura le contrôle de Zodiac Aerospace début 2018" (Philippe Petitcolin, DG de Safran)


Sur le Rafale, avez-vous des espoirs d'augmenter la poussée du moteur ?

Nous n'avons pas eu de discussions à ce sujet avec la DGA (direction générale de l'armement), l'armée de l'air et la marine, qui sont les utilisateurs du Rafale. A titre personnel, je milite pour une augmentation de la poussée du moteur M88 parce que je pense qu'à terme, l'avion en aura besoin. L'avion a grossi depuis son origine - ce qui est normal - mais le moteur est resté le même. Que le moteur augmente sa puissance paraitrait être une décision normale, mais c'est aux armées et à la DGA de la prendre. Le risque serait qu'on se rende compte un jour que le moteur n'est plus assez puissant par rapport à ce qu'on veut faire faire au Rafale, et Safran va se retrouver sous la pression alors que nous aurions tout le temps aujourd'hui de lancer cette évolution.

Pourquoi ne pas commencer par une petite augmentation de la poussée du M88 ?

La poussée du M88 peut effectivement passer de 7,5 tonnes à plus de 8 tonnes - entre 8 et 8,3 tonnes - sans toucher aux entrées d'air, donc sans toucher à l'avion, simplement en travaillant sur le moteur. Soit une augmentation d'une dizaine de pourcents. Au-delà, si la DGA et les armées souhaitent aller vers des gammes de puissance supérieures, de type 9 tonnes par exemple, la modernisation du moteur passerait par une modification plus structurelle du Rafale.

N'y a-t-il pas une crainte sur les bureaux d'études ?

Il y a effectivement un problème de maintien des compétences dans le domaine du militaire qu'il ne faut pas sous-estimer. Il est réel.

Un contrat export pourrait-il être le déclencheur de cette modernisation ?

C'est peut-être possible avec l'Inde et son moteur, le Kaveri. Aujourd'hui, le M88 est fiable et répond aux besoins. Pour les armées, c'est donc toujours difficile de mettre la priorité sur une telle évolution.

Où en êtes-vous sur le Patroller ? Pourquoi ne pas le proposer à l'export ?

Le développement se passe bien. Je ne souhaite pas pour le moment que Safran le propose à l'export parce que je veux vraiment assurer une bonne fin de développement. L'armée de Terre nous a fait confiance, c'est à nous d'honorer cette confiance en livrant à l'heure le produit aux conditions que nous avons garanties. Tant que nous n'aurons pas atteint un niveau où j'estimerai que le produit est bien né, je n'autoriserai pas les équipes à faire de la prospection sur ce produit à l'export. Pourquoi ? Comme nous faisons appel plus ou moins aux mêmes équipes, je veux vraiment qu'elles se concentrent totalement sur la réalisation du contrat que nous avons signé. Bien sûr, je serais ravi d'avoir des commandes export.

"Safran will have control of Zodiac Aerospace early 2018" (Philippe Petitcolin, CEO of Safran)

On the Rafale, do you have any hopes of increasing engine thrust?

We have not had any discussions on this subject with the DGA (Directorate General of Armament), the Air Force and the Navy, which are the users of the Rafale. On a personal note, I am arguing for an increase in the thrust of the M88 engine because I think that eventually the plane will need it. The plane has grown from its origin - which is normal - but the engine has remained the same. That the engine increases its power would seem to be a normal decision, but it is up to the armies and the DGA to take it. The risk is that we realize one day that the engine is not powerful enough compared to what we want to do Rafale, and Safran will be under pressure when we have all the time today to launch this evolution.

Why not start with a small increase in the thrust of the M88?

The thrust of the M88 can actually go from 7.5 tons to more than 8 tons - between 8 and 8.3 tons - without touching the air intakes, so without touching the plane, simply by working on the engine. An increase of about ten percent. Beyond that, if the DGA and the armies wish to move towards higher power ranges, such as 9 tonnes, the modernization of the engine would require a more structural modification of the Rafale.

Is there not a fear on the design offices?

There is indeed a problem of maintenance of skills in the military field that should not be underestimated. He is real.

Could an export contract be the trigger for this modernization?

It may be possible with India and its engine, the Kaveri. Today, the M88 is reliable and meets the needs. For armies, it is always difficult to prioritize such an evolution.

Where are you on the Patroller? Why not offer it for export?

The development is going well. I do not wish at the moment that Safran proposes it for export because I really want to ensure a good end of development. The Army has trusted us, it is up to us to honor this confidence by delivering the product on time to the conditions we have guaranteed. As long as we have not reached a level where I estimate that the product is well born, I will not allow teams to explore this product for export. Why ? Since we are using more or less the same teams, I really want them to focus totally on completing the contract we signed. Of course, I would love to have export orders.

 

[Prashant12]

LCA Tejas LSP-8 successfully completes Hot Refuelling Trial

Inching close to the Final Operational Clearance (FOC), the Tejas completed a hot refueling trial followed by a sortie at HAL airport, Bengaluru yesterday. The system performance during the refueling session was in-line with design requirements and was satisfactory.

In the history of the Indian Air Force, LCA will be the first aircraft to fly with this unique capability of hot refuelling.

Hot Refuelling is a single point pressure refuelling of the aircraft with the engine in operation. It is a process by which a fighter aircraft is refuelled (in between sorties) while its engine is in operation, thereby cutting down the refuelling time by half and turn-around time significantly. This capability is highly desired in combat situation which basically puts aside the need for the pilot to park the aircraft, power down and exit the cockpit for refuelling to begin.

https://www.facebook.com/tejas.lca

 

[Rahul Singh]

Just put that Pole in a Hole. It's about time

 

[PD_Solo]

Just put that Pole in a Hole. It's about time

It has apparently done that to the import lobby and paid media.
Slowly but surely.

 

[Rahul Singh]

It has apparently done that to the import lobby and paid media.
Slowly but surely.

Yeah! A long time ago with the latex provided by a chemist named M Parrikar.

 

[Sancho]

View attachment 23457

7 hardpoints with an option for 2x MER on inner board pylons not enough for you?

First of all, the inner wing stations will care fuel tanks.
Secondly that's enough for a light class fighter, in basic roles, but not to defend the country against superior numbers of modern fighters and offensive strikes beyond our border. That's why you need more capable fighters, that can carry more loads, if necessary to further ranges, or simply to require less fighters per mission. While LCA can do what it was meant to do, if it gets the required capabilities.

The truth is, in-service Tejas is giving confidence to every stakeholder

The truth is, confidence is good to make sight seeing flights for VIP's, but for war tines you need capability and that is only available after achieving FOC and developing MK2.

 

[Rahul Singh]

First of all, the inner wing stations will care fuel tanks.
Secondly that's enough for a light class fighter, in basic roles, but not to defend the country against superior numbers of modern fighters and offensive strikes beyond our border. That's why you need more capable fighters, that can carry more loads, if necessary to further ranges, or simply to require less fighters per mission. While LCA can do what it was meant to do, if it gets the required capabilities.

Firstly. The inner stations will carry 2400 litres of extra fuel only when the mission requires doubling the endurance and range from +30 minutes and +300 KM(lo-lo-lo) respectively. Still, it will have 2x outboard, 2x mid-board, 1x centre-line and 1x EL/OP station free. Which means apart from carrying 2x 1200 liter drop tanks on inner-board stations, it can carry 4x AAMs on wings and 1x Exocet class ALCM on centre-line.

Certainly, such a load configuration speaks of a self-escorted deep deep strike mission into Pakistani theatre and into TAR.

Still, it is one of many load configuration that Tejas can carry. Which is to remind that inner board stations are not only to suitable to carry fuel only. It is a multipurpose station. As depicted in pic i had posted earlier carrying 2x 500 pounders in tandem configuration per inner-board station.

Secondly. Tejas MK-1 is a light category fighter just like Gripen C. It could do what both are meant to do.

Tejas was supposed to be just a point interceptor. But today GCI concept is gone and Tejas is a swing role fighter.

During a campaign such as Cold-Start Tejas can not only take out border defence of Pakistanis with its A2G weapons but also can conduct anti-armour and provide Air cover to our invading army. Still few of many mission in carrying out in Pakistan.

The truth is, confidence is good to make sight seeing flights for VIP's, but for war tines you need capability and that is only available after achieving FOC and developing MK2.

This confidence has come from advance technologies which have gone into Tejas which has ensured not safe flying but also allowed operational tempo as impressive as +3 sorties per day and clocking 600 hours in a year with just 5 Tejas. Still, we are only at IOC phase.

FOC is just another milestone. It only means incorporation of suggested changes learned and for to be necessary after putting IOC varients in its expected roles. Which is what is being done.

The inclusion of upcoming weapons is an ongoing process and forever it will be.

It is said that Genious in a Kid known since the birth. Small glimpse is in this video. And )old video. Besides how many of Tejas contemporaries entered service with such capabilities.

 

[Rahul Singh]

clocking 600 hours in a year with just 5 Tejas

It is 600 hours in a year and a half with just 5 Tejas............

My apologies.

 

[Rahul Singh]

Enjoy.........................................

 

[Sancho]

Firstly. The inner stations will carry 2400 litres of extra fuel only when the mission requires doubling the endurance and range from +30 minutes and +300 KM(lo-lo-lo) respectively.

Wrong, for any strike mission 2 x 1200l fuel tanks are required, just as any CAP mission requires 2 x 800l fuel tanks in the same inner wing stations. More weight with bombs increases the fuel requirements, just as longer endurance in patrol missions, require more (if possible super sonic) fuel tanks as well.
That leaves just 2 mid wing stations for bombs or BVR missiles not both and why you need twice the number of light class fighters, compared to a medium class fighter, with more hardpoints (Gripen C vs Gripen E for example).

Still, it is one of many load configuration that Tejas can carry. Which is to remind that inner board stations are not only to suitable to carry fuel only. It is a multipurpose station. As depicted in pic i had posted earlier carrying 2x 500 pounders in tandem configuration per inner-board station.

That was an old wind tunnel model, that was based on Jaguar weapon loads. But even the Jag today, don't use that kind of configuration anymore, because guided bombs are the standard, which require more space than dumb bombs.
Look up the ADA mission configs in this thread and you will get a more realistic idea LCA loads in different missions.

Tejas was supposed to be just a point interceptor. But today GCI concept is gone and Tejas is a swing role fighter.

You are using terms that you obviously don't understand, because earlier you claimed IAF wanted it to be a multi role fighter and now even confuse it with a swing role fighter.

Single role fighter = a fighter that has only capability for 1 role, like Jaguars or LCA IOC, or Mig 29 during Kargil war.

Multi role = a fighter that can be used for either strike or A2A roles, depending on current the need, Gripen C, LCA FOC, Mirage 2000 during Kargil war.

Swing role = a fighter that has the load capability, to do a strike mission and directly switch to A2A role, without landing and re-arming, like MKI, MMRCA, or even upgraded Mirage 2000.

Tejas was always suppose to be a 4th gen multi role fighter, because that was the standard for the time when it was meant to enter service. Also by that time frame, it was ok to have pulse doppler radar and external SPJs (see Mirage 2000 in Kargil). But those times are gone and the current standard are AESA radars, integrated EW and to do more with less fighters, by reducing the need for dedicated escorts, or sortI numbers, by using the same fighter for self escorted strike missions, or swing roles, that only require mid air refuelling. So while you can upgrade the radar and EW of a light class fighter, adding or freeing hardpoints to make it more capable is difficult. That's why MK1A and MK2 were planned with the same 7+1 hardpoints.

This confidence has come from advance technologies which have gone into Tejas which

True, the proven and reliable GE 404 engine.

FOC is just another milestone. It only means incorporation of suggested changes learned and for to be necessary after putting IOC varients in its expected roles. Which is what is being done.

FOC is the key milestone, to make Tejas at least somewhat useful for the primary roles it was meant to do, air policing and interceptions. IOC can't do that, by the lack of fully integrated gun and missiles. FOC still will lack flight performance, but at least will finally be a multi role fighter.

 

[Rahul Singh]

Wrong, for any strike mission 2 x 1200l fuel tanks are required, just as any CAP mission requires 2 x 800l fuel tanks in the same inner wing stations. More weight with bombs increases the fuel requirements, just as longer endurance in patrol missions, require more (if possible super sonic) fuel tanks as well.
That leaves just 2 mid wing stations for bombs or BVR missiles not both and why you need twice the number of light class fighters, compared to a medium class fighter, with more hardpoints (Gripen C vs Gripen E for example).

ROFL!!!!!!!!!!!!

For strike missions in general? Really? Where you read that a strike mission irrespective of distance will always require 2x drop tanks?

You really believe that when ADA stated Range of LCA it did not account for total combat load and flight profile? This is getting really hilarious.

Just to give you an idea. The distance between Pathankot and Lahore is 145 km. And between Srinagar and Skardu it is 154. Tejas has a range of 500km on internal fuel alone.

Tejas was always suppose to be a 4th gen multi role fighter, because that was the standard for the time when it was meant to enter service. Also by that time frame, it was ok to have pulse doppler radar and external SPJs (see Mirage 2000 in Kargil). But those times are gone and the current standard are AESA radars, integrated EW and to do more with less fighters, by reducing the need for dedicated escorts, or sortI numbers, by using the same fighter for self escorted strike missions, or swing roles, that only require mid air refuelling. So while you can upgrade the radar and EW of a light class fighter, adding or freeing hardpoints to make it more capable is difficult. That's why MK1A and MK2 were planned with the same 7+1 hardpoints.

One more thing that has changed with time is the introduction of Multi-ejector Racks/Rails.Thereby increasing effective no. of stations without any structural change.

Even if i chose to believe a highly unlikely scenario in which despite getting dimensionally larger and longer, getting 97 kn thrust engine (2 kn more than Mirage-2000) and getting a pair of canards, there will be no increase in the number of hardpoints on Tejas MK-2. Are you sure that those 5 hardpoints out of 7+1 seen on MK-2 scale models won't be carrying any MER? Considering you have been so rhetorically saying we don't know the specifications of Tejas MK-2.

BTW below is DRDO developed SAAW. A 120kg PGM in 2x configuration per MER, on a Jaguar. What are the chances that Tejas MK-2 won't be able to carry these on strike missions (to strike as far away as 100Kms from point of its release)?

SAAW in 4x configuration

That was an old wind tunnel model, that was based on Jaguar weapon loads. But even the Jag today, don't use that kind of configuration anymore, because guided bombs are the standard, which require more space than dumb bombs.

What makes you think those tandem bomb racks on Tejas to carry only unguided bombs not small PGMs within size limits?

Besides, Guided bombs are for pinpoint targeting in order to avoid collateral damages. Bombs without L.G kits are used to target loosely spread targets. Cost difference alone will never allow replacing one with other. Apart from fact that so-called dumb bombs are getting smarter with just a smart tail fin (eg JADM). Something which without adding much to the length of bomb converts it into a G.M. And a tail fin is something every dumb bomb is equipped with irrespective of it being guided or not.

As far as dumb bombs on Jaguars are concerned. This is what they were doing not so long ago. And they flew against a mock target which was a fuel depot. Something which is best and most importantly cost effectively targetted by dumb bombs. And a dumb bomb is nothing but an iron bomb minus active guidance kit.

Look up the ADA mission configs in this thread and you will get a more realistic idea LCA loads in different missions.

Thank you. Have seen those many years ago.

You are using terms that you obviously don't understand,

Much better than you could ever.

because earlier you claimed IAF wanted it to be a multi role fighter and now even confuse it with a swing role fighter.

Where did i say IAF wanted Tejas to be a multi role fighter at the initiation of the project? Kindly locate mine.

Single role fighter = a fighter that has only capability for 1 role, like Jaguars or LCA IOC, or Mig 29 during Kargil war.

Multi role = a fighter that can be used for either strike or A2A roles, depending on current the need, Gripen C, LCA FOC, Mirage 2000 during Kargil war.

Swing role = a fighter that has the load capability, to do a strike mission and directly switch to A2A role, without landing and re-arming, like MKI, MMRCA, or even upgraded Mirage 2000.

Even funnier.

Swing role is not to at all combat load dependent terminology. Instead, it is the defined in terms of the swiftness with which a fighter can switch between modes i.e A2G and A2A even during the same sortie. In fact, It is the culmination of aerodynamic suitability and sensors synergy (MMR and EL/OP) both working in close harmony.

Aerodynamic suitability means an airframe which is able to manoeuvre hard as well as be stable enough to deliver A2G weapons accurately.

Rafale is called an Omni role fighter. And Su-30MKI is called a multi-role fighter. Care to differentiate as per your 'Lahori' logic.

Caution: Taking commercially attractive terminologies for granted often makes a person worse than one is already.

True, the proven and reliable GE 404 engine.

Gripen C/Ds with same engine( a customised F404 called RM-12) have crashed 8 times so far. Two times during testing, one after induction, each time due to FCS malfunction.

And you think it's just the engine that has played in Tejas's immaculate safety record. But again you are.......aah never mind.

FOC is the key milestone, to make Tejas at least somewhat useful for the primary roles it was meant to do, air policing and interceptions. IOC can't do that, by the lack of fully integrated gun and missiles. FOC still will lack flight performance, but at least will finally be a multi role fighter.

The first certification without which Tejas or for that matter any newly inducted aircraft IAF choose to procure can never go into action is its full Operationalization within IAF. That means fully explored mission roles and respective SOPs.

In other words, full integration with IAF's air warfare doctrine. That, of course, starts with fully trained personnel, acquisition of sufficient armaments, Which requires by thumb rule takes at least 5 years.

 

[patriots]

enjoy the sexy queen.......and the killer look of Hal Tejas
............................................................

 

[Rahul Singh]

enjoy the sexy queen.......and the killer look of Hal Tejas
............................................................

With Astra Mk-1 entering production I don't think Derby will ever be purchased in numbers, if at all.