ADA Tejas (LCA) News and Discussions

[patriots]

Use of the third form of Verb only a typo or Tejas has already fired BVRAAM during ongoing GaganShakti?

hmm ...
...if it's true then it's great .........................
...........................

 

[abingdonboy]

A page from 2015 brouchure.
View attachment 24357
@Prashant12


Amount of work that has gone into Tejas since 2015 AI is well illustrated when compared with a page(second) from Tejas' brochure from 2015 AI. Still, it is MK-1 only.

First time I am seeing a mention of standoff weapons which could be a long-range glide bomb or even an A2S missile.

With 5 stations becoming capable of Drop Tank carriage, two things will definitely follow. First Tejas will be made capable of Buddy Refuelling and second, a Gripen F equivalent of Tejas may very well in the pipeline.

With 2x WVRAAM + 2x BVRAAM + 2x LGB + 1x DT + 1x EL/OP + 1x SPJ, a Swing role configuration is well illustrated in this graphics of MK-1A.

Any ideas why the SPJ can’t be placed at station g? Weight limits?

 

[binayak95]

Any ideas why the SPJ can’t be placed at station g? Weight limits?

ITs not a station I think. Just the Gun Port. Not 100% sure though

 

[Rahul Singh]

Any ideas why the SPJ can’t be placed at station g? Weight limits?

'G' refers to Gun-Bay. It is just an emplacement for GSH-23 with 123 rounds of ammo. It is not a multi-store station.

Ideally, SPJ shall be mounted internally but because of space concerns, ADA decided to put it on wings.

However, I won't be surprised if at some later stage(MLU) they decide to put it inside a conformal attachment somewhere around the fuselage. Since any type of conformal attachment on an FCS control fighter requires a lot of testing in order find out induced drag and RCS variation, given to time concerns they are not doing it now.

 

[Rahul Singh]

Not that I wanna rub your nose into the ground @Sancho but can't help but point to you what your beloved source ADA brochure writes in its latest brochure. Check underline in red.

Hope from next time you educate yourself properly before you decide to spread your usual filth in this thread also.

Just in case other members are interested in the context. LINK

 

[patriots]

Not that I wanna rub your nose into the ground @Sancho but can't help but point to you what your beloved source ADA brochure writes in its latest brochure. Check underline in red.

Hope from next time you educate yourself properly before you decide to spread your usual filth in this thread also.

Just in case other members are interested in the context. LINK

View attachment 24398

is it possible to have a 2 dual rack system..by which tejas can carry 4 wvraam instead of 2 missile....bdw in mk1a one dual rack system will be there

 

[Rahul Singh]

is it possible to have a 2 dual rack system..by which tejas can carry 4 wvraam instead of 2 missile....bdw in mk1a one dual rack system will be there

Yes MK-1A is getting a dual rack for WVRAAM on the outboard station. By thumb rule, another dual rack for WVRAAM can also be placed on other outboard station when SPJ is not being carried. However, since SPJ will be required during most missions, Tejas MK-1A will carry only 2 WVRAAMs in most cases.

What interests me more is when DRDO gonna design a dual rail launcher for Astra MK-1....... Most probably only Astra MK-1 will be in the dual rail configuration on Tejas. I don't think we have any such launcher for Derby.

Aim-120 on dual rails.

 

[rohit b3]

So guys, I got this old link

http://www.thehindu.com/todays-pape...ith-drop-tanks-successful/article15162772.ece


An important step towards the initial operational clearance (IOC) of India’s light combat aircraft Tejas was taken here recently, when PV1 (prototype vehicle one) undertook its first successful flight powered by fuel from two drop tanks.

Drop tanks not only increase an aircraft’s endurance but also allow the pilot to jettison them, if need be, once their purpose is served.

Programme Director P.S. Subramanayam told The Hindu that the aircraft flew for an hour and 24 minutes with the drop tanks, which carried 800 litres of fuel. At the end of the flight, some fuel remained in the internal tank.

“This is a major achievement as we work towards the IOC target date of 2010. This test will also give the Air Force added confidence in the Tejas.” While the internal tanks allow the Tejas to perform a 40-minute sortie, the drop tanks will increase its endurance by almost an hour.

According to sources, the tests show that the Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA), designer of the LCA, have fixed the issue of fuel supply from the drop tanks. But the ADA will still have to manage issues of the aircraft’s centre of gravity when the drop tanks are jettisoned.


So is Tejas's endurance on internal fuel just 40 mins??

 

[Rahul Singh]

So is Tejas's endurance on internal fuel just 40 mins??

There are many variables. Flight profile and combat load to name few.

Besides a whole lot has changed in Tejas since 2010 and before. Still exact endurance and range are classified and will remain so. That is why ADA did not revealed exact volume of fuel that remained left in internal tanks.

 

[Kshithij]

So guys, I got this old link

http://www.thehindu.com/todays-pape...ith-drop-tanks-successful/article15162772.ece


An important step towards the initial operational clearance (IOC) of India’s light combat aircraft Tejas was taken here recently, when PV1 (prototype vehicle one) undertook its first successful flight powered by fuel from two drop tanks.

Drop tanks not only increase an aircraft’s endurance but also allow the pilot to jettison them, if need be, once their purpose is served.

Programme Director P.S. Subramanayam told The Hindu that the aircraft flew for an hour and 24 minutes with the drop tanks, which carried 800 litres of fuel. At the end of the flight, some fuel remained in the internal tank.

“This is a major achievement as we work towards the IOC target date of 2010. This test will also give the Air Force added confidence in the Tejas.” While the internal tanks allow the Tejas to perform a 40-minute sortie, the drop tanks will increase its endurance by almost an hour.

According to sources, the tests show that the Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA), designer of the LCA, have fixed the issue of fuel supply from the drop tanks. But the ADA will still have to manage issues of the aircraft’s centre of gravity when the drop tanks are jettisoned.


So is Tejas's endurance on internal fuel just 40 mins??

The data here is that Tejas flew with internal fuel and 2 drop tanks of 800 litre each for 84 minutes and still had some fuel left in the internal tanks.

Now, if we take the fuel left in internal tanks as close to zero, then 4600 litres gave 84 minutes of endurance. So, 3000 litre internal fuel would give about 65% of it which is about 55 minutes.

The drop tanks also induce massive drags in addition to carrying weight of 1.3ton fuel and another 200kg for tanks and pylons.

Now, if we ignore weight penalty and just take drag into consideration, even then the internal fuel endurance will easily cross over an hour, maybe over 75 minutes. If we now include the weight penalty and also consider the fact that there was significant fuel left after 84minute sortie, we can say that the internal fuel only endurance without any payload will be higher. If the internal fuel remaining was 1500 litres, the endurance would be 2 hours only on internal fuel. And if the internal fuel remaining was 1000 litres, then endurance can be considered to be over 100minutes.

Also, if we consider the fact that tejas did not simply fly in a straight line but did some maneuver, we can say that the actual endurance in a straight line from internal fuel will be much higher.

So, even with given data, we can decisively say that the endurance on internal fuel is decisively over 1 hour and the chances are that it can only go higher

 

[Mikesingh]

So is Tejas's endurance on internal fuel just 40 mins??

Instead of endurance in minutes we need to check out the range and combat radius instead.

The Ferry Range of Tejas mk1 on internal fuel is 1700 kms from Point A to Point B.

However Combat Radius involves carrying payloads, doing combat maneuvers, going to point A, completing the mission, and coming back home. Tejas mk1’s Combat radius is anywhere between 300 kms(full payload of 4 tons) to 700+ kms(with external fuel tanks and limited weapon load). Not bad for a Light Combat Aircraft but the air force is a trifle disappointed with this CR.

The Indian Navy which may opt for the future LCA mk2 will have a range of around 2000 kms or around an average of over 600 kms+ combat radius which is the same as a Mig29K currently used on the IN Carriers.

 

[Immanuel]

You realise this is true for EVERY OEM, why single out Dassault?

In fact US OEMs are even more restricted as by LAW they cannot even sell sensitive American tech to any country without official sanction from US CONGRESS.

Rafale is the only affordable choice because of the sunk costs already committed to by the IAF, the level of delusion some have to go to ignore the fact that the 36 unit Rafale deal exists is unbelievable. This isn’t a repeat of MMRCA, the entire landscape has changed, by the time the RFP is even out for these new jets Rafale will be in IAF service, Indian crews are already in France RIGHT now, Dassault is RIGHT NOW integrating IAF Buyer Nominated Equioment (BNE), DA is RIGHT NOW working with IAF to integrate Rafale into AFNET and IAF service procedures.

You’re mad if you can’t see how this makes the RFI tailormade for Rafale.

Every day that passes Rafale becomes the only viable offer

Best part is how many are rewriting history, the Rafale and EFT were the ONLY two fighters found to adequately meet IAF’s criteria. For some reason the F-16/18, Gripen and Mig-35 are somehow serious contenders again just because they have signed MOUs with some Indian companies?

Well I never said more Rafale shouldn't be ordered, I always said IAF should have upto 72-100 Rafales i.e 4-5 sqds, 1 per every air command. I see Rafale as a long term Jaguar replacement. Currently only 60 Jags are planned for further upgrades while rest will be gradually phased out. 36 Rafales fill in that need perfectly and excercising the options for 36 more is good common sense. I am certain Rafale orders will come by excercising of the options.

This new contest opens the gates wide open for competition and Rafale of today just doesn't have the same kind of edge especially when re-trials happen, EF is highly updated with E-Captor coming up, Gripen E comes with very cutting edge GAN tech, I am sure the US will push the SH Block 3 heavily too with all the newest upgrades. Why do you compare this RFI to MRCA-1, all the potential contenders for MRCA-2 are pretty good and EF/Gripen,SH Block 3, potentially F-35 can make a very strong case when retrials happen. It would be stupid of IAF to pick a winner based on MRCA-1 criteria even as we know Rafale was not the L-1 in MRCA-1.

Now, the SH Block 3 is widely considered the favorite for IN's deal and combine that with LCA MK-2s engine commonality there are massive cost savings. Furthermore F414 EPE is favorite to power the AMCA.

The madness here is the silliness of this tender if more Rafales were actually to be ordered, this new MRCA only makes the chances of Rafale slimmer.

Besides, from the RFI it's clear Dassault can't meet a lot of needs linked to AMCA.

 

[Kshithij]

Well I never said more Rafale shouldn't be ordered, I always said IAF should have upto 72-100 Rafales i.e 4-5 sqds, 1 per every air command. I see Rafale as a long term Jaguar replacement. Currently only 60 Jags are planned for further upgrades while rest will be gradually phased out. 36 Rafales fill in that need perfectly and excercising the options for 36 more is good common sense. I am certain Rafale orders will come by excercising of the options.

This new contest opens the gates wide open for competition and Rafale of today just doesn't have the same kind of edge especially when re-trials happen, EF is highly updated with E-Captor coming up, Gripen E comes with very cutting edge GAN tech, I am sure the US will push the SH Block 3 heavily too with all the newest upgrades. Why do you compare this RFI to MRCA-1, all the potential contenders for MRCA-2 are pretty good and EF/Gripen,SH Block 3, potentially F-35 can make a very strong case when retrials happen. It would be stupid of IAF to pick a winner based on MRCA-1 criteria even as we know Rafale was not the L-1 in MRCA-1.

Now, the SH Block 3 is widely considered the favorite for IN's deal and combine that with LCA MK-2s engine commonality there are massive cost savings. Furthermore F414 EPE is favorite to power the AMCA.

The madness here is the silliness of this tender if more Rafales were actually to be ordered, this new MRCA only makes the chances of Rafale slimmer.

Besides, from the RFI it's clear Dassault can't meet a lot of needs linked to AMCA.

Firstly, stop saying that F18 can be used in Navy as the ability to fly from 200m STOBAR runways has not been proven.

Next, Gripen is just a hotch-potch assembly. It has no GaN radar yet. They are offering "co-development" of it with India! That is not at all meaningful. It also is not finalised and no flying version has been made. It is better to go for Tejas MK2 than Gripen. Tejas MK2 will come at the same time as Gripen E.

The RFI is to ensure that the procurement will be based on the maximum ToT and to get a leverage with Dassault and prevent any arm-twisting. If F18 gives ToT like Radar, avionics and engine manufacturing etc, then India may even go with it, despite F18 being unfit to fly in Navy. The only intention of this RFI is to get ToT and not the best available fighter.

So, Gripen is simply ruled out as SAAB has no technology to offer. The contest is in between the companies/countries that are willing to offer a comprehensive ToT

 

[Rahul Singh]

The Ferry Range of Tejas mk1 on internal fuel is 1700 kms from Point A to Point B.

This figure was put when Tejas was capable of carrying only 3 drop tanks. Now with 2 mid-board stations becoming Drop Tank capable the stated figure of 1700 km ferry range is no more valid.

 

[Rahul Singh]

Ok guys I am taking a 4-5 month leave for professional reasons. You guys keep this thread lively and continue celebrating the rise of Phoenix named Tejas. Our Tejas!

Hope ADA and HAL keep providing you enough reasons for lungi dance now and then.

God bless you all.

Rahul Singh out!

 

[Immanuel]

Firstly, stop saying that F18 can be used in Navy as the ability to fly from 200m STOBAR runways has not been proven.

Next, Gripen is just a hotch-potch assembly. It has no GaN radar yet. They are offering "co-development" of it with India! That is not at all meaningful. It also is not finalised and no flying version has been made. It is better to go for Tejas MK2 than Gripen. Tejas MK2 will come at the same time as Gripen E.

The RFI is to ensure that the procurement will be based on the maximum ToT and to get a leverage with Dassault and prevent any arm-twisting. If F18 gives ToT like Radar, avionics and engine manufacturing etc, then India may even go with it, despite F18 being unfit to fly in Navy. The only intention of this RFI is to get ToT and not the best available fighter.

So, Gripen is simply ruled out as SAAB has no technology to offer. The contest is in between the companies/countries that are willing to offer a comprehensive ToT

Dude, you need to chill, the SH Block 3 is final contender for the IN and it will take part in trials and I am willing to believe the SH can do plenty from our cariers. your same criticism can be given to the Rafale. You claiming it can't be used in IN doesn't make it the truth. Truth is Boeing is confident it can perform well in trials.

The point here is MRCA-2 is quite different from MRCA-1, EF, SH Block 3 and perhaps even the F-35 can easily throw a tough competition. I doubt anybody including Dassault can give any meaninful TOT (AESA, Engines, EW suit, MAWS etc) without seriously breaking the bank. Russians are the only ones that can meet this need at a reasonable cost.

 

[patriots]

Ok guys I am taking a 4-5 month leave for professional reasons. You guys keep this thread lively and continue celebrating the rise of Phoenix named Tejas. Our Tejas!

Hope ADA and HAL keep providing you enough reasons for lungi dance now and then.

God bless you all.

Rahul Singh out!

will miss u a lot ...ur.. information. .and ur knowledge...
hope we will see. u back soon

 

[patriots]

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NAVY/Galleries/5303-2/viraat01+057_1_.jpg(photo of sea harrier with dual rack)

We have already built and integrated a twin rack to carry the Derby - that was integrated into the Sea Harrier upgrade. A variant of that I think will be used in the Tejas to enable it to carry 4 BVRs


vishnusom in keypub



........... moderator s Please delete the link if it's violates the rules of this forum

 

[AMCA]

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NAVY/Galleries/5303-2/viraat01+057_1_.jpg(photo of sea harrier with dual rack)

We have already built and integrated a twin rack to carry the Derby - that was integrated into the Sea Harrier upgrade. A variant of that I think will be used in the Tejas to enable it to carry 4 BVRs


vishnusom in keypub



........... moderator s Please delete the link if it's violates the rules of this forum

......................................................................................................................................

 

[Sancho]

Not that I wanna rub your nose into the ground @Sancho but can't help but point to you what your beloved source ADA brochure writes in its latest brochure. Check underline in red.

Cute, but as you said yourself it's a"brochure" for the purpose of advertising. Also it shows weapon load configuration for each station, not mission configs, as in the ADA info I showed you before. But you already know how wrong you were, since you already made a u turn on you earlier claims wrt the fuel tanks.

But the for the pics, had not much time in the recent days.