ADA Tejas (LCA) News and Discussions

[pi314159]

What? And create MORE bureaucrats? You do not know India. If HAL has 100 Bureaucrats and only 10 of them do any work (and are needed), then split HAL (say HAL1 and HAL2) and GOI will hire another 100 bureaucrats of which again 10 only will work at HAL2. What's worse, GOI might end up creating ANOTHER agency with 50 new bureaucrats to "oversee" competition between HAL1 and HAL2.

Govt does not care what bureaucrats were doing most time as long as they can deliver products in the end. Govt only needs to place more orders in future as reward to the company that delivers quicker, better and cheaper. There will always be a better one, even slightly, of the two, unless the two have reached a secret agreement to cheat Govt together

Of course, this is just armchair strategist's thinking

 

[ace009]

Hmmm - It may work in the "people's democracy", but in Indian democracy, competition between govt organizations are hard to find - check out Hindusthan Petroleum, Bharat Petroleum and Indian Oil. Three PSUs, making money all right, but no competition and they suck in efficiency.

 

[japatel93]

Is the Tejas MK1 going to be fitted with a retractable refueling probe (as the picture in the link below suggests)? Or is the probe going to be fitted exclusively on the MK2? Also, what is the latest news on Tejas AESA radar development. Last I heard was that DRDO was looking for a foreign development partner?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e1/Tejas_3_view_b.gif

 

[Rahul Singh]

Tejas Mk2 MRCA's R & D Effort Gathers Pace


The full-scale engineering development efforts of India's Tejas Mk2 multi-role combat aircraft (MRCA) recently took a significant step forward when the Bangalore-based Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA), in consultation with the Indian Air Force (IAF), froze the MRCA's design, which will now have a length of 14.2 metres (1-metre more than that of the Tejas Mk1 for incorporationg 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 Mk1) to accommodate an enlarged vertical tail-section, and a wingspan of 8.2 metres—same as that of the Tejas Mk1—that, however, will feature an increased wing area. External stores capacity will be boosted to 5,000kg (as opposed to 3,500kg for the Tejas Mk1), while the twin internal air-intake ducts will be minimally enlarged to cater to the increased airflow requirements of the 98kN thrust F414-GE-INS6 turbofan built by GE Aero Engines. The Ministry of Defence had, last January, sanctioned US$542.44 million (Rs2,431.55-crore) for ADA to develop the IAF's Tejas Mk2 variant and the Indian Navy's LCA Mk2 (Navy) variant so that the first Tejas Mk2 prototype can take to the skies by September 2013 and make this prototype fly by December 2014, following which the MoD-owned Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL) would begin series-producing the MRCA by 2016. While the IAF is committed to procuring an initial 83 Tejas Mk2s, the Navy has expressed its firm requirement for 46 LCA Mk2 (Navy). Just like the Tejas Mk1, the airframe of the Tejas Mk2 will incorporate 13 major composites-built structures fabricated by TATA Advanced Materials Ltd (TAML), which was awarded the contract after the state-owned National Aerospace Laboratory (NAL) expressed its failure to deliver the structures on time. Structures to be produced by TAML for each aircraft will include a rudder assembly, fin assembly, 60 carbon-fibre reinforced (CFC) wing spars, 38 wing fuselage fairing skins, 20 wing fuselage fairing blocks, 41 CFC centre fuselage components, two forward undercarriage doors and two aft undercarriage doors.

Vendor selection by the IAF for supplying various sub-systems for the Tejas Mk2 too is gathering pace. What has been confirmed thus far is that the two-way airborne operational data-links (ODL) will be supplied by HAL, which, among other systems, will be supplying a newly-designed mission computer (to cater to the increased processing requirements of the new fire-control system and IDAS), the RAM-1701AS radio altimeter, TACAN-2901AJ and DME-2950A tactical air navigation system combined with the ANS-1100A VOL/ILS marker, CIT-4000A Mk12 IFF transponder, COM-1150A UHF standby comms radio, UHF SATCOM transceiver, and the SDR-2010 SoftNET four-channel software-defined radio (working in VHF/UHF and L-band for voice and data communications), and the Bheem-EU brake control/engine/electrical monitoring system, all of which have been developed in-house by the Hyderabad-based Strategic Electronics R & D Centre of HAL. SAGEM Défense Sécurité will supply the Sigma-95N ring laser gyro-based inertial navigation system coupled to a GPS receiver (which is also on board the Su-30MKI and Tejas Mk1). The open-architecture integrated defensive aids suite (IDAS), which has been under joint development by the DRDO's Bengaluru-based Defence Avionics Research Establishment (DARE) and Germany-based Cassidian since 2006, will include the AAR-60(V)2 MILDS F missile approach warning system, the EW management computer and Tarang Mk3 radar warning receiver (all to be built by Bharat Electronics Ltd), countermeasures dispenser built by Bharat Dynamics Ltd, and Elettronica of Italy's Virgilius directional jammers (now being installed on the IAF's MiG-29UPGs), which make use of active phased-array transmitters for jamming hostile low-band (E-G) and high-band (G-J) emitters. The redesigned digital flight-control computer will be built by BEL, while the HMD chosen is the Dash Mk5 from Elbit Systems. For tactical strike missions, the 'Tejas' Mk2 will be equipped with the Litening-3 LDP, supplied by RAFAEL Advanced Defence Systems of Israel. The actuated retractable aerial refuelling probe, mounted on the Tejas Mk2's starboard cockpit section, will be supplied by UK-based Cobham Mission Equipment. The same vendor will also supply the pneumatic air-to-ground stores ejection systems like release units, practice bomb carriers, multiple stores carriers, AGML-3 triple-rail launchers, and high-velocity ejection launchers, almost all of which are already operational on the IAF's fleet of BAE Systems Hawk Mk132 lead-in fighter trainers. Cobham will thus join a growing list of foreign vendors associated with both the Tejas Mk1 and Mk2, which include Intertechnique SA, SAFRAN Group's SAGEM Défense Sécurité subsidiary and IN-LHC ZODIAC of France; US-based GE Aero Engines, Hamilton Sunstrand, EATON Aerospace, MOOG, and Goodrich Aerospace; UK-based CHELTON Avionics, Penny + Giles, and Martin Baker (supplier of Mk 16LG zero-zero ejection seats); Italy's Secondo Mona; and Germany's Cassidian and Faure Herman. Indian companies involved include HAL, TAML, Data Patterns Pvt Ltd, Government Tool Room and Training Centre (GT & TC), and SLN Technologies Pvt Ltd.

By the year's end, the IAF is expected to select the foreign vendor for supplying the integrated fire-control system (including an infra-red search-and-track sensor, or IRST, integrated with an AESA-based multi-mode radar), and a frameless canopy actuation system. The former, which will, in essence, dictate the Tejas Mk2's combat capabilities, is likely to keenly contested by vendors from the US, France, Israel and Italy. US-based OEM Raytheon intends to offer its RACR AESA-based MMR along with a chin-mounted IRST sensor, while THALES Avionics is likely to propose a scaled-down variant of its RBE-2 AESA-based MMR integrated with the nose-mounted Optronique Secteur Frontal (OSF) IRST, which comprises two optical modules. The right-side module has a long-wave (8-12 micron) infra-red sensor used for target search and track out to 90km in ideal conditions. The left-side module carries a CCD TV camera for daytime target identification. The system also includes a laser rangefinder for use against airborne targets. The OSF is primarily an air-to-air search, track, identification, and localisation sensor, with a limited air-to-ground localisation and identification function as of now. A future enhancement of the OSF will include a night target-identification function (for precision air-to-ground strikes and anti-ship operations) based on a mid-wave IR sensor that would replace the CCD TV camera. The ELTA Systems subsidiary of Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) is expected to proposed its EL/M-2052 AESA-based MMR integrated with an in-house nose-mounted IRST sensor, while Selex Galileo of Italy will most likely propose its Vixen 1000ES AESA-based MMR integrated with its 55kg Skyward nose-mounted IRST. Choice of the optimum combination of air combat missiles (both within-visual-range and beyond-visual-range) will be totally dependent on which fire-control system is finally selected, with the principal contenders being Raytheon (AIM-9X/AIM-120C AMRAAM), RAFAEL of Israel (Python-5/Derby), MBDA (MICA family) and Russia's Vympel JSC (RVV-MD/RVV-SD combination), which IAI/ELTA Systems will likely propose in case the Python-5/Derby solution is rejected by the IAF.—Prasun K. Sengupta

 

[Rahul Singh]

Double post.

 

[Godless-Kafir]

Tejas Mk2 MRCA's R & D Effort Gathers Pace


The full-scale engineering development efforts of India's Tejas Mk2 multi-role combat aircraft (MRCA) recently took a significant step forward when the Bangalore-based Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA), in consultation with the Indian Air Force (IAF), froze the MRCA's design, which will now have a length of 14.2 metres (1-metre more than that of the Tejas Mk1 for incorporationg 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 Mk1) to accommodate an enlarged vertical tail-section, and a wingspan of 8.2 metres—same as that of the Tejas Mk1—that, however, will feature an increased wing area. External stores capacity will be boosted to 5,000kg (as opposed to 3,500kg for the Tejas Mk1), while the twin internal air-intake ducts will be minimally enlarged to cater to the increased airflow requirements of the 98kN thrust F414-GE-INS6 turbofan built by GE Aero Engines. The Ministry of Defence had, last January, sanctioned US$542.44 million (Rs2,431.55-crore)

Its a little baffling to see that these where the same ideas i discussed with some junior scientists in Aero India, who where in-charge of design and modification! I thought a longer fuselage and bigger ducts would be more aerodynamically efficient at supersonic speeds, however i also suggested modifying the ducts to square ones like the F/A-18 super hornet to prevent the chocking at high AoA. I know this is probably just a coincidence but nice to see my amateur take was a bit on the dot! :wof:

 

[rudresh]

Tejas Mk2 MRCA's R & D Effort Gathers Pace



By the year's end, the IAF is expected to select the foreign vendor for supplying the integrated fire-control system (including an infra-red search-and-track sensor, or IRST, integrated with an AESA-based multi-mode radar), and a frameless canopy actuation system. The former, which will, in essence, dictate the Tejas Mk2's combat capabilities, is likely to keenly contested by vendors from the US, France, Israel and Italy. US-based OEM Raytheon intends to offer its RACR AESA-based MMR along with a chin-mounted IRST sensor, while THALES Avionics is likely to propose a scaled-down variant of its RBE-2 AESA-based MMR integrated with the nose-mounted Optronique Secteur Frontal (OSF) IRST, which comprises two optical modules. The right-side module has a long-wave (8-12 micron) infra-red sensor used for target search and track out to 90km in ideal conditions. The left-side module carries a CCD TV camera for daytime target identification. The system also includes a laser rangefinder for use against airborne targets. The OSF is primarily an air-to-air search, track, identification, and localisation sensor, with a limited air-to-ground localisation and identification function as of now. A future enhancement of the OSF will include a night target-identification function (for precision air-to-ground strikes and anti-ship operations) based on a mid-wave IR sensor that would replace the CCD TV camera. The ELTA Systems subsidiary of Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) is expected to proposed its EL/M-2052 AESA-based MMR integrated with an in-house nose-mounted IRST sensor, while Selex Galileo of Italy will most likely propose its Vixen 1000ES AESA-based MMR integrated with its 55kg Skyward nose-mounted IRST. Choice of the optimum combination of air combat missiles (both within-visual-range and beyond-visual-range) will be totally dependent on which fire-control system is finally selected, with the principal contenders being Raytheon (AIM-9X/AIM-120C AMRAAM), RAFAEL of Israel (Python-5/Derby), MBDA (MICA family) and Russia's Vympel JSC (RVV-MD/RVV-SD combination), which IAI/ELTA Systems will likely propose in case the Python-5/Derby solution is rejected by the IAF.—Prasun K. Sengupta

when did americans found the inner charity and allowed ELTA 2052 for tejas and when french proposed RBE2 based MMR and only one more team is left didnt eurofighter consortium proposed something.........what a great article.

we herd that DRDO was working with isreal or an european partner for AESA and what happend to that project.

 

[p2prada]

Something disappointing,

Tejas LCA project to cost more than Rs 13,000 crore over 35 years - The Times of India

The overall developmental cost of Tejas Light Combat Aircraft has quietly zoomed past the Rs 13,000-crore mark, with the government sanctioning the extension of the fighter's "full-scale engineering development'' (FSED) till December 31, 2018.

"So, IAF should have its first Tejas squadron of 20 fighters by 2014-15. Even Swedish Gripen fighter's developmental cost was around Rs 12,640 crore,'' said an official.

It is to be expected since the world has become more expensive and this was our first major aero project.

 

[Godless-Kafir]

The JSF cost is estimated to come to 1trillion dollars. The LCA on the other hand had to build critical infrastructure like labs,testing rigs and ancillary industries to build its aircraft industry from the Bottom up, this 13,000cr is not for LCA alone it for building the whole Aeronautical establishment from scratch, while Gripen had all the facilitates already, it is only based on development cost for R&D alone.

So this is good news that they did it in just 2.8billion dollars.! kudos:thumb:

 

[lambu]

Naval Tejas to begin Ground Trails soon

ADA is all set to begin ground testing of Naval Tejas NP-1 soon, in series of ground testing which will be performed, first phase will involve Engine ground runs, and other phase will include, slow speed engine run on the tarmac, and later high speed ground trials, where aircraft reaches speed of near take off before pilot slows the aircraft and brings the aircraft to immediate halt.

Naval Tejas NP-1 which was rolled out last year with much fun and fare ,struggled to meet deadline of end of 2010 for its first flight , NP-1 which is a Trainer variant of Naval fighter ,had issues related to heavy landing gear and additional weight which comes with any Naval fighter ,since it requires to carry hard landing on a aircraft carrier ,which means additional strengthing of the airframe .

follow link for further news ...

Naval Tejas to begin Ground Trails soon | idrw.org

 

[nitesh]

Bhavnagar industry produces important part of India's first locally made Multi-Mode Radar | idrw.org
IAF begins establishing first LCA squadron | idrw.org

 

[gogbot]

Something disappointing,

Tejas LCA project to cost more than Rs 13,000 crore over 35 years - The Times of India



It is to be expected since the world has become more expensive and this was our first major aero project.

I remeber when ToI first published that bs figure. It includes funds allocted for LCAN and LCA mk2
The gripen hower is only inclusive of ammount spent orignally and not the gripen NG

 

[p2prada]

I remeber when ToI first published that bs figure. It includes funds allocted for LCAN and LCA mk2
The gripen hower is only inclusive of ammount spent orignally and not the gripen NG

Unlike the Gripen NG program, the LCA Mk2 is the actual equivalent of the Gripen C/D with more powerful engines. Otherwise the gamut of capabilities of the Gripen NG is more in the region of F-16IN.

The NG is more like the Mk3 version of LCA, if it ever reaches that stage.

Anyway, even without the projected figures for LCA Mk2, the Mk1 figures for only 20 aircraft and without Kaveri engine is still Rs 8000Crores whereas the Gripen C/D figure is for the Volvo RM-12 engine included.

Also the fact that Saab had the required infrastructure and India did not is simply an excuse. Whenever a project of such magnitude is undertaken a lot of additional infrastructure is built for development of the fighter. For eg: even with all the infrastructure that US and Russia has, they still have to build a lot more for F-22 and PAKFA. It was the same for Sweden and India as well.

Even for AMCA we will still have to build a lot of testing facilities because infrastructure for 5th gen technologies is non existent in India, same as Russia and US did not have it before commencement of their own programs. Similarly, Sweden had to build infrastructure before commencement of the 4th gen Gripen program.

 

[Godless-Kafir]

Unlike the Gripen NG program, the LCA Mk2 is the actual equivalent of the Gripen C/D with more powerful engines. Otherwise the gamut of capabilities of the Gripen NG is more in the region of F-16IN.

The NG is more like the Mk3 version of LCA, if it ever reaches that stage.

Anyway, even without the projected figures for LCA Mk2, the Mk1 figures for only 20 aircraft and without Kaveri engine is still Rs 8000Crores whereas the Gripen C/D figure is for the Volvo RM-12 engine included.

Also the fact that Saab had the required infrastructure and India did not is simply an excuse. Whenever a project of such magnitude is undertaken a lot of additional infrastructure is built for development of the fighter. For eg: even with all the infrastructure that US and Russia has, they still have to build a lot more for F-22 and PAKFA. It was the same for Sweden and India as well.

Even for AMCA we will still have to build a lot of testing facilities because infrastructure for 5th gen technologies is non existent in India, same as Russia and US did not have it before commencement of their own programs. Similarly, Sweden had to build infrastructure before commencement of the 4th gen Gripen program.

What is the development cost of the Aircrafts you compared it with? What is the development cost of Eurofighter and Rafael? Also can you please let me know what is the unit cost of these aircrafts including the Gripen?

Do you know the Gripen SAAB never developed an engine and the Volvo RM-12 is actually the F-404? It was never developed by SAAB or Volvo. Can this be considered another one of your rectum derived conclusions?

 

[gogbot]

Unlike the Gripen NG program, the LCA Mk2 is the actual equivalent of the Gripen C/D with more powerful engines. Otherwise the gamut of capabilities of the Gripen NG is more in the region of F-16IN.

The NG is more like the Mk3 version of LCA, if it ever reaches that stage.

Dude this is off topic , but i have to ask , what does the NG have that the Mk2 does not.

I though the important bits were all there , Radar and engine.

Sure you can say the NG is superior , but i don't see the difference as being that of the next mk

Anyway, even without the projected figures for LCA Mk2, the Mk1 figures for only 20 aircraft and without Kaveri engine is still Rs 8000Crores whereas the Gripen C/D figure is for the Volvo RM-12 engine included.

Volvo-Rm12 that's just a GE-404 variant , that's not that expensive.

Plus the Tejas project is fund spent over longer period of time with , as you mention greater inflation numbers.
And you can only compare the two figures based on the current change rate.
We did not spend money in dollars , and neither did they.

You Can hardly do a fair comparison like that.

Also the fact that Saab had the required infrastructure and India did not is simply an excuse. Whenever a project of such magnitude is undertaken a lot of additional infrastructure is built for development of the fighter. For eg: even with all the infrastructure that US and Russia has, they still have to build a lot more for F-22 and PAKFA. It was the same for Sweden and India as well.
Even for AMCA we will still have to build a lot of testing facilities because infrastructure for 5th gen technologies is non existent in India, same as Russia and US did not have it before commencement of their own programs. Similarly, Sweden had to build infrastructure before commencement of the 4th gen Gripen program.

I agree , that's why i never mention that.
however keep in mind , building an aero space complex can be more expensive than expanding it.

we still don't have an High altitude engine test facility. Tells you much we still need to spend.

 

[lambu]

Indian Defence - Images: LCA Tejas MK 1

 

[Godless-Kafir]

Deleted.............

 

[Godless-Kafir]

The jobless and inferior intelligent scientists of HAL, compared to our great arm chair experts of DFI!

 

[p2prada]

Dude this is off topic , but i have to ask , what does the NG have that the Mk2 does not.

I though the important bits were all there , Radar and engine.

No AESA, no extended range, no increased aerodynamic capability, no increased payload.

There are too many differences between NG and LCA mk2. The LCA Mk2 is just a revised Mk1 with a more powerful engine meant for actually conforming to IAF's first ASR whereas Gripen NG manages to satisfy the IAF's MMRCA ASR.

Let's not forget the ACM's words which he has repeated once again. Unlike before where we assumed the Mk1 to be compared to a Mig-21++ even the LCA Mk2 is also a Mig-21++ as told by him. It is just a more advanced interceptor. Compare that to NG or even Gripen C, the differences make the LCA woefully short of what the IAF requires.

Volvo-Rm12 that's just a GE-404 variant , that's not that expensive.

Yes and the Kaveri K-10 is just a Snecma M-88-3 variant. But even making the variant is going to cost GTRE $2Billion or Rs 10000 Crores as already specified by them. Why the extra cost?

The RM-12 does have design changes in the diameter of the core and newer parts designed in Sweden like the Compressor discs, spools and afterburner. Only 60-65% of the RM-12 relates to the actual F-404 design. Does that not include the costs as well? The RM-12 isn't just renamed GE F404 it is an engine made specifically for Gripen.

Plus the Tejas project is fund spent over longer period of time with , as you mention greater inflation numbers.
And you can only compare the two figures based on the current change rate.
We did not spend money in dollars , and neither did they.

Oh! But they did. Components in the Gripen are sourced from outside, so yes they have paid in Dollars, Euros and Kronas.

Nevertheless as compared to where the Gripen C is the LCA is short of being called an air superiority fighter.

You Can hardly do a fair comparison like that.

On the contrary, the Gripen indeed was more expensive, but it is also a more successful program even after adding the Volvo program to it. LCA wasn't supposed to be this expensive. The extra 5000 crores required to make the Mk2 conform to IAF standards should never have happened in the first place.

I agree , that's why i never mention that.
however keep in mind , building an aero space complex can be more expensive than expanding it.

we still don't have an High altitude engine test facility. Tells you much we still need to spend.

The infrastructure Sweden had was quite the same as India's. We had managed to design and build a second generation Marut. Then we built the Migs and Jaguars in India. A lot of the design and testing happened in ISROs wind tunnels as well. Then there were quite a few tests done in US, France and Russia too. Let's not forget the FBW system was designed and made using British and American infrastructure as well. So, even today a lot of the facilities don't actually exist for a second 4th gen project. AMCA is supposed to take care of quite a bit of that.

We rented the infrastructure while a lot of Gripen's design happened in their own country due to their slightly superior infrastructure. But even expansion costs a lot, sometimes as much as building a whole new facility.

Building the LCA Mk2 with the K-10 is going to be extremely expensive as compared to the entire Gripen program excluding the NG. Even after NG is included, it should be more or less the same. Then again, the NG will still be superior to the K-10 equipped MK2.

 

[Immanuel]

Firstly, LCA mk-2 wont have K-10 engine for a quite a long time, K10 is still a long way off from being ready. for the forseeable future, it will remain the GE F414 and once this engine proves itself, they'lll just go for an uprated EPE if needed for mk-3. well you're wrong on a lot of counts, the new mk-2 will have higher payload ability of over 5000kg that too without any change in wing design or a drastic change of the aircraft.

The mk-2 is little over 1 m longer and about 20 cm taller than the mk-1, everything else is kick ass, firstly because it too will recieve a lot of new gen avionics, it will have AESA mostly likely one derived from the EL2052, even Raytheon's RACR is on offer for the lca mk-2, it will have a range of weapons like r-77, Astra, Derby and Python-5 may be even Meteor, it has a very low rcs as it is, the range of the aircraft will also be higher. Being lighter than the NG, the aircraft will be able to supercruise faster than the NG. LCA's current performance is pretty good as it already out performs the mirage/f-16, the new engine will allow aerial performance better than the rafale, ng and may be even EF.
TRISHUL: Tejas Mk2 MRCA’s R & D Effort Gathers Pace