ADA Tejas (LCA) News and Discussions

[garg_bharat]

@Kharavela, just looking at IAF bases near to the border (like within 100km).

You need high number + small aircraft that can fit into existing reinforced shelters + quick turnaround.
A small aircraft needs less fuel and less weapons, and can be made ready quicker.

 

[Yumdoot]

Su-30MKI has a subsidiary mini-AWACS function also said to be effective for at least 4 other aircrafts.

The WSO in the Su-30MKI can easily vector in a force comprised of several LCAs.

There could be a basing plan around this capability, with Su-30MKI on long range patrols and LCAs coming up fast and thick nearer the borders.

 

[HariPrasad-1]

I want 15.5 m long tejas like Gripen NG with 300 Km range mach 2 speed 9g AESA, EW, Sensor fusion etc.

 

[Superdefender]

I want 15.5 m long tejas like Gripen NG with 300 Km range mach 2 speed 9g AESA, EW, Sensor fusion etc.

300km is combat radius (It sould be 500km). Range is always more than combat radius.

 

[Superdefender]

I want 15.5 m long tejas like Gripen NG with 300 Km range mach 2 speed 9g AESA, EW, Sensor fusion etc.

300km is combat radius (It sould be 500km). Range is always more than combat radius.

 

[Superdefender]

Su-30MKI has a subsidiary mini-AWACS function also said to be effective for at least 4 other aircrafts.

The WSO in the Su-30MKI can easily vector in a force comprised of several LCAs.

There could be a basing plan around this capability, with Su-30MKI on long range patrols and LCAs coming up fast and thick nearer the borders.

MKI has one of the biggest radar aperture in the world, which means lots of reserved power. In the west, MKI should patrol along with F-18E (or whichever mmrca is choosen) complements it besides. In the east, FGFA should patrol alongwith AMCA complements it behind. Believe me, Tejas should remain in-border for taking out/intercept if any hostile fighter tries to breach.

 

[HariPrasad-1]

300km is combat radius (It sould be 500km). Range is always more than combat radius.

I am sorry. I wanted to say 3000 KM and not 300 KM.

 

[Superdefender]

I am sorry. I wanted to say 3000 KM and not 300 KM.

But that is supposed to be the planned range of AMCA!!

 

[HariPrasad-1]

But that is supposed to be the planned range of AMCA!!

Yes and I want that on LCA Mk2 (Not the proposed One but all new). The plane shall be 15.5 m long with 3500 to 4000 Kg kerosene and 3000 KM Range. Gripen has in excess of 2000 KM range with 2500 KG fuel.

 

[garg_bharat]

Yes and I want that on LCA Mk2 (Not the proposed One but all new). The plane shall be 15.5 m long with 3500 to 4000 Kg kerosene and 3000 KM Range. Gripen has in excess of 2000 KM range with 2500 KG fuel.

I think the current length is 13.2m which can become 14.7m. The additional volume will be for fuel and avionics.
You can expect 3000kg aviation fuel. The combat range will go up with extra fuel and lower drag.

A combat range of 500km is similar to Mig-29. So it should be adequate.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

This information must be Read & Saved that ' Tejas MK1 ' Ferry range is 1700kms without Fuel tanks ( With fuel tanks or in flight refueling its 3000kms according to Janes ) and Combat Range is more than 500kms .. , This information is released by Government agency during IOC-2 ...

Source : Press Information Bureau English Releases

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

Shared by @Archer ..

 

[Superdefender]

Then mk. 2 will be a light fighter capable of doing performances of a medium fighter. Wow!!

 

[HariPrasad-1]

Then mk. 2 will be a light fighter capable of doing performances of a medium fighter. Wow!!

Yes, It may perform the role of MMRCA provided we further reinforce the performance of MK1. We need to make it more aerodynamic (Proposed in Mk1+), We need to slash weight (Proposed in Mk1+), We need to resolve air intake issues, As a part of improvement, new light weight high strength wings are proposed to be design, More composites and more merging of LRUS, Plug in nosecone by 0.5 m and lighter landing gear.

8% aerodynamic improvement and atleast 8% weight reduction is almost certain in MK1+. Now it need to be seen how that will translate into performance improvement?

Designers say that it will be a 20% rise in transsonic acceleration, 2% rise in speed and 60 KG higher fuel, These are very decent figures. Now if T/W ratio increases, it should push these parameters further upward.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Tejas MK1 is a fine aircraft, It does not require any changes ..

Their are no air intake problems for MK1/1+/2 ..

We need to make it more aerodynamic (Proposed in Mk1+), We need to slash weight (Proposed in Mk1+), We need to resolve air intake issues.

 

[HariPrasad-1]

Tejas MK1 is a fine aircraft, It does not require any changes ..

Their are no air intake problems for MK1/1+/2 ..

But It is discussed a lot on all the blogs regarding the air intake issues and they have continuously changed the air intakes. The air intake in LSP 8 was significantly larger.
It is said that at very high speed engine is starved from air resulting into underperformance.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

I cannot find the official report from DRDO spokesman which conformed their are no issues with air-intake for both MK1 and MK2, Its posted in this thread as well ..

But It is discussed a lot on all the blogs regarding the air intake issues and they have continuously changed the air intakes. The air intake in LSP 8 was significantly larger.
It is said that at very high speed engine is starved from air resulting into underperformance.

 

[HariPrasad-1]

I cannot find the official report from DRDO spokesman which conformed their are no issues with air-intake for both MK1 and MK2, Its posted in this thread as well ..

Yes but if you remember the talk of late shree Parvez khokkar, he had criticized DRDO fro hiding the issue. He had specifically mentioned faulty design of air intake. He had mentioned some issue with wings as well.

 

[HariPrasad-1]

I cannot find the official report from DRDO spokesman which conformed their are no issues with air-intake for both MK1 and MK2, Its posted in this thread as well ..

A new designed redome with 0.5m plug was proposed for Aeridynamic improvements. Do you know whether new chobham redome incorporates that design change?

 

[rohit b3]

Tejas MK1 is a fine aircraft, It does not require any changes ..

Their are no air intake problems for MK1/1+/2 ..

Tejas mk1 is indeed a fine aircraft, yes., However
-it has a somewhat higher fuel consumption that can be improved(compared to Gripen)
- It was a Low Thrust to Weight Ratio of 0.94 with 100% Fuel (1.07 on Wikipedia is incorrect info)

Tejas mk1A was a brilliant move by HAL and Parrikar. If the Weight is slashed by even 500 kgs, both the drag will go down and Thrust to Weight ratio will go up.
Another thing i wanted of the Tejas was a slightly higher Weapons load. That can be done too, if the Empty weight goes down without affecting the Max Take off weight. Need to wait and see.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

I cannot compare with anything as this Aircraft was tailor made for IAF under IAF guidance..

It might be true but does not hinder its flight characteristics designated in IOC and FOC ..

=======

MK1A is more of a stop gap measure until MK2 is ready and flying in numbers, It will keep up production line running and operational, MK1A weight reduction is for mounting AESA radar, Its good development and must be continued ..

Interesting time indeed ahead, Specially additional production line with Pvt sector ..

Tejas mk1 is indeed a fine aircraft, yes., However
-it has a somewhat higher fuel consumption that can be improved(compared to Gripen)
- It was a Low Thrust to Weight Ratio of 0.94 with 100% Fuel (1.07 on Wikipedia is incorrect info)

Tejas mk1A was a brilliant move by HAL and Parrikar. If the Weight is slashed by even 500 kgs, both the drag will go down and Thrust to Weight ratio will go up.
Another thing i wanted of the Tejas was a slightly higher Weapons load. That can be done too, if the Empty weight goes down without affecting the Max Take off weight. Need to wait and see.

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

I cannot say as my knowledge is limited here ..

A new designed redome with 0.5m plug was proposed
for Aeridynamic improvements. Do you know whether new chobham redome incorporates that design change?