ADA Tejas (LCA) News and Discussions

[Filtercoffee]

Maybe rated but could, you are saying?

 

[IndianHawk]

Maybe rated but could you are saying?

No no I made a mistake. It's top speed is 2205 km/hr I simply converted that into Mach 2.2 while it actually converts to Mach 1.8.

But none of lca competitors including paki f16 and jf17 can go faster than LCA.

So anyway we have already got the speed covered and we can focus on other aspects.

For a light fighter going above Mach 2 will cripple the range by burning all the fuel in a very short time.

 

[Filtercoffee]

No no I made a mistake. It's top speed is 2205 km/hr I simply converted that into Mach 2.2 while it actually converts to Mach 1.8.

But none of lca competitors including paki f16 and jf17 can go faster than LCA.

So anyway we have already got the speed covered and we can focus on other aspects.

For a light fighter going above Mach 2 will cripple the range by burning all the fuel in a very short time.

They have a probe for fuel ready, range isn't a problem. After 414, the Mach number will go up at all altitudes. as for unrestricted flying the real number is your knowledge.

 

[StealthFlanker]

I hope they get an engine with 125KN of thrust, might get it it to a 2.5 Mach number.

They have a probe for fuel ready, range isn't a problem. After 414, the Mach number will go up at all altitudes. as for unrestricted flying the real number is your knowledge.

That not how it work, engine with higher static thrust rating doesn't get you to higher speed. Otherwise ,later F-16 and F-15 would be much faster than early version.

 

[Filtercoffee]

That not how it work, engine with higher static thrust rating doesn't get you to higher speed

And yet they could get it better. disappointing to say the least to your idea.

 

[Filtercoffee]

That not how it work, engine with higher static thrust rating doesn't get you to higher speed. Otherwise ,later F-16 and F-15 would be much faster than early version.

The airframe is rated at Mach 2.5 and have super cruise at Mach 1.8 at all altitudes. First we wait for the FOC then we try to get your truly to agree on going faster.

 

[StealthFlanker]

And yet they could get it better. disappointing to say the least to your idea.

When did they said they got LCA to Mach 2.5 with the F414 or did you just come up with that idea because you think more static thrust mean more speed ?

The airframe is rated at Mach 2.5 at all altitudes.

Absolute nonsense, there is not a single aircraft flying today or in the next 20-30 years is rated for Mach 2.5 at all altitude, and i mean it. Not a single one , not even the famous SR-71 or Mig-25 is rated for Mach 2.5 at all altitude

 

[airtel]

Mk1A is supposed to reduce weight plus a more powerful engine.
So technically it shall be able to carry heavier payloads.

I hope they get an engine with 125KN of thrust, might get it it to a 2.5 Mach number.

MK1a will use GE 404 instead of 98kn GE 414 , because Tejas Air-frame is not designed for Such high thrust ..................it can damage the Air-frames .

if it can not use 98kn Engine then how it will use 125 Kn Engine ??

May be they can use after Modifications in Air-frames in MK-2 .

 

[Filtercoffee]

If the rating is at 1.8 Mach then why is there a problem for 2.5 Mach? After modifications. Remember we are waiting for a hot engine at 110-125KN thrust.

 

[airtel]

If the rating is at 1.8 Mach then why is there a problem for 2.5 Mach? After modifications. Remember we are waiting for a hot engine at 110-125KN thrust.

MK-1a will not use 110-125KN Engine ..............also Such type of "Modifications" means designing a New Aircraft from zero .

 

[StealthFlanker]

If the rating is at 1.8 Mach then why is there a problem for 2.5 Mach? After modifications.

Because going faster is not that easy. It is a matter of trade-off. If you want to go fast , you normally need a variable inlet and a low bypass engine. Variable inlet is heavier and require more maintenance, low bypass engine have lower thrust and less fuel efficient. And going fast, you need wing that ihas lower Cd , but lower Cd often mean lower CL too, that mean less turning performance.

 

[Filtercoffee]

MK-1a will not use 110-125KN Engine ..............also Such type of "Modifications" means designing a New Aircraft from zero .

Sir if you could read back there were talks of a Kaveri or 414 hot engine with a thrust equivalent to the F16 engine. There won't be a problem if applied to this aircraft.

 

[Filtercoffee]

Because going faster is not that easy. It is a matter of trade-off. If you want to go fast , you normally need a variable inlet and a low bypass engine. Variable inlet is heavier and require more maintenance, low bypass engine have lower thrust and less fuel efficient. And going fast, you need wing that ihas lower Cd , but lower Cd often mean lower CL too, that mean less turning performance.

I'm sorry but the parameters are changeable knowing the current government. Further reading might suggest this to be as passable as the next.

 

[airtel]

Sir if you could read back there were talks of a Kaveri or 414 hot engine with a thrust equivalent to the F16 engine. There won't be a problem if applied to this aircraft.

I'm sorry but the parameters are changeable knowing the current government. Further reading might suggest this to be as passable as the next.

sir , with due respect , Laws of Physics does not depend of Government .

Do you even Know the thrust of F-16 Engine ??

Thrust of Kaveri (which is based of Kabini core or Snecma’s core ) can not be Increased to the Level of 125 Kn , Because then we will have to change it's core , that means designing a New engine with a new Core from start .

 

[StealthFlanker]

I'm sorry but the parameters are changeable knowing the current government. Further reading might suggest this to be as passable as the next.

Unless you get a different inlet , different engine (basically get new aircraft ), LCA wont get to Mach 2.5.

 

[HariPrasad-1]

You think after improvements and F414 it will make Mach 2.5?

No. It will touch Mach 1.8 which is good. Su 30 MKI in indian conditions does not do more than Mach 1.9.

 

[HariPrasad-1]

Mach No itself is confusing. Some people take it 1200 KM per Hour and some people take it around 1020 KM. LCA in KM has done 1699 Km in one of the test. This was the highest speed of Tejas noticed some 2 years ago. Now, I do not know whether LCA crossed it. I think it is a good speed.

 

[HariPrasad-1]

When did they said they got LCA to Mach 2.5 with the F414 or did you just come up with that idea because you think more static thrust mean more speed ?

Absolute nonsense, there is not a single aircraft flying today or in the next 20-30 years is rated for Mach 2.5 at all altitude, and i mean it. Not a single one , not even the famous SR-71 or Mig-25 is rated for Mach 2.5 at all altitude

Yes, crossing mach 1 is also difficult task. Where tejas can fly at 1700 KMPH at high altitude, It just does 1350 KM at hot weather sea level trial. This is true for missiles also. When they fired at high altitude (SAM), their speed almost gets doubled. Air density plays a very very important role in speed and range of missiles. Brahmos does 300 KM at high altitude and does 120 KM at low level flight.

 

[Superdefender]

If the rating is at 1.8 Mach then why is there a problem for 2.5 Mach? After modifications. Remember we are waiting for a hot engine at 110-125KN thrust.

Hey, you are talking about AMCA right? It will be the fastest beast among all 5th gen fighters with speed exceeding mach 2.5; but common man LCA can't reach mach 2.5. Its frame can not sustain that speed. See, speed of F-35 is just mach 1.8 despite of a single +190kN!! To get more speed, you have to make front radome section longer (like AMCA), make the height less so that less drag will happen. It's all physical tinkering. Then there is modification of air intake inlate and optimum engine thrust. Less drag (no weapons, no fuel pod outside) will result more speed. That's why stealth is the way forward.

 

[Tejas_Champ]

Tejas will be a capable fighter jet. But anyone else think we should invest in future technologies? The Americans have been researching 6th generation fighter technologies for sometime. We should do the same.

Stuff like point defense laser weapons, smart skin, full autonomy, even new propulsion systems that to reach low orbit. We should do stuff like that too.