ADA Tejas (LCA) News and Discussions

[TPFscopes]

Dassault converted its mirge-2000 to mirage 4000 in no time

https://www.dassault-aviation.com/en/passion/aircraft/military-dassault-aircraft/mirage-4000/

may be the carrier requirements of french & common EU proposal for a joint fighter (Typhoon, but french parted midway) meant that there was no oreder for this fighter

Actually It was surfaced for UAE requirements.
Like Thales downsize their RBE2 for LCA without any firm order.

 

[TPFscopes]

Thread is going on with full of baseless Desires

tired of answering the same concern again and again..

 

[Kshithij]

India's multi-role fighter Tejas to be equipped with world's fastest cruise missile -'Brahmos Light'

New Delhi: After the successful launch of the supersonic Brahmos cruise missile from the Sukhoi-30, ensuring a tactical advantage for the armed forces, work on 'BRAHMOS Light,' a lighter version of the missile that can be fired from the Tejas, the indigenously made Light Combat Aircraft that the Indian Air Force is acquiring, has begun.

The new version of the Brahmos will have a smaller engine. The warhead will be about the same but the weight of the missile will be considerably less. The lighter missile's range will be about the same: 300 km.

A senior defence official said it is "currently in the design stage, though initial consultations have been held." The missile is likely to be ready by 2019.

The Brahmos ('Brah' from Brahmaputra and 'Mos' from Moscow) is a missile jointly developed in the late Nineties.

Its speed makes interception difficult. As the Tejas is a lighter aircraft compared with to the Sukhoi-30 (about 1,000kg to 1,800 kg), a lighter missile becomes necessary. The IAF is looking at over 120 Tejas fighter aircraft in the future.

http://www.timesnownews.com/india/a...os-launch-iaf-to-acquire-brahmos-light/133256

 

[Steven Rogers]

Tejas MK2 is not an interceptor. It is a full fledged aircraft. It is smaller than Gripen E in size and weight but has same thrust and hence probably higher payload than Gripen E.

Only according to media and foreign lobbyists it is an interceptor, not in real life.



I don't know about length of Brahmos NG. But, current version is 8+ metres long. NG may be thinner but not shorter as they are going to use scramjet with no oxidizer in fuel mixture.

I would say maximum permissible length is less than 6 metres in MK2. Brahmos mini may or may not fit due to length, but it will not fit due to weight. Maximum payload per hardpoint is 1.2ton under fuselage and 2 inner wing hardpoint.

Nirbhay is different from Brahmos as Nirbhay uses turbofan engine and is much more efficient per kg of fuel. So, smaller nirbhay will be meaningful. Brahmos is supersonic and uses turbojet. Turbojet is inefficient and speeds above 0.8Mach have higher drag which also increases Brahmos fuel consumption. Smaller brahmos will be wasteful. Even guided bombs travel about 60km when dropped from a fast moving plane from 10km height


PS- Next time POST ONLY 1 REPLY WITH ALL CONTENT. DON'T SPAM THE THREAD WITH A DOZEN REPLIES. YOU CAN QUOTE ALL THE MESSAGES YOU WANT TO REPLY TO AND REPLY THEM ONE. BY ONE

BrahMos don't turbojet but uses Ramjet, Scramjets are triggered for hypersonic flight, they needed to be accelerated at Mach 4.5 or above.

Sent from my Aqua Ace II using Tapatalk

 

[Fulcrum21]

Light Combat Aircrafts around the world do have Cruise missile capability and so there should not be any discrimination for home made Tejas and it deserves its teeth.

 

[Kshithij]

BrahMos don't turbojet but uses Ramjet, Scramjets are triggered for hypersonic flight, they needed to be accelerated at Mach 4.5 or above.

Sent from my Aqua Ace II using Tapatalk

Then, how will Brahmos size be reduced without sacrificing range? What changes will they do?

 

[Steven Rogers]

Then, how will Brahmos size be reduced without sacrificing range? What changes will they do?

The range so far is 300km for BrahMos mini, current BrahMos sized missile don't need any thing to increase the range from 300 to 600kms, just some software unlocks, BrahMos was always made to strike farther, the restriction was due MTCR.

Sent from my Aqua Ace II using Tapatalk

 

[undeadmyrmidon]

Is Brahmos M faster at Mach 3.5 ?

 

[Babloo Singh]

you're assuming too much about me. You don't know me.

My humble opinion
1. only naive fools read ToI, and other media for news.
> True... News is either paid for or it is there to fill up space as they were paid not to publish real news.

2. no matter what you say, the mk2 is on back burner, and there's no airframe/design specs out, yet..
> True IMO, it's on back burner but it's on back burner for good reason, reason is Kaveri. Seems Safran will fullfil its commitment and we are going to have certified engine by end of 2018. Things are heald up awaiting final spec of finished Kaveri... It will be foolish to design MK 2 around GE414 in current situation.

3. I always maintain that the Tejas program is not going to go anywhere, too much time and energy has been invested to create an aerospace ecosystem in the country.
> Tejas with Kaveri is going to stay... since MK1 is designed keeping Kaveri in mind... a 60/90+ Kn Kaveri may make Mk1A as capable as planned MK2 except for range... lets wait and see how things shape up

4. The IAF is genuinely impressed by the Tejas in its present form. they badly want to get the mk1A into service and on its way to squadrons; the Southern Command's AOC-in-C taking a sortie was meant to convey that message.
> Agree A MK1A with reduced weight will be great plane. It will be deadly with a 60/90 + engine which will make it supercruze..... expect production pushed to 16 & then 24 per year ASAP once this is done.

5. I know the services well, especially the Navy, and yes, the IN is keenly monitoring the programme as well. the thought is the Mk2 could be a possible carrier based strike aircraft. But not the Mk1 (and certainly not the MiG-29K)

> If we get Kaveri MK1 A than MK 2 will be developed as focused carrier based aircraft, which will be adapted to Air force needs later.

 

[Babloo Singh]

> If we get Kaveri MK1 A than MK 2 will be developed as focused carrier based aircraft, which will be adapted to Air force needs later.

Well I messed up formatting my reply to @binayak95 ... hope this one is visible...


1. only naive fools read ToI, and other media for news.
> True... News is either paid for or it is there to fill up space as they were paid not to publish real news.

2. no matter what you say, the mk2 is on back burner, and there's no airframe/design specs out, yet..
> True IMO, it's on back burner but it's on back burner for good reason, reason is Kaveri. Seems Safran will fullfil its commitment and we are going to have certified engine by end of 2018. Things are heald up awaiting final spec of finished Kaveri... It will be foolish to design MK 2 around GE414 in current situation.

3. I always maintain that the Tejas program is not going to go anywhere, too much time and energy has been invested to create an aerospace ecosystem in the country.
> Tejas with Kaveri is going to stay... since MK1 is designed keeping Kaveri in mind... a 60/90+ Kn Kaveri may make Mk1A as capable as planned MK2 except for range... lets wait and see how things shape up

4. The IAF is genuinely impressed by the Tejas in its present form. they badly want to get the mk1A into service and on its way to squadrons; the Southern Command's AOC-in-C taking a sortie was meant to convey that message.
> Agree A MK1A with reduced weight will be great plane. It will be deadly with a 60/90 + engine which will make it supercruze..... expect production pushed to 16 & then 24 per year ASAP once this is done.

5. I know the services well, especially the Navy, and yes, the IN is keenly monitoring the programme as well. the thought is the Mk2 could be a possible carrier based strike aircraft. But not the Mk1 (and certainly not the MiG-29K)

 

[TPFscopes]

Well I messed up formatting my reply to @binayak95 ... hope this one is visible...

2. no matter what you say, the mk2 is on back burner, and there's no airframe/design specs out, yet..
> True IMO, it's on back burner but it's on back burner for good reason, reason is Kaveri. Seems Safran will fullfil its commitment and we are going to have certified engine by end of 2018. Things are heald up awaiting final spec of finished Kaveri... It will be foolish to design MK 2 around GE414 in current situation.

3. I always maintain that the Tejas program is not going to go anywhere, too much time and energy has been invested to create an aerospace ecosystem in the country.
> Tejas with Kaveri is going to stay... since MK1 is designed keeping Kaveri in mind... a 60/90+ Kn Kaveri may make Mk1A as capable as planned MK2 except for range... lets wait and see how things shape up

4. The IAF is genuinely impressed by the Tejas in its present form. they badly want to get the mk1A into service and on its way to squadrons; the Southern Command's AOC-in-C taking a sortie was meant to convey that message.
> Agree A MK1A with reduced weight will be great plane. It will be deadly with a 60/90 + engine which will make it supercruze..... expect production pushed to 16 & then 24 per year ASAP once this is done.

5. I know the services well, especially the Navy, and yes, the IN is keenly monitoring the programme as well. the thought is the Mk2 could be a possible carrier based strike aircraft. But not the Mk1 (and certainly not the MiG-29K)

I want to correct some points...
Safranized kaveri might get completed by 2018 end with will further need almost a year for certification..
And AFAIK, even if kaveri will be ready by 2019 but initial batches of LCAs (FOC) will have F404 engine which will be replaced with Kaveri during overhaul..

And for carrier based ops IN is pretty much interested to have Rafale-M. But they may buy NLCA mk-2 as shore based fighter..

 

[Babloo Singh]

I want to correct some points...
Safranized kaveri might get completed by 2018 end with will further need almost a year for certification..
And AFAIK, even if kaveri will be ready by 2019 but initial batches of LCAs (FOC) will have F404 engine which will be replaced with Kaveri during overhaul..

And for carrier based ops IN is pretty much interested to have Rafale-M. But they may buy NLCA mk-2 as shore based fighter..

My point is once Safranized kaveri is completed, we get data like exact weight, dimensions, center of gravity & fuel consumption... The push on LCA MK1A or Mk2 will start from that point onward.
There will be need to make some adjustments to weight distribution & controls, so by the time engine is certified those changes will be done.
Another key point is fuel efficiency of this engine... if it's more efficient that GE404 so as to improve range than we will be focused on MK1A, if it's say less efficient than GE414 than we may need to rework on internal fuel capacity of MK2.
My point is Tejas 1A & 2 both are on pause mode awaiting Good news & Data from Safranized kaveri

 

[TPFscopes]

My point is Tejas 1A & 2 both are on pause mode awaiting Good news & Data from Safranized kaveri

As planned, mk1a will have fixtures for both f404 and kaveri.
Mk1a is delayed because it is totally depends on MK1 FOC.

According to some media hypes, mk1a will have weight reduction of 1000kgs which is totally BS. HAL can only cut down max to max 300-400kgs without any major modification. 1000kgs is possible but it'll require major modification including landing gear system, which requires IOC and FOC again for modified design, hence it is unlikely...

 

[Babloo Singh]

As planned, mk1a will have fixtures for both f404 and kaveri.
Mk1a is delayed because it is totally depends on MK1 FOC.

According to some media hypes, mk1a will have weight reduction of 1000kgs which is totally BS. HAL can only cut down max to max 300-400kgs without any major modification. 1000kgs is possible but it'll require major modification including landing gear system, which requires IOC and FOC again for modified design, hence it is unlikely...

If we assume 300-400 kg weight reduction which is say 5% & increased dry thrust if Safranized Kaveri ( from 50 to 60+ Kn) which is 20%+ and smaller dimension (Length 349cm vs 391 of GE404)
We are going to have a real potent aircraft here. It will supercruze and will have better range & will have some internal space to fit in EW suit or to increase internal fuel capacity....
We will need to get one more assembly line to churn out 24-30 units per year.
Lets hope all this comes true.

 

[sthf]

To develop one weapon system, it takes a lot of iterations of design, testing (simulation as well as prototype), optimization, before it is put into production. In many cases, after initial induction, further modifications are carried out using inputs from the operator.

Agreed and is not the point.

You argued that IA & IAF have a tendency to go for systems who have attained "maturity in their respective "home countries". I gave you four different examples that prove otherwise but now you are lecturing me on canards and drag when none of it has anything to do with your claims.

This is true for T-72. A bulk of the design effort that went into T-72 also went into T-90.

Once again, not the point. T-90 attained "maturity" in Indian service because of OFB not Russia (Home country).

Ditto for MiG-29 and Sukhoi-27/30. These were neither designed by Mikoyan-Guryevich Design Bureau (MiG), nor by Sukhoi Design Bureau. If you are interested to know who designed it, ask.

Put on your reading glasses and go through the post once again and after you have done that point me to the place where word "design" has been used.

You said "mature systems", I said Mig-29 entered service in India the same time as Soviets.

The British developed the Vickers Mark I but then went on to develop it further and proceeded to Mark II and Mark III. For you kind information, the UK built the first 90 Vickers Mark I/Vijayanta tanks. Part of the design also overlapped with the UK's Chieftain tank, which was inducted by the UK.

Once again, I don't care about the "design overlap". Vijayanta was inducted in Indian service "without attaining maturity in home country". Whatever maturity it attained was in Indian service and not in "home country".

Whatever they did was for their own needs. India specific requirements are not the requirements of the home countries.

Never said that they were. The fact is that both IA and IAF bought substandard "unproven" weapon systems and turned them into good fighting machines. On the other hand they are unwilling to give a similar chance to home grown products like LCA and Arjun.

But please tell me more about Tu-144, design houses, canards and drag despite that I never used any of these words and never asked for them.

 

[Shashank Nayak]

Where is LCA sp-5.. In an article on October 31tst.. it was reported that sp-5 would fly in 3 days.. and sp-7 in 10 days
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com...ction-work-for-tejas/articleshow/61363473.cms

 

[lcafanboy]

Where is LCA sp-5.. In an article on October 31tst.. it was reported that sp-5 would fly in 3 days.. and sp-7 in 10 days
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com...ction-work-for-tejas/articleshow/61363473.cms

With the reservation quota chaap employees of HAL who are good for nothing parasites living on tax payer's money...................

 

[Steven Rogers]

With the reservation quota chaap employees of HAL who are good for nothing parasites living on tax payer's money...................

How many employees in HAL have got the job with the help of reservation.

Sent from my Aqua Ace II using Tapatalk

 

[tejas warrior]

A very potential Air to Ground mission profile :

LSP-7 (KH-2017) taxying out with four 1000lbs live bombs and the centreline drop tank for a test sortie..

#TejasLCA #NFTC #ADA #TejasOfficialArchive

Jai Hind.

 

[tejas warrior]

Where is LCA sp-5.. In an article on October 31tst.. it was reported that sp-5 would fly in 3 days.. and sp-7 in 10 days
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com...ction-work-for-tejas/articleshow/61363473.cms

It will come.. SP5 & SP7 both.

SP5 is first fighter from 2nd line which is facing some issues.

Maybe SP7 comes before SP5.. But it doesn't matter to me if they are not occuping Final assembly line.