ADA Tejas Mark-II/Medium Weight Fighter

[porky_kicker]

By looking at canard position i assume they are non moving...
It will be huge panalty in AOA I guess...

Mentions hinge in hal pic and so it has to be moving in my opinion.

 

[Enquirer]

By looking at canard position i assume they are non moving...
It will be huge panalty in AOA I guess...

Eh?
Firstly the canard is joined to the body by a hinge - so there's an option to rotate.
Secondly, even it the canard doesn't move it will still improve the AoA!
In all probability, the initial tests (&FBW) will keep the canard stationary. In advanced variants the canard will probably be used to give the aircraft more maneuverability.

 

[uoftotaku]

Fixed canards of that size would be counter productive and hinder maneuverability. Has to be all moving

 

[Arihant Roy]

Mentions hinge in hal pic and a French guy was saying it is closed couple canard, so it has to be moving in my opinion.

Are you there in forum key publishing ?

 

[porky_kicker]

Are you there in forum key publishing ?

Only dfi ................................

 

[captscooby81]

If anyone watch closely both the Govt and IAF wants more Rafales . Its only the stupidity of having Anil Ambani has one of the offset partners has created most of the issues . Govt don't have $25 Bn in its budget to buy 126 Rafales neither to sign the contract. so best option buy 36 get the rest in few more batches. What screwed everything was when Congress started using Rafale as a scam because of the lazziness in Govt side to explain the deal and pricing initially now govt think if they go for follow on order congress will use it even more widely to pain the town in red by showing modi as corrupt .

Best option would be if Dassault buys out the remaining share of the joint venture and make it 100 % dassault owned subsidary to manufacture rafales in india and go ahead with 90 + 56 more for deal provided Rafale M demonstrates Folding wing capability

Govt don't want to touch F-16 or F-18 with a pole also with the current trade ban issues between India vs USA govt would surely want to keep americans away from MMRCA-2 for sure . Eurofighter already made its life miserable by unnecessarily poking the Rafale issue through Raga. Mig don't think IAF wants to get bitten by russians again . So all options lead to one way and its Only Rafale

BJP truly lacks in experience is very visible in Rafale issue
Congress does scams and don't get caught
Congress does scams and get caught still comes out clean
BJP does no scam and still gets screwed by opposition and media and portrayed as scams .

Being in Power is different and knowing how to use that power is all different game

 

[Enquirer]

If anyone watch closely both the Govt and IAF wants more Rafales . Its only the stupidity of having Anil Ambani has one of the offset partners has created most of the issues . Govt don't have $25 Bn in its budget to buy 126 Rafales neither to sign the contract. so best option buy 36 get the rest in few more batches. What screwed everything was when Congress started using Rafale as a scam because of the lazziness in Govt side to explain the deal and pricing initially now govt think if they go for follow on order congress will use it even more widely to pain the town in red by showing modi as corrupt .
Best option would be if Dassault buys out the remaining share of the joint venture and make it 100 % dassault owned subsidary to manufacture rafales in india and go ahead with 90 + 56 more for deal provided Rafale M demonstrates Folding wing capability

BJP truly lacks in experience is very visible in Rafale issue
Congress does scams and don't get caught
Congress does scams and get caught still comes out clean
BJP does no scam and still gets screwed by opposition and media and portrayed as scams .

Being in Power is different and knowing how to use that power is all different game

Pappu watched Trump and learnt!
Keep repeating lies a 1000 times, then at least half the population (who are morons anyways) will believe you.
In a way, you're right that Modi's team didn't do a good job in crushing the matter.
Hindu newspaper etc are acting as shameless stooges of Pappu! It was disgusting to watch N.Ram talk lies and shit!

 

[Bleh]

Compared to the last one, the spineof the tail looks different...

 

[rone]

View attachment 31906
Compared to the last one, the spineof the tail looks different...

Wait did anyone noticed the wing placemnt it pushed further back also previously it's position blended the front fueslege top edge now it blends to mid lower section plus elongated frnot nose ,so I think either it may have retractable ifr ,or irst sensors

 

[porky_kicker]

View attachment 31906
Compared to the last one, the spineof the tail looks different...

Because a spine section is missing one with the auxiliary intake for cooling

 

[Enquirer]

View attachment 31906
Compared to the last one, the spineof the tail looks different...

The nozzle is not part of the fuselage. It's built separately and attached to the engine directly.

 

[Bleh]

Because a spine section is missing one with the auxiliary intake for cooling

View attachment 31908

The nozzle is not part of the fuselage. It's built separately and attached to the engine directly.

I not talking about that scoop/budge on it, that came in the later prototypes, but the spine itself. The whole thing is raised... more like f-16 or jf-17.

Mark 1

Mark 2

 

[Rahul Singh]

By looking at canard position i assume they are non moving...
It will be huge panalty in AOA I guess...

Canards are all-moving and will be fully integrated with FCS (unlike LEVCON of NLCA). See the mention of a hinge.

 

[Enquirer]

I not talking about that scoop/budge on it, that came in the later prototypes, but the spine itself. The whole thing is raised... more like f-16 or jf-17.
View attachment 31909
Mark 1

Mark 2

Ok. I thought you drew the black trapezium at the tail.

Probably that's how they created space for the bigger engine (by lifting the parachute bay up)

 

[Bleh]

Ok. I thought you drew the black trapezium at the tail.

Probably that's how they created space for the bigger engine (by lifting the parachute bay up)

Yes, probably. It's only 70cm longer than Mark 1/A.

The chute-bay looked different & moved back, so i did draw the trapezium (by comparing with the nozzle on Mark1) trying to check...

 

[cyclops]

What exactly is the width of the centre fuselage of Tejas Mk1 & Mk1A?
Coz that of Mk2 is 2100mm.

If Tejas Mk2 is sufficiently wide enough than Mk1 & Mk1A then it might just get extra hardpoints thereby further justification of it being designated as a Medium Weight Fighter.

 

[Rahul Singh]

What exactly is the width of the centre fuselage of Tejas Mk1 & Mk1A?
Coz that of Mk2 is 2100mm.

If Tejas Mk2 is sufficiently wide enough than Mk1 & Mk1A then it might just get extra hardpoints thereby further justification of it being designated as a Medium Weight Fighter.

In all likelihood, landing gears have been moved to wing roots in AF MK-2 as well. So the addition of one more hard point at centre fuselage is a possibility.

Besides, there is a whisper about wingtip stations.

 

[NeXoft007]

Yes, probably. It's only 70cm longer than Mark 1/A.

The chute-bay looked different & moved back, so i did draw the trapezium (by comparing with the nozzle on Mark1) trying to check...

Tejas Mk.1 is 13.2m in length when the nozzle is included. Mk. 2 is 13.9m without the nozzle.
So obviously, length of Mk.2 will be ~1.5m longer than Mk.1, not 70cm, when the nozzle is included.

 

[Bleh]

Tejas Mk.1 is 13.2m in length when the nozzle is included. Mk. 2 is 13.9m without the nozzle.
So obviously, length of Mk.2 will be ~1.5m longer than Mk.1, not 70cm, when the nozzle is included.

That why i drew the nozzle here...

It looks like with the new raised position of the parachute bay compared to Mark 1, it doesn't look like a nozzle is going to result in any increase of length than what the fuselage presently is.

 

[G10]

Mk 2 was supposed to be 1 mtr longer not 1.5