ADA Tejas Mark-II/Medium Weight Fighter

[ersakthivel]

You should know, because in your very own words Tejas beat Su-30Mki at top speed, and you have been posting this for the last 4 years. I'd take it with a side serving of a link or the acceptance that you made it up Either shall suffice.



And what was the original intended sea level top speed as per the design? You don't know and you just made that fact up. Implementation of the Nose cone wasn't the only recommendation from that paper, correction to the trailing edge (done in LSP-5 IIRC), reshaping of pylons was also recommended.



Better than making up facts like you do. Agree ?



In India, tax payers aren't anonymous

Yup. That's the way Swedes do it, they accelerate the program to the hilt, they simulate as much of the program as possible to save the costs of flight tests and their programs deliver the promised capability on time. Meanwhile, how many Indian Pilots were squashed like bugs due to crashing MiGs while waiting for Tejas? Dozens. Incompetence and ineptitude and underestimation of program complexity has no part to play in Tejas delays. Still waiting for 2012 FOC and 31st march roll out of series production aircrafts. Sure, the program was 'safe' but the MiGs weren't. Remind me again, when was Tejas supposed to enter into service originally ? You know, post sanctions.

the funding for building just two tejas technology demonstrators were released only in 1993, they flew in 2001,

Then a realistic time line for induction is 2010 according to MSD woolen who was an IAF chief and HAL chief in his fact file article posted before IAF request, which led to FSED phase-2 in 2004, which further delayed induction.

SO only eggsperts like you can hold tejas responsible for all the deaths of mig-21 pilots from 1993 to 2013, not real aviation watchers!!!!

ofcourse eggsperts like you will contrive to forget the time line for all other 4.5th gen fighters which took no less than 15 years to mature and enter into service and put the entire blame on Tejas for the death of mig pilots from 1993 to 2014,

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Indian-made fighter plane Tejas clocks fastest speed - Thaindian News

12/8/2009 6:24:00 PM by IANS

Panaji, Dec 8 (IANS) Light combat aircraft (LCA) Tejas notched a speed of over 1,350 km per hour — the fastest by an indigenously-made fighter aircraft — during its sea level flight trials off Goa Tuesday, a senior Indian Air Force official said.


Tejas which is undergoing rigorous testing in saline, humid marine conditions in and off the coast of Goa, had performed admirably in the two-week long trials in Goa, Air Commodore Rohit Varma who is also the commanding officer of the Bangalore-based National Flight Testing Centre (NFTC) told reporters at the INS Hansa naval base Tuesday.

"The trials which lasted for two weeks comprised of flutter clearances, weapons firing, performance, stability and avionics validation. The LCA is the first supersonic fighter being manufactured indigenously by Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL)," Varma, an elite pilot himself, said.

As part of the initial operational clearance, the Aeronautics Development Agency (ADA) had inducted three aircraft to Goa for conducting various sea-level flight tests, he said.

Varma also said that the LCA had already been tested in other extreme atmospheric conditions.

"Tejas has already been tested for high altitude and cold climate at Leh and in the desert environment of Rajasthan," he said. "During the trials Tejas clocked in excess of 1,350 kmph," Varma said, adding that the ADA in tandem with HAL was also in the process of manufacturing a naval version of the LCA.

"While the present trials are in progress for the air force version, the first prototype aircraft for the navy is also under production. The LCA-navy will be capable of taking off and landing on an aircraft carrier," he said.

The LCA is expected to cost Rs.150 crore per aircraft and will find its home at the Sulur air force base near Coimbatore. The Indian Air Force has already ordered 20 LCAs from HAL, which will be delivered to them by 2013.

Air Vice Marshal Shankar Mani, who was also present during the media briefing, said the IAF could place a further order of 20 more LCAs after the first order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fighter aircraft Tejas clocks fastest speed during testing - Indian Express

Indian Air Force - News & Discussion # 13 [Archive] - Key Publishing Ltd Aviation Forums
------------------------------------------

The details of the flutter test is --"INS Hansa Base (Goa), Dec 9 (PTI) The aircraft dived towards the sea as the pilot lifted his hands off the control stick for five seconds. In such a short duration, it had plummeted from four kilometres above sea level to just 900 metres before the pilot hit to the throttle again to take to the skies.
".

So tejas achieved this topspeed while pulling out of the powerless dive from 4 Km altitude at sea level.

ADA IOS release says "supersonic at altitudes,","http://tejas.gov.in/IOC-Brochure.pdf"

 

[ersakthivel]

And what was the original intended sea level top speed as per the design? You don't know and you just made that fact up. Implementation of the Nose cone wasn't the only recommendation from that paper, correction to the trailing edge (done in LSP-5 IIRC), reshaping of pylons was also recommended.

LCA Tejas - Featured Articles: The Light Combat Aircraft Story by Air Marshal MSD Wollen (Retd)

Space constraints prevent any meaningful description of materials, technology, facilities, processes developed for execution of the project. Military aviation enthusiasts may read a monograph on Aeronautical Technology that has attained maturity through DRDO efforts; much of this technology finds application in the LCA project. The monograph was brought out at Aero India 1998.

The LCA is tailless with a double-sweep delta wing. Its wing span is 8.2 m, length 13.2 m, height 4.4 m. TOW clean 8.500 kg, MTOW 12500kg. It will be super-sonic at all altitudes, max speed of M 1.5 at the tropopause. Specific excess power and g-over load data has not been published. Maximum sustained rate of turn will be 17 deg per sec and maximum attainable 30 deg per sec.

The above is a true expert quote.

not an eggspert quote like yours, its initial topspeed was to be mach 1.5 at service ceiling and supersonic at sea level.
According to ADA IOC-2 brochure , It is supersonic in all altitudes and the following page lists mach 1.6 as achieved top speed,
http://www.tejas.gov.in/specifications/leading_particulars_and_performance.html

http://www.tejas.gov.in/history/timeline.html

2009
22nd January - Tejas completed 1000 flights.

October - PV-3 and LSP-2 completed air-to-ground weapons delivery trials.

26th November - Two seater (Trainer) version of Tejas (PV-5) made its maiden flight on 26 Nov 09.

7th December - Tejas speed envelope expanded to 1350 km/h (CAS) while performing flight flutter test in a dive to near sea level. These tests were conducted at INS Hansa, Goa.

The above is from tejas history page listing the timeline,

It says that Tejas speed envelope expanded to 1350 km/h (CAS) while performing flight flutter test in a dive to near sea level. These tests were conducted at INS Hansa, Goa

You can assume that normal indian summer temp hovers from high 30s to low 40 degreee. So the speed achieved in those hot and humid condition is significant considering the ambient temperature's effect on jet thrust.

 

[Pulkit]

I think u had shared that article on another page ..... idrw cannot be trusted tarmak cannot be trusted whom will you rely on then...
On this forum I have seen many people quoting article from idrw....
Asumption you call it I can call u calculated estimation...

but i wish u were true....

idrw not a reliable reference. And the whole article is an assumption. There is 6 month for december. All ground tests and fuel drop tanks test did in just 5 months so bvr can be tested till then

 

[abhi_the _gr8_maratha]

I think u had shared that article on another page ..... idrw cannot be trusted tarmak cannot be trusted whom will you rely on then...
On this forum I have seen many people quoting article from idrw....
Asumption you call it I can call u calculated estimation...

but i wish u were true....

there are many reasons for sharing
.
yesterday I didn't posted the article about help of saab for mk2 will be great and later you posted it. Now that's I posted that article earlier....... If I haven't, anyone would have posted that.
.

 

[Pulkit]

leave that bro thats not the issue.....

there are many reasons for sharing
.
yesterday I didn't posted the article about help of saab for mk2 will be great and later you posted it. Now that's I posted that article earlier....... If I haven't, anyone would have posted that.
.

 

[abhi_the _gr8_maratha]

@Pulkit its just an article of assumption. Reliable sources have quote of drdo,hal,iaf etc. Or of their official spokesperson.

 

[abhi_the _gr8_maratha]

I was quite suspicious about the word ' india' since su30mki is russian fighter made in india but the link by ersakthivel clearly says manufactured indigenously ,su30mki is manufactured indigenously.
.
there was another link quoting gripen c will be upgraded to E with aesa radar( surprisingly, there are many upgrades in E also known as gripen NG)
.
so tejas still have aesa advantage over gripen c.....
.
this reporters reports too shorts be even cuts important part.

 

[power_monger]

Inaccurate, Tejas has a much larger radome dia than Rafale and herein falls flat your argument. For reference
KAI T-50 - 490 mm
Mirage-2000 - 500 mm
Rafale - 550 mm
F-16- 740x480 mm oval.
Gripen - 600 mm
Tejas - 650 mm
Eurofighter - 750 mm.

Radome means a Dome with Radar inside it.(Dome is to protect radar from external infliuences suc as weather).So given technology being same,can tejas have more radar detection range than rafale?Practically does it mean, given same radar technology Tejas can detect and have missile lock on rafale first in a pure air-air combat ?

 

[Pulkit]

Not being part of the organisations involved I can only assume and all the assumptions are based on the information I get online....

After that SAAB article I was also wondering about another hypothetical comparison between Rafale and Tejas MK2....

Its hypothetical and there are not many basis to make that comparison but still tried to compare :


Just if all the upgradadtion modification required for MK2 occur successfully then Tejas MK2 will give a good fight to Rafale...
Though cannot say which one will be superior or will have an edge over the other...
Not hoping for a miracle here....


I dont understand how vital this could be but:

Dry thrust and thrust after burner is more in Tejasmk1.
Tejas mk2 WILL HAVE MORE FUEL capability more than 2500 (No Sources as the length will be increased and the fuselage will be carrying more fuel do provide some information on this) Rafale has 4700kg as capacity.

Speed we already know of MK1 is 1.6 and tejas is 1.8 .
Weaponary on tejas is more suitable to us than on rafale as many of the domestic arms are used.
though with extra fuel even the combat radius and range will also be improved.
But till the time anything is tabled these will remain just expectations and assumptions.

Please do add to it.


Airframe Modifications

Minor modifications are being made to the LCA Tejas Mk1 airframe to accommodate the slightly larger engine. The fuselage has been extended by 500mm.

--------------------------

The dimensions of Mk2 will be as follows

Span : 8.20m
Length: 13.70m
Height: 4.52m

--------------------------

Upgrades

Besides a more powerful engine, Tejas Mk-2 will feature other improvements. Here is the complete list of planned upgrades

1 Higher Thrust Engine
2 Structural Weight Reduction
3 Aerodynamic Improvements
4 Upgrade of Flight Control Computer
5 Electronic Warfare Suite
6 Avionics Upgrade
7 In flight refuelling retractable probe
8 On board oxygen generation system
9 Increased fuel capacity.

--------------------------

Features

1 Supersonic at all altitudes
2 15km service altitude
3 Tailless compound delta wing
4 Composite structure
5 Improved performance
6 Improved maintainability
7 Improved Survivability
8 Digital Fly by wire
9 Fuel dump system
10 Multi mode radar AESA

all these over the capability of todays Tejas MK1
General characteristics

Crew: 1
Length: 13.20 m (43 ft 4 in)
Wingspan: 8.20 m (26 ft 11 in)
Height: 4.40 m (14 ft 9 in)
Wing area: 38.4 m² (413 ft²)
Empty weight: 6,500 kg (14,300 lb)
Loaded weight: 9,500 kg[127] (20,944 lb)
Max. takeoff weight: 13,200 kg[127] (29,100 lb)
Powerplant: 1 × F404-GE-IN20 turbofan
Dry thrust: 53.9 kN[130] (12,100 lbf)
Thrust with afterburner: 89.8 kN (20,200 lbf[131])
Internal fuel capacity: 2,458 kg
External fuel capacity: 2 x 1,200-litre drop tank at inboard, 1 x 725-litre drop tank under fuselage
Performance

Maximum speed: Tested up to Mach 1.6 for IOC-I (1,350 km/h) (CAS) at high altitude,[127] theoretically capable of Mach 1.8[132]
Range: 850 km[133] (459 nmi, 528 mi)
Combat radius: 1300 km[133] (162 nmi, 186 mi)
Ferry range: 3,000 km, Theoretically capable of 3,500 km[82] (1,840 mi)
Service ceiling: 15,000 m[127] (49,200 ft, possibility of being raised to 60,000 ft)
Wing loading: 247 kg/m² (50.7 lb/ft²)
Thrust/weight: 1.07[127]

g-limits: +8/−3.5 g[127] (to be raised to +10/-3.5 g)
Armament


Guns: 1× mounted 23 mm twin-barrel GSh-23 cannon with 220 rounds of ammunition.
Hardpoints: 8 total: 1× beneath the port-side intake trunk for targeting pods, 6× under-wing, and 1× under-fuselage with a capacity of 4,200 kg external fuel and ordnance
Missiles:


HAL Tejas carrying R-73 missile and Drop Tank.
Tejas weapon display Aero India 2011Air-to-air missiles:
Python 5
Derby[137]
Astra
Vympel R-77
Vympel R-73
Air-to-surface missiles:
Kh-59ME (TV guided standoff Missile)
Kh-59MK (Laser guided standoff Missile)
Anti-ship missiles
Kh-35
Kh-31
Bombs:
[134]
KAB-1500L laser-guided bombs
GBU-16 Paveway II
FAB-250
ODAB-500PM fuel-air explosives
ZAB-250/350 incendiary bombs
BetAB-500Shp powered concrete-piercing bombs
FAB-500T dumb bombs
OFAB-250-270 dumb bombs
OFAB-100-120 dumb bombs
RBK-500 cluster bomb stake
Others:[134]
S-8 rocket pods
Bofors 135 mm rocket
Drop tanks for ferry flight/extended range/loitering time.
LITENING targeting pod

For Rafale

General characteristics

Crew: 1–2
Length: 15.27 m (50.1 ft)
Wingspan: 10.80 m (35.4 ft)
Height: 5.34 m (17.5 ft)
Wing area: 45.7 m² (492 ft²)
Empty weight:

C: 9,500 kilograms (20,900 lb)
B: 9,770 kilograms (21,540 lb)
M: 10,196 kilograms (22,480 lb[193])
Loaded weight: 14,016 kg (30,900 lb)
Max. takeoff weight: 24,500 kg (C/D), 22,200 kg (M) (54,000 lb)
Powerplant: 2 × Snecma M88-2 turbofans
Dry thrust: 50.04 kN (11,250 lbf) each
Thrust with afterburner: 75.62 kN (17,000 lbf) each
Fuel capacity: 4,700 kg (10,360 lb) internal
Performance

Maximum speed:

High altitude: Mach 1.8 (1,912 km/h, 1,032 knots)
Low altitude: Mach 1.1 (1,390 km/h, 750 knots)
Range: 3,700+ km (2,000+ nmi) with 3 drop tanks
Combat radius: 1,852+ km (1,000+ nmi) on penetration mission
Service ceiling: 15,235 m (50,000 ft)
Rate of climb: 304.8+ m/s (60,000+ ft/min)
Wing loading: 306 kg/m² (62.8 lb/ft²)
Thrust/weight: 0.988 (100% fuel, 2 EM A2A missile, 2 IR A2A missile) version M

Maximum g-load: +9/–3.2 g
Armament


Guns: 1× 30 mm (1.18 in) GIAT 30/M791 autocannon with 125 rounds
Hardpoints: 14 for Air Force versions (Rafale B/C), 13 for Navy version (Rafale M) with a capacity of 9,500 kg (20,900 lb) external fuel and ordnance and provisions to carry combinations of:
Missiles:

MBDA MICA IR or EM or Magic II and
MBDA Meteor air-to-air missiles in the future
Air-to-ground:
MBDA Apache or
Storm Shadow-SCALP EG or
AASM-Hammer or
GBU-12 Paveway II or GBU-49 Enhanced Paveway II
GBU-24 Paveway III
AS-30L
Air-to-surface:
AM 39-Exocet
Deterrence:
ASMP-A nuclear missile
Other:

Thales Damocles targeting pod
AREOS (Airborne Recce Observation System)reconnaissance pod[195]
up to 5 drop tanks
Buddy-buddy refuelling pod

@Pulkit its just an article of assumption. Reliable sources have quote of drdo,hal,iaf etc. Or of their official spokesperson.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

This thread is not this vs that, Open in some other section ..

 

[Avilover]

Very interresting as a Swedish person to read how SAAB and Gripen is percieved abroad.

You claim Tejas has better EW-suite. I would be very impressed if it does but most of it is top secret so don´t speculate.

Good to see other sensible comments tough.

 

[pmaitra]

So we are going to win a debate by speculating on another person's age? How mature!

 

[abhi_the _gr8_maratha]

So we are going to win a debate by speculating on another person's age? How mature!

this is old style, sir, if you can't win debate then call them kid and immature.... I have already given reason why tejas have lower RCS but people won't want to read it and directly start to debate

 

[ersakthivel]

Very interresting as a Swedish person to read how SAAB and Gripen is percieved abroad. Unfortunately there is loads of people talking as if they know everything when infact they clearly have no clue.

Abhi_the _gr8_maratha, if you are 14-years old I understand. But if you are older... What´s the point of making things up? I just can´t believe you have access to top secret papers about RCS numbers etc. It changes all the time as paint and EW-software and other things develop. These things are of course not made public. You are just shooting in the dark and making your own reality. Maybe Tejas has better RCS than Gripen...maybe not. The truth is we here on the forum does not know by obvious reasons, so why even claim to know? You claim Tejas has better EW-suite. I would be very impressed if it does but most of it is top secret so don´t speculate. You make a fool of yourself. You have made so many false statements about Gripen that it´s rediculous. It only proves you can´t be trusted in what you write.

Good to see other sensible comments tough.

Shaping of the airframe is the most crucial factor in determining RCS, RAM coatings help to certain extent. But ultimately it is the air frame shape which matters.

EW has nothing to do with RCS, as one emits any electromagnetc waves in EW it leads to another way of tracking.

You dont need top secret papers to deduce the simple fact that the fighter with large flat rectangular air intake , on whose sides is a large canard fixed at right angles will have a larger average l RCS than another fighter of the same size and same wing shape ,which does not have this arrangement.

If SAAB produces another version of gripen without canards jutting out at right angle from the sides of the flat rectangular air intake wall, will it have lesser RCS or higher RCS?

Same goes with radome dia, through out the life time of a fighter its radar is upgraded.

All things being the same higher dia radome provides for more TR modules for an ASEA.

may be today the TR module of one fighter is more powerful than that of the other. But in MLUs the TR tech will be upgraded and the radome dia will be crucial in this regard.

No one thinks lowly of gripen. If it is so it would not have won many overseas competitions.

problem is there are many "planted" articles in inidan defence journals written by jackass stuffs posing as experts constantly berating tejas by comparing it with Gripen.

An example is a recent piece called "What ails Tejas' by some das. Who says since gripen measures 14.2 meters , tejas is aerodynamically blunt and inferior because of the bad aspect ratio!!!

Truth is to cut weight ADA eliminate canards in tejas. Because adding canards will add extra 3 feet to tejas fuselage and add weight which will make it underpowered in indian hot atmospheric condition, because indian hot conditions reduce jet engine thrust and lift available from wings by significant margin.

They only had an 80 Kn engine to play with. So they did the optimum thing by reducing length of tejas to 13.2 meters by eliminating the canards and getting a bit lesser empty weight.To compensate for the lesser lift from low density indian hot atmospheric condition they went for larger wing span,

Also there was a need to operate from high himalayan airfields with meaningful weapon loads which needed a large wing for take off from high altitude airfields.

And decided to go for compound delta wings based on F-16 for vortex creation instead.

tejas mk-1 weighs 300 Kg less than gripen C/D empty and has a fuselage one meter less than Gripen. Still many people call it underpowered (falsely ofcourse) and now mk-2 is in progress with the aim of reducing empty weight to 6 tons by removing the lead plates meant for balancing tejas mk-1.

Can he also use the same excuse to call the 20 billion dollar MMRCA winner RAFALE which can also be called aerodynamically blunt in comparison with any other twin engined fighters which have longer fuselage length ?

It is such unrelenting rants in the grab of defence journos which makes a few guys here overboard to correct the wrong perception.

Otherwise Gripen is great. In fact if tejas program was not there, gripen would easily have won the MMRCA contract based on cost vs the capability delivered, since india is also developing the FGFA 5th gen with Sukhoi, gripen would have been a very cost effective solution to arrest the falling squadron strength and remaining at the cutting edge.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Regarding RCS reduction, There are some information posted in this very thread from Gov source published annually ..

The truth is we here on the forum does not know by obvious reasons, so why even claim to know? You claim Tejas has better EW-suite.Good to see other sensible comments tough.

 

[Jagdish58]

Saab Partnership could have Helped Tejas Mk-2 | idrw.org

 

[ersakthivel]

Saab Partnership could have Helped Tejas Mk-2 | idrw.org

Even this picture is posted by rahul Singh a member of DFI in ADA tejas -III thread in our forum years before.

Other than sensor fusion most of the stuff presently on Gripen is sourced from other firms by SAAB.

Atleast in tejas we can claim more local contents when it comes to avionics, mision computer and close to 80 percent of the LRUs by the time tejas goes into production.

After the crash of the first gripen prototype due to fly by wire problems SAAB outsourced the work of Gripen fly by wire to a US firm. In tejas despite sanctions fly by wire was successfully developed in house.

And DRDO has experience in the field of ASEA for AWACS, and israeli co operation will give tejas mk2 a decent indigenous radar.

Also as per the only original article on tejas mk-1s initial spec written by Air marshal MSD Woolen and posted on ADA tejas government website the initial topspeed of tejas mk-1 asked for by IAF was just mach 1.5 . SO the air intake was originally designed with that goal in mind. Also original max take of weight for tejas mk-1 was just 12.5 tons.

Even with the intake designed for mach 1.5 tejas mk-1 reached mach 1.6.If the intake design was wrong how can tejas mk-1 now take off with 13.2 ton max take off weight?

Broadsword: The Tejas LCA: improving performance with the current F-404 engine

Top HAL decision-makers pooh-pooh the IAF's contention that the LCA's air intakes are incorrectly designed, resulting in oxygen starvation and incomplete burning and, therefore, sub-optimal engine power from the F-404s. At the same time, however, steps are being taken to improve air intake, without getting into major redesign that could set back the programme by years. Instead, auxiliary air intakes are being provided on the sides of the Tejas engine housing --- similar to those on the Jaguar (see photos).

These auxiliary air intakes comprise of spring-loaded panels that open when engine suction is very high and provide an additional route for airflow into the engine intakes. As you can see in the photos, the spring-loaded panels can be pushed in by manual pressure.

At critical stages in the flight envelope, such as during take-off, rapid climb, sustained turn"¦ and in any case, when afterburners are on"¦ the heavy suction from the engines would open the auxiliary air intakes. When the demand for air goes down, such as in level flight, the auxiliary air intakes would close.

HAL designers aver that this would improve the engine performance only in some portions of the flight envelope. They say that during the most critical moments --- which are during sustained turns, in aerial combat --- the auxiliary air intakes would provide only marginally improved performance, if any at all.

A top HAL designer told me, "There is some merit in [the IAF's idea]"¦ the designers are considering it. There has been a debate for quite some time"¦ will it really improve to that extent. Where it really matters it may not give added thrust.. in other places it will give."

Nevertheless, the fitment of auxiliary air intakes is going ahead, partly because this does not require major re-engineering, nor will it delay the Tejas induction in any way. According to HAL, this will take six months to engineer; later LSPs will incorporate the auxiliary air intakes.

Above blog is a good read when it comes to the so called air intake troubles of tejas.

It is common knowledge that fighters have to use their jet engines with after burner at peak power to take off at max take of weight. So if the air intake is wrong how can tejas mk1 take off with higher than planned initial max take off weight?

many people ignore this crucial fact when making a sweeping comment like "air intake on tejas was wrong."

But now with the help of jaguar like Aux intake there will be no question of engines being starved off air.

ALso OBORG is already designed and tested by ADA. And in flight refueling probe work has been contracted to a very experienced british firm for tejas mk-2 .

Also even though the wings are large , the most crucisl factor is wing loading (weight per square meter area of the wing ) which determines the wing aerodynamics will be same for both tejas and gripen.

Already NAL has supplied tech to HAL to make composite wings . SO what is SAAB going to bring in?

And no major structural change other than lengthening the fuselage is needed.

This shows the sheer lack of authenticity of the article. Most of the articles there should never be taken seriously.

 

[abhi_the _gr8_maratha]

Chander said that the flight tests are
being conducted with LCA Mark-I to
prove certain technologies and to
familiarise the naval pilots with them.
One aircraft is operational, another is
on the anvil and a third will son be
available to complete the trials. After
that, for full weaponised operations
aboard carriers, will come the LCA
Mark-II powered by GE 414 engines,
according to India Strategic.

.
Defence News - Indian Navy LCA to Soon Begin Test Flights

 

[abhi_the _gr8_maratha]

a jv with saab means totally dependence on them. If in future tejas mk2 sent as a contender for export and finalist are NG and mk2. Swiss will simply block the equipment supplied for tejas and accidently there won't will be a good export.
.
even 51% of money will go in hands of swiss for mk2 ordered by IAF.
.
third, we will have to choose NG as MMRCA which by all ways is not a good choice against rafale.

 

[knathan]

sorry for off topic.

Kunal Sir, Ersaktivel Sir and other experts ,

For Rafale

Powerplant: 2 × Snecma M88-2 turbofans
Dry thrust: 50.04 kN (11,250 lbf) each
Thrust with afterburner: 75.62 kN (17,000 lbf) each

exactly what kaveri gives the output is same with Snecma M88-2 giving
then what stopping us developing two engine fighter.? atleast prototype of something before AMCA, or give the engine specifications to IIT students they will come up with some aerodynamics. something wrong going in administration, hope so.

prototype or TD