ADA Tejas Mark-II/Medium Weight Fighter

[Kshithij]

Latest design iteration of naval LCA MK2

Most striking is the changes in the canopy shaping

Also is it one piece frameless canopy ?

View attachment 25537

Where is the canards which was said to have been present to make it supermaneuverable?

 

[porky_kicker]

Where is the canards which was said to have been present to make it supermaneuverable?

Fully active levcons is more or less same as canard except the levcons is hinged on the wings and canards are positioned on the fuselage.

Su57 also has fully active levcons as canards

 

[Sancho]

Fully active levcons is more or less same as canard except the levcons is hinged on the wings and canards are positioned on the fuselage.

Su57 also has fully active levcons as canards

Just that NLCAs LEVCONS are limited to a few positions only, since they are not intended to improve manuverability, but slow speed handling during carrier landings. The Su 57 LEVCONS are far more advanced, since they will be operated in the full flight envelop and coupled with the TVC as well, but it's certainly the canard replacement of the future, as Airbus is showing too.

 

[porky_kicker]

Just that NLCAs LEVCONS are limited to a few positions only, since they are not intended to improve manuverability, but slow speed handling during carrier landings. The Su 57 LEVCONS are far more advanced, since they will be operated in the full flight envelop and coupled with the TVC as well, but it's certainly the canard replacement of the future, as Airbus is showing too.

Naval LCA mk1 had levcons with limited role, LCA mk2 will have fully active levcons for superior manuverablity and will be fully integrated into the FBW flight control system.

 

[Sancho]

Naval LCA mk1 had levcons with limited role, LCA mk2 will have fully active levcons for superior manuverablity and will be fully integrated into the FBW flight control system.

Again, the need for LEVCONS on Tejas is only for carrier landings, not for improved manuverability, otherwise the IAF MK2 would get it too, but IAF neither asked for LEVCONS, nor wanted the additional internal fuel, which both were specific navy requirements.

 

[Kshithij]

Again, the need for LEVCONS on Tejas is only for carrier landings, not for improved manuverability, otherwise the IAF MK2 would get it too, but IAF neither asked for LEVCONS, nor wanted the additional internal fuel, which both were specific navy requirements.

I don't know about LEVCONS, but IAF strongly demanded additional fuel. IAF wanted 4000litre fuel capacity (3200kg, roughly). IAF argued that to fly longer missions with more payload, higher fuel is mandatory. With 30% extra internal fuel and higher payload, the ability to carry external fuel without compromising payload has increased and thus endurance of Tejas Mk2 should be similar to F16 or even Rafale

 

[Prashant12]

When is the IAF expected to achieve its required combat strength?

The next step would be the design and development of the LCA Mk2 which has been renamed as medium weight fighter (MWF). Further, RFI (Request for Information) for 110 new fighters has been issued on April 6, 2018. If all the inductions take place as planned, the IAF is expected to achieve its authorised strength of fighter squadrons by the end of the 15th Plan (2032).

https://www.theweek.in/theweek/curr...delivery-will-commence-in-september-2019.html

 

[HariPrasad-1]

One way out would be to use the GE 414 EPE hot engine with 18% more power than the GE 414 INS6.

The 116 kN thrust class GE 414 EPE has a T/W ratio nearly 11:1

Best way is to go for Ej 230 which has 73 kg dry thrust and 108 kg wet with some 1050 kg weight which includes TVC. Anything except EJ 230 is a sub optimal choice.

 

[HariPrasad-1]

How will the thrust increase without any change? Will they make the engine bigger and heavier? If the engine becomes heavier, then it is meaningless

May not be bigger but certainly heavier. Some part will require strengthening.

 

[Kshithij]

May not be bigger but certainly heavier. Some part will require strengthening.

It is difficult to make an engine heavier without making it bigger. Increasing thickness of parts will reduce area for air flow. Also, the heat will increase due to compression. A metal of 1kg and 10kg melts at the same temperature. So, even thick blades will melt if temperature rises beyond a point

 

[Kshithij]

Best way is to go for Ej 230 which has 73 kg dry thrust and 108 kg wet with some 1050 kg weight which includes TVC. Anything except EJ 230 is a sub optimal choice.

Who told you that the weight of EJ230 with TVC is 1050kg?

Also, EJ230 is 90kN, not 108kN thrust. They are hoping to make it 108kN but that is unlikely as the TWR is already high at 9 for EJ230. Making it higher may be difficult

 

[porky_kicker]

UTTAM AESA radar

I WILL SEARCH AND TRACK, CATCH ME IF YOU CAN

Some of the features

1.Low probability of intercept

2.Non cooperative target recognition

3.Interleaved modes of operation and rapid target engagement.

4.Simultaneous multimode , multifunction and multi-target tracking capability.

5.Multiple SLC channels for jammer supression.

6.Multiple ECCM features

7.Very high resolution active array based SAR resolution.

8.Frequency and wavefront agility

9.Scalable to enable fitment on other aircrafts

Etc

In the second picture you can see the Uttam radar integrated to LCA for testing.

 

[HariPrasad-1]

It is difficult to make an engine heavier without making it bigger. Increasing thickness of parts will reduce area for air flow. Also, the heat will increase due to compression. A metal of 1kg and 10kg melts at the same temperature. So, even thick blades will melt if temperature rises beyond a point

When I said some part, you assumed blades.

 

[HariPrasad-1]

Who told you that the weight of EJ230 with TVC is 1050kg?

Also, EJ230 is 90kN, not 108kN thrust. They are hoping to make it 108kN but that is unlikely as the TWR is already high at 9 for EJ230. Making it higher may be difficult

Here is the detail of EJ 230. Read it. It has an extraordinary dry thrust and decent afterburner thrust. Article quotes 75 kn dry and 102 wet.

 

[Kshithij]

Here is the detail of EJ 230. Read it. It has an extraordinary dry thrust and decent afterburner thrust. Article quotes 75 kn dry and 102 wet.

Sorry, I confused EJ200 with EJ230. Anyways, EJ230 is not complete yet. I am not even sure if it will be pursued further as the EU has no plane that needs it. Designing engines at billions of dollars price without having a use for it may not be what Rolls Royce wants.

 

[HariPrasad-1]

Sorry, I confused EJ200 with EJ230. Anyways, EJ230 is not complete yet. I am not even sure if it will be pursued further as the EU has no plane that needs it. Designing engines at billions of dollars price without having a use for it may not be what Rolls Royce wants.

They had offered a partnership. We should have taken the opportunity. Just increase some wet thrust and you can use it for AMCA as well. Bloody 75 kn dry thrust is a hell of thrust. Euro fighter is powered by it (old version EJ 200 series engine) so AMCA can also be powered by it without any doubt. If we partner in Ej 230, surely our engine quest will come to an end.

 

[Kshithij]

They had offered a partnership. We should have taken the opportunity. Just increase some wet thrust and you can use it for AMCA as well. Bloody 75 kn dry thrust is a hell of thrust. Euro fighter is powered by it (old version EJ 200 series engine) so AMCA can also be powered by it without any doubt. If we partner in Ej 230, surely our engine quest will come to an end.

What do you mean by partnership? Is it about paying Rolls Royce heavily so that they can get the engine developed and then allow India to assemble it? How will engine quest come to an end if full IPR is not given and India will not be able to manufacture it inhouse?

I think it has been stated here that Tejas MK2 will have MToW of 17-17.5 tonnee and empty weight of 8tons. AMCA will have MToW of 25tons and empty weight if 11-12tons. So, it is most likely that the Kaveri engine under development will be used in Tejas Mk2 and in AMCA in twin engine configuration. So, the same Kaveri engine is likely to be used in both the platform and the requirement of another engine will not exist.

 

[HariPrasad-1]

What do you mean by partnership? Is it about paying Rolls Royce heavily so that they can get the engine developed and then allow India to assemble it? How will engine quest come to qn end if full IPR is not given and India will not be able to manufacture it inhouse?

I think it has been stated here that Tejas MK2 will have MToW of 17-17.5 tonnee and empty weight of 8tons. AMCA will have MToW of 25tons and empty weight if 11-12tons. So, it is most likely that the Kaveri engine under development will be used in Tejas Mk2 and in AMCA in twin engine configuration. So, the same Kaveri engine is likely to be used in both the platform and the requirement of another engine will not exist.

When I refer partnership, it means full access to all codes and not simple assembly.

 

[Kshithij]

When I refer partnership, it means full access to all codes and not simple assembly.

Then it is ToT or at best ToT-exchange, not partnership. I don't think Rolls Royce offered that to India. Rolls Royce offered only partnership which may mean that some things will be Indian while some from Rolls-Royce. Since India wants technology if Rolls Royce and not just combined designing efforts, it will be considered as ToT rather than partnership

 

[captscooby81]

So IAF now wants to call the LCA MK2 as MWF ...

https://economictimes.indiatimes.co...edium-weight-fighter/articleshow/64214939.cms