ADA Tejas Mark-II/Medium Weight Fighter

[Twinblade]

it dosen't have a single mdpu

Do you even have any idea what MDPU is and what is it made up of?. MDPU is a name used by Dassault for the system. Indians use the term UREPs, the descriptions change by projects and manufacturer. Btw Dassault's MDPU is made largely off COTS components and is made up of 19 LRUs so it is not a singular system.

 

[Twinblade]

i know what it means and i have also clarified that we need a single chip and not scattered lru's for tejas mk2 just like pakfa will have and f-35 has.

Using a single chip defeats the purpose of integrated modular architecture which will feature on Tejas Mk 2. DARE was working into incorporating several LRU's into one LRM, but the LRM would use multiple processors and not a single chip.

 

[ersakthivel]

No.


What kind of MTOW do you expect off a light fighter ? F-16 has 11 hard points because it can fly off with full fuel with each of its hard point loaded to its limits. Tejas can't do that today (the difference between MTOW and clean take off weight is 3.5 to 3.8 tons while hard points are rated in excess of 5 tons combined) and Tejas mk2 should better the MTOW with another couple of tons. It would be easier to strengthen three heavy harpoints 1,2 and 7 or the medium hard points 3 and 4 to carry that few hundred kilos of extra payload. Gripen C and Gripen NG too have more hard point capacity than their MTOW would permit when fully fueled up.

chances are in it's operational lifetime spanning 30 or so years,

tejas mk-1 will get a much better engine if better SCB tech for AMCA engines is ported on to the present K-9 which is up for flight certification with much lower thrust,

And then in MLU with htis engine tejas mk-1 can carry even 5 tons, it is not an impossibility,

And since Tejas mk-2 is going to have a much higher thrust engines it may even find use for some more hard points,

But it is a trivial debate in the end, multi ejector rakes in both tejas mk-1 and mk-2 will give any number of possible load outs without even the need for extra hardpoints and as 5 or 6 hard points of the tejas mk-1 itself can be used to carry ground bomb or air to air missile,

So the excess load bearing capacity on tejas mk-1 is not some PR exercise by ADA , I think, may come in handy if future engine tech can breath some life into the K-9 or even the possiblity of porting k-10 with some modifications,

 

[he-man]

Using a single chip defeats the purpose of integrated modular architecture which will feature on Tejas Mk 2. DARE was working into incorporating several LRU's into one LRM, but the LRM would use multiple processors and not a single chip.

thats precisely my worry that they will again use drdo developed processors.

we need advnced stuff and its not even that difficult,,,just design the chip on open arm architecture and get it made under contract from tsmc or other corporations.

i guess using intel chips will be a security risk,,same goes for amd,snapdragon,mediatek,rockchip etc

so there is no way out but using custom chips.


i think drdo ones are 90nm or maybe at best 65nm stuff whereas intel will be producing a 14 nm chip next year and so will be samsung and others.

now u can well imagine the performance diff these will have over drdo developed chips and processors

 

[he-man]

correction------arm is not open but licensed from arm,uk

 

[cloud]

chances are in it's operational lifetime spanning 30 or so years,

tejas mk-1 will get a much better engine if better SCB tech for AMCA engines is ported on to the present K-9 which is up for flight certification with much lower thrust,

And then in MLU with htis engine tejas mk-1 can carry even 5 tons, it is not an impossibility,

And since Tejas mk-2 is going to have a much higher thrust engines it may even find use for some more hard points,

But it is a trivial debate in the end, multi ejector rakes in both tejas mk-1 and mk-2 will give any number of possible load outs without even the need for extra hardpoints and as 5 or 6 hard points of the tejas mk-1 itself can be used to carry ground bomb or air to air missile,

So the excess load bearing capacity on tejas mk-1 is not some PR exercise by ADA , I think, may come in handy if future engine tech can breath some life into the K-9 or even the possiblity of porting k-10 with some modifications,

Sorry to say, but I have no faith in Kaveri engines to power a fighter jet in next 2 decades, if the things will go the way it is right now for GSRE, i. e. it will be like 15-20 years before we will be in the position to develop(and fully operational) something better then GE414(there will be easily 115-120kn version of engine GE414, the current EPE version has less life).

Nonetheless Its not like I don't support the indigenous development and it should go in parallel with full funding support. But warships and the fighter jets are the 2 things which really cannot be mass produced in real terms(when needed for emergency) even if one has all the techs, it takes years and much more money to setup extra production line apart from human resources. This where the equation go wrong when in battlefield. In today's scenario where BVRs and missiles are much potent, A 30% superior fighter jet(in terms of avionics/radar/EW suite) or a 30% superior warship can take out the a lot many enemy fighters or in the case of warships. Which has multiple effect from demoralization of army to changed tactics and as usual running for defense strategy then going for offensive. So the equation of getting 3 for 1 (which is again a bit stretched) is not always advantageous, especially when it comes to things where it is important to find first, fire first and kill first. Any recent war or conflict is the example of that where a superior forces is totally wiping out enemy in air/water, though I admit that the gap was huge, but still.

Lets say China buys 200 PAKFAs and we pitch 600 LCAs against it in an actual war, all other things being same. It will be a massacre where out of 3 squadrons of LCA, 40-50 LCAs will go down even before knowing what hit them against a single sq of PAKFA. We can't compromise on these things even if we have to import right now.

 

[ersakthivel]

Sorry to say, but I have no faith in Kaveri engines to power a fighter jet in next 2 decades, if the things will go the way it is right now for GSRE, i. e. it will be like 15-20 years before we will be in the position to develop(and fully operational) something better then GE414(there will be easily 115-120kn version of engine GE414, the current EPE version has less life).

Nonetheless Its not like I don't support the indigenous development and it should go in parallel with full funding support. But warships and the fighter jets are the 2 things which really cannot be mass produced in real terms(when needed for emergency) even if one has all the techs, it takes years and much more money to setup extra production line apart from human resources. This where the equation go wrong when in battlefield. In today's scenario where BVRs and missiles are much potent, A 30% superior fighter jet(in terms of avionics/radar/EW suite) or a 30% superior warship can take out the a lot many enemy fighters or in the case of warships. Which has multiple effect from demoralization of army to changed tactics and as usual running for defense strategy then going for offensive. So the equation of getting 3 for 1 (which is again a bit stretched) is not always advantageous, especially when it comes to things where it is important to find first, fire first and kill first. Any recent war or conflict is the example of that where a superior forces is totally wiping out enemy in air/water, though I admit that the gap was huge, but still.

Lets say China buys 200 PAKFAs and we pitch 600 LCAs against it in an actual war, all other things being same. It will be a massacre where out of 3 squadrons of LCA, 40-50 LCAs will go down even before knowing what hit them against a single sq of PAKFA. We can't compromise on these things even if we have to import right now.

5th gen vs tejas all alone is disaster,

but,

5th gen Vs tejas + the aid of stealth UCAVs that can spot the IR and have radar tech to pin point the 5th gen

is a bit different,

Thats what I have been saying , Every body knows in one on one comparison there is no use for 4th gen in a fight with 5th gen,

but dedicated stealth detection UCAVs will come up in a decade or two to aid the 4th gens,

Then if both the pilots know and have the means to target each other it is back to the same old game of aerodynamics,


Lets see what GTRE does with K-9 or K-10 in future.

 

[he-man]

5th gen vs tejas all alone is disaster,

but,

5th gen Vs tejas + the aid of stealth UCAVs that can spot the IR and have radar tech to pin point the 5th gen

is a bit different,

Thats what I have been saying , Every body knows in one on one comparison there is no use for 4th gen in a fight with 5th gen,

but dedicated stealth detection UCAVs will come up in a decade or two to aid the 4th gens,

Then if both the pilots know and have the means to target each other it is back to the same old game of aerodynamics,


Lets see what GTRE does with K-9 or K-10 in future.

i agree with the above poster
gtre has been the most incompetent of the defence psu' so far.

its track record has left a lot to be desired and it will be foolish to expect miracles suddenly.



the only way out of this mess is privatisation,nothing else

 

[Kunal Biswas]

The engine produce 80kn thrust and little heavy than RD-33, It passed the test in Russian IL-76 and gone again for testing on a MIG-29 ..

If MIG-29 tests are successful then it will go on tejas, At least not the one for IAF but for export ..

 

[he-man]

The engine produce 80kn thrust and little heavy than RD-33, It passed the test in Russian IL-76 and gone again for testing on a MIG-29 ..

If MIG-29 tests are successful then it will go on tejas, At least not the one for IAF but for export ..

there is no chance an engine with 80 kn thrust will equip tejas

its 100% decided that ge-414 will power the mk2 and ge-404 is already been ordered for mk1??


where did u get this info??

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Look back the thread, there is a link said that one of the LSP will be powered by Kaveri after successful test ..

I never said on IAF aircrafts but Exports ..

there is no chance an engine with 80 kn thrust will equip tejas

its 100% decided that ge-414 will power the mk2 and ge-404 is already been ordered for mk1??


where did u get this info??

 

[cloud]

5th gen vs tejas all alone is disaster,

but,

5th gen Vs tejas + the aid of stealth UCAVs that can spot the IR and have radar tech to pin point the 5th gen

As I have said all other things being same, meaning Chinese stealth UCAVs are also in the picture in future(in which again they are getting ahead of us, as our simple 2 bomb carrying AURA is still on drawing board and they are flying n numbers of stealth UAVs prototypes). Now imagine a scenario where Indian and Chinese UCAVs are taking on each other and both of our manned fighters are out of IRST range(Say100kms behind from each others respective UCAVs). Now if they(Chinese) are in more stealth fighters and we in 4th+ gen Tejas, whose UCAVs will pickup opponents manned fighter jets first(here the IRST will have no meaning as the radars of Chinese UCAVs will pickup the 4th gen Tejas loaded with BVRs quite easily, but our UCAVs will not pick up more stealthy opponents planes on their radars, and IRSTs are not effective at longer distance).

Same with the J10c or J10b versions, As they are also supposed to have low RCS, but on almost all the parameters they will take the lead over Tejas, if we were to assume the level of avionics/radar tech being same, simply because it has got the bigger engine and more power and more space.

Also I think we are overestimating the UCAVs(UAVs are different story), as UCAVs will have almost all the things which a manned fighter jet(5th gen or 6th gen) will have except a man inside, so they will remain the toys of Rich countries for foreseeable future. If we could develop a stealthy UCAVs(capable of 5th gen capability) than we would also prefer a man sitting inside of it, unless the future UCAVs are capable of very very high G pressure.

 

[dvdiyen]

As I have said all other things being same, meaning Chinese stealth UCAVs are also in the picture in future(in which again they are getting ahead of us, as our simple 2 bomb carrying AURA is still on drawing board and they are flying n numbers of stealth UAVs prototypes). Now imagine a scenario where Indian and Chinese UCAVs are taking on each other and both of our manned fighters are out of IRST range(Say100kms behind from each others respective UCAVs). Now if they(Chinese) are in more stealth fighters and we in 4th+ gen Tejas, whose UCAVs will pickup opponents manned fighter jets first(here the IRST will have no meaning as the radars of Chinese UCAVs will pickup the 4th gen Tejas loaded with BVRs quite easily, but our UCAVs will not pick up more stealthy opponents planes on their radars, and IRSTs are not effective at longer distance).

Same with the J10c or J10b versions, As they are also supposed to have low RCS, but on almost all the parameters they will take the lead over Tejas, if we were to assume the level of avionics/radar tech being same, simply because it has got the bigger engine and more power and more space.

Also I think we are overestimating the UCAVs(UAVs are different story), as UCAVs will have almost all the things which a manned fighter jet(5th gen or 6th gen) will have except a man inside, so they will remain the toys of Rich countries for foreseeable future. If we could develop a stealthy UCAVs(capable of 5th gen capability) than we would also prefer a man sitting inside of it, unless the future UCAVs are capable of very very high G pressure.

I think UCAV is a bomber rather a air superiority fighter.

 

[ersakthivel]

As I have said all other things being same, meaning Chinese stealth UCAVs are also in the picture in future(in which again they are getting ahead of us, as our simple 2 bomb carrying AURA is still on drawing board and they are flying n numbers of stealth UAVs prototypes). Now imagine a scenario where Indian and Chinese UCAVs are taking on each other and both of our manned fighters are out of IRST range(Say100kms behind from each others respective UCAVs). Now if they(Chinese) are in more stealth fighters and we in 4th+ gen Tejas, whose UCAVs will pickup opponents manned fighter jets first(here the IRST will have no meaning as the radars of Chinese UCAVs will pickup the 4th gen Tejas loaded with BVRs quite easily, but our UCAVs will not pick up more stealthy opponents planes on their radars, and IRSTs are not effective at longer distance).

Same with the J10c or J10b versions, As they are also supposed to have low RCS, but on almost all the parameters they will take the lead over Tejas, if we were to assume the level of avionics/radar tech being same, simply because it has got the bigger engine and more power and more space.

Also I think we are overestimating the UCAVs(UAVs are different story), as UCAVs will have almost all the things which a manned fighter jet(5th gen or 6th gen) will have except a man inside, so they will remain the toys of Rich countries for foreseeable future. If we could develop a stealthy UCAVs(capable of 5th gen capability) than we would also prefer a man sitting inside of it, unless the future UCAVs are capable of very very high G pressure.

Any UCAV switching on its radar to track any 4.5th gen fighter itself becomes a target with ESM suites of the 4.5th gen fighter guiding BVrs riding on the radar signal to the source UCAV,

Once you switch on your radar , you are no longer stealth, whatever your radar may be ASEA LPI or anything,

SO even if you take IRST as primary passive weapon tejas emits less heat signal than any other 5th gen stealth twin engined chinese 5th gen fighters,

 

[cloud]

Any UCAV switching on its radar to track any 4.5th gen fighter itself becomes a target with ESM suites of the 4.5th gen fighter guiding BVrs riding on the radar signal to the source UCAV,

Once you switch on your radar , you are no longer stealth, whatever your radar may be ASEA LPI or anything,

SO even if you take IRST as primary passive weapon tejas emits less heat signal than any other 5th gen stealth twin engined chinese 5th gen fighters,

But Tejas will already be exposed by enemy UCAV radars, So while we will be launching BVRs at their UCAv, they will be launching BVRs at our fighter jets. not to mention next gen AWACS will stay behind like 200 Kms,out of our BVRs range and will be providing guidance for their fighter's BVRs, as Tejas being less stealthy will be easily visible on their AWACs screen, but our AWACs won't see their stealthy jets.

 

[ersakthivel]

But Tejas will already be exposed by enemy UCAV radars, So while we will be launching BVRs at their UCAv, they will be launching BVRs at our fighter jets. not to mention next gen AWACS will stay behind like 200 Kms,out of our BVRs range and will be providing guidance for their fighter's BVRs, as Tejas being less stealthy will be easily visible on their AWACs screen, but our AWACs won't see their stealthy jets.

Our stealth UCAVS too will be firing thier BVR s on enemy fleet UCAVs as tomorrow's IRST won't leave any scope for fast flying stealths undetected from BVR ranges.

And long wavelength radars from our awacs can know the rough 3 km x 3km area where the enemy stealth fighters are going to fly and the long range BVrs can roughly be guided on them to that kill box, for close to target guidance the Ir seeker of the missile takes over,

But their stealthy jets too will be visible on our stealth UCAVs flying with higher range IRST pay load in front of tejas fleet,

In any of the tomorrow's fighter fleets there will be three components

1. stealth UCAvs with ASEA and IRST package,
2, Awacs with longer wavelength radars to get a rough idea of enemy 5th gen fleet(5th gen stealth can only hide from X band radars not higher bands)
3. 5th gen fighters with a BVrs in internal weapon bays,
4. And large number of 4th and 4.5 the gen fighters carrying heavy loads of BVRs and jammers and asea radars,

For the forseeable future of next two three decades at least this will be the order of the battle,

SO tejas will remain relevant through out its service life, AMCA or FGFA is not going to make tejas irrelevant in the forseeable future,

In fact if IRST, and long wave length radars evolve in the way modern fire control ASEA radar has evolved for the past twenty years,

after a couple of decade there will be no stealth fighter or stealth UCAv at all and the stealth may be just one of the attributes of a fighter, not a be all and end all of a fighter,

So the game is once again back to basic aerodynamics , range of long range BVR missiles ,and cost per BVR missiles carried.

 

[cloud]

Our stealth UCAVS too will be firing thier BVR s on enemy fleet UCAVs as tomorrow's IRST won't leave any scope for fast slying stealths.

And long wavelength radars from our awacs can know the rough 3 km x 3km area where the enemy stealth fighters are going to fly and the long range BVrs can roughly be guided on them to that kill box, for close to target guidance the Ir seeker of the missile takes over,



But their stealthy jets too will be visible on our stealth UCAVs flying with higher range IRST pay load in front of tejas fleet,

Also the enemy is not likely to switch on the UCAVs radar for more than 3-4 units, that will be sufficient enough. Meaning while we are seeing and targeting their 3-4 nos, they will be seeing the whole picture and targeting the whole fighter jets fleet.

Also if the enemy is in stealth jets, They will surly opt for tactics,where they stay fairly out of range from IRSTs. What range do you expect for IRSTs, In my guess it will hard to develop an IRST seeker above 100km range, especially for stealth jets for which exhaust will be optimized for such things.

Also I have doubt about AWACs detecting the stealth jets at 200-300kms. If such were the case then it totally defeats the purpose of stealth fighter jets and bigger ground radars should be capable of much more, but we don't see that case.

 

[ersakthivel]

Also the enemy is not likely to switch on the UCAVs radar for more than 3-4 units, that will be sufficient enough. Meaning while we are seeing and targeting their 3-4 nos, they will be seeing the whole picture and targeting the whole fighter jets fleet.

Also if the enemy is in stealth jets, They will surly opt for tactics,where they stay fairly out of range from IRSTs. What range do you expect for IRSTs, In my guess it will hard to develop an IRST seeker above 100km range, especially for stealth jets for which exhaust will be optimized for such things.

Also I have doubt about AWACs detecting the stealth jets at 200-300kms. If such were the case then it totally defeats the purpose of stealth fighter jets and bigger ground radars should be capable of much more, but we don't that case.

their stealth UCAVs too will emit IR signature and present a good 1 sq meter RCS to long wavelength radars,

Their stealth fighters too will emit IR signature and present a good 3 plus sq meter RCS to long wavelength radars,

So all things being equal tejas will remain as relevant today as it will be in future,

And still the time PAf and PLAF field their 5th gen UCAvs and stealths IAF fleet with tejas in high numbers will give an edge in any scenario in the near future of say a decade or two, as per the post no-2185 in http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/indian-air-force/43717-ada-lca-tejas-iv-146.html#post832673

If at all the money spent on RAFALE is spent on tejas mk-2 fleet , it will make IAF flet twice as much potent for the same cost in defence of indian skies

ofcourse for long range bombing missions tejas mk-2 won't be as useful as RAFALE, but most of the long range bombing missions will be delegated to cruise missiles in future.

 

[cloud]

their stealth UCAVs too will emit IR signature and present a good 1 sq meter RCS to long wavelength radars,

Their stealth fighters too will emit IR signature and present a good 3 plus sq meter RCS to long wavelength radars,

So all things being equal tejas will remain as relevant today as it will be in future,

And still the time PAf and PLAF field their 5th gen UCAvs and stealths IAF fleet with tejas in high numbers will give an edge in any scenario in the near future of say a decade or two, as per the post no-2185 in http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/indian-air-force/43717-ada-lca-tejas-iv-146.html#post832673

If at all the money spent on RAFALE is spent on tejas mk-2 fleet , it will make IAF flet twice as much potent for the same cost in defence of indian skies

ofcourse for long range bombing missions tejas mk-2 won't be as useful as RAFALE, but most of the long range bombing missions will be delegated to cruise missiles in future.

All your explanation comes down to Tajas being advantageous due to being the lowest RCS 4th gen plane. But Dassault claims Rafale to have 1/10th of RCS, while we claim 1/3rd for Tejas compare to Mirage. So going by your argument Rafale will have much more advantage, especially when PLAF is building very Low RCS J10c etc.

 

[ersakthivel]

All your explanation comes down to Tajas being advantageous due to being the lowest RCS 4th gen plane. But Dassault claims Rafale to have 1/10th of RCS, while we claim 1/3rd for Tejas compare to Mirage. So going by your argument Rafale will have much more advantage, especially when PLAF is building very Low RCS J10c etc.

claims are claims, to believe or not is our choice,

There is no way in the world for the much bigger RAFLE which presents two planes one with canard and one with wing to have a lesser frontal RCS than mk-2 whose shaping is to be done now using the same tech of RAAFLe shaping,
Full scale anechoic chamber is going to be built and much better shaping technique thanks to studies on AMCA should be available to ADA,

and for the cost of one RAFALE we can have 4 or 5 Tejas mk-2 if total lifecylce and the massive MLU cost is to be looked at.
\