LCA TEJAS MK1 & MK1A: News and Discussion

[Lancer]

Actually LCA Mk1A covers Light category
MWF should be covered be Rafale +ORCA
Heavy already covered by MKI's

Even F4I4 sufficient to power it

Seprate study on MWF is needles all resources should be on AMCA

Yup, that's what I'm saying. Bulk + Speed production of MK1A in big numbers to make up for all the MiG 21's, then shift directly to this ORCA plane to supplement Rafales.

A heavier LCA MK2 that is Single Engine, doesn't make much sense to me.

 

[Assassin 2.0]

A heavier LCA MK2 that is Single Engine, doesn't make much sense to me.

Future is of GaN based radars which will consume lesser engine power and will provide higher output compared to older generation radars. One reason for which dual engines were required. In today's era technology is becoming more and more efficient.

Second previously Dual engines were used to provide high thrust to even cross Mach 2 barrier. But most of the countries are already limiting their aircrafts for Mach 1.8 speed only
the cold war era, Mach speed mattered the most only in getaway drive and little actually in the combat, also in the cold war era, jets were not made to last 6000 hours of airframe life nor were to be operational for 40 years. lower production cost in the 60-70s meant those jets with higher max speeds could barely last beyond 20 years before airframe stress and hairline fractures on the fuselage could have grounded them for good but when jets became more expensive due to avionics and improved technology, many countries start studies effect of high-speed stress on the airframe and it was concluded that unnecessary high speed which has little advantages in combat scenarios should be avoided to prolong the airframe life of the jets. The LCA-Tejas airframe has been engineered to achieve 1.8Mach speed and it was supposed to be tested till that speed to achieve its specification mark but that could not be done due to fear of possible FBW failure and loss of control due to excessive vibrations at that speed and max speed achieved was 1.6Mach, which now has become the gold standard of max speed in new jets to maintain a long life of the airframe and to also avoid critical premature airframe failures. India’s next two fighter jet programs like Medium Weight Fighter and AMCA will also have Max speed of 1.8Mach, but this time engineers and its developers plan to test to its limit but Pilots will always be told to keep it below 1.6Mach.

More focused is going to towards situation awareness and BVRM fights compared to close range maneuvering vrm fights.
Recent Chinese Su-27 copies Vs saab grippen showed this concept in theory.

MWF with single engine will be cheaper to operate tho only negative they will have is lesser payload but remember we have 270 SU-30 aircraft which are heavy weight aircrafts. And i don't think we are going to retire SU-30 anytime soon.

And i think manufacturing single engine jet should be easier than Dual engine jet?

 

[Lancer]

tho only negative they will have is lesser payload

That's one of my main reasons for being against a Single Engine MWF.

We do have Sukhois as you said, but using them as bomb trucks would kind of be a waste of their abilities, their primary use is to dominate the hell out of the enemy's best fighters, on both fronts.

They're our best bets against PAF's upgraded F-16s, but they'll also have to be maintained in high numbers at the border with China - because (along with our future Rafales) they're possibly the only aircraft that can take on or comprehensively outdo China's best fighters.

As China ramps up its production of various 4+ Gen fighters (incl. their myriad knockoff Sukhois) - our need for top level fighters on that front will only increase.

 

[aghamarshana]

ORCA/MWF will take over the job of MiG27(retd) Mig29 and Jags in future. It should be in all probability a TE multirole bird. We are not looking at a tiny miny bird which will replace the Bisons but one which tackles multiple fronts and conditions with mission specific roles. Also, knowing that the tech of Mk2 goes straight into AMCA, it is feasible for us to go with a TE bird than design a new TE one altogether frm scratch once we start phasing out MKIs.

 

[Kchontha]

ada should develop both twin engine orca, single engine MWF and amca simultaneously. If a nation with 1 billion people and one of the largest economy in the world couldn't do so then we all are idiots and shame on us. Look at our northern adversary, they are developing two fifth gen fighters along with a few fourth gen one. The only way to win two front aerial tussle is to manufecture combat aircraft within the country itself because you cannot manned your whole squadron with expensive foreign made combat aircraft. LCA mk1a should fill the void left by the retirement of mig 21 and for other aircaft replacement like those of mirage 2k MWF can step in. For supplementing Rafale and mki orca can come into the picture despite iaf sceptic. Amca should be always a step ahead of them.

 

[A chauhan]

There is no point in developing twin engine MWF when there is a separate AMCA project. The whole point of LCA was to have a single engine light weight fighter which could replace Might 21 and be cheaper to operate.

 

[aditya10r]

There is no point in developing twin engine MWF when there is a separate AMCA project. The whole point of LCA was to have a single engine light weight fighter which could replace Might 21 and be cheaper to operate.

This Twin engine fighter as of now is purely Navy project for their carriers.
Navy needs some 150+ jet fighters in the long run.

 

[A chauhan]

This Twin engine fighter as of now is purely Navy project for their carriers.
Navy needs some 150+ jet fighters in the long run.

Actually Navy had contacted ADA for a Navy version of AMCA, if that happens that would be better.

 

[aditya10r]

Actually Navy had contacted ADA for a Navy version of AMCA, if that happens that would be better.

A stealthy airframe on a carrier may not be a good idea.
It will be very expensive to maintain on a carrier which doesnt have all the ground based hangar facilities.It will not have good payload,This is a downer because launching and recovering aircrafts from a carrier is very important and if you dont have adequate range and payload then the aircraft wont be able to perform its missions all that well.Our Mig-29ks have to sacrifice a lot of payload and fuel just to take off from the DECK and landing is equally challenging.And lastly sortie generation rate.Stealthy aircrafts will be expensive to operate than the present aircrafts and will be require a lot of down time affecting the sortie rates.

_________________________________________

 

[1971ftw]

Is the navy going to get Tejas now ? They only want 2 engine jets right? So how's this going to play out?

 

[Assassin 2.0]

On procurement priorities: The order for 83 LCA Mk1A is a very big priority for us. It will naturally fit into the new regime and despite the issue of budgets, it is something we would want to go ahead with and, I am sure, it will get finalised soon. It will help HAL, the MSMEs as well as the private sector. Our focus is on this order for many reasons—the first 40 LCAs on order are more or less through and we need to have the order for continuity. We need to take the LCA programme to its max potential and for that we are already launching the Mk II programme as well. The other priority is the HTT 40 basic trainer that is close to getting finalised. This is an area in which we want work to quickly finish. It is a priority as we have closed the issue of procuring additional Pilatus trainer, so it is important that these aircraft come.

Statement by IAF chief.

 

[IndianHawk]

ada should develop both twin engine orca, single engine MWF and amca simultaneously. If a nation with 1 billion people and one of the largest economy in the world couldn't do so then we all are idiots and shame on us. Look at our northern adversary, they are developing two fifth gen fighters along with a few fourth gen one. The only way to win two front aerial tussle is to manufecture combat aircraft within the country itself because you cannot manned your whole squadron with expensive foreign made combat aircraft. LCA mk1a should fill the void left by the retirement of mig 21 and for other aircaft replacement like those of mirage 2k MWF can step in. For supplementing Rafale and mki orca can come into the picture despite iaf sceptic. Amca should be always a step ahead of them.

Orca development is dependent on tedbf. It will be a spin-off of tedbf . If navy is going ahead with tedbf then orca will be 90% ready automatically.

 

[Bleh]

Is the navy going to get Tejas now ? They only want 2 engine jets right? So how's this going to play out?

This is what I don't get. Charles de Gaule is approximately the same size as Vikki, and it has EMALS. Even original INS Vikrant was originally CATOBAR, which was replaced by a sky-jump!.. Looked like this before '89.

So those must be interchangeable to certain degree of design constraint.
I don't see why IAC can't be retrofitted with it. The, even Tejas could take off with AShM, unlike NLCA's present restrictions to A2A only.

One priyajitbera made a cute NLCA render at TurboSquid... needs that 725lt centreline drop-tank tho.

 

[IndianHawk]

This is what I don't get. Charles de Gaule is approximately the same size as Vikki, and it has EMALS. Even original INS Vikrant was originally CATOBAR, which was replaced by a sky-jump!.. Looked like this before '89.

So those must be interchangeable to certain degree of design constraint.
I don't see why IAC can't be retrofitted with it. The, even Tejas could take off with AShM, unlike NLCA's present restrictions to A2A only.

One priyajitbera made a cute NLCA render at TurboSquid... needs that 725lt centreline drop-tank tho.
View attachment 48363

Charles de gualle has catobar and it's nuclear powered.

 

[IndianHawk]

There is no point in developing twin engine MWF when there is a separate AMCA project. The whole point of LCA was to have a single engine light weight fighter which could replace Might 21 and be cheaper to operate.

If we are going to buy 150+ rafale( IAF +navy) then we might as well develop a twin engine jet. Overall we will save a lot of money.

 

[Raj Malhotra]

IAF has been delaying LCA for a long time & this game is continuing.

LCA Engine now is 89kn compared to 95kn of Mirage. Fuel Efficiency of LCA engine is 15% better. Guess what? LCA MKI FOC is "already" in league of upgraded Mirage 2000.

MKIA will be much better than even upgraded Mirage 2000.

 

[rohit b3]

IAF has been delaying LCA for a long time & this game is continuing.

LCA Engine now is 89kn compared to 95kn of Mirage. Fuel Efficiency of LCA engine is 15% better. Guess what? LCA MKI FOC is "already" in league of upgraded Mirage 2000.

MKIA will be much better than even upgraded Mirage 2000.

To a specific query on how best was Tejas when compared to the MiGs and Mirages, Ranga said: "Generation ahead of Mirage, MiG. You can't compare apples with oranges."

Read more at: https://www.oneindia.com/india/teja...ve-flown-so-far-group-capt-ranga-2142289.html

 

[IndianHawk]

IAF has been delaying LCA for a long time & this game is continuing.

LCA Engine now is 89kn compared to 95kn of Mirage. Fuel Efficiency of LCA engine is 15% better. Guess what? LCA MKI FOC is "already" in league of upgraded Mirage 2000.

MKIA will be much better than even upgraded Mirage 2000.

Mirage simple is much bigger and carries much more fuel and can carry almost 2 tons more payload then lca. That's why mwf is required. That's iaf baseline now for two front war iaf needs at least mirage level range so that even jets deployed in Punjab can take on laddakh if necessary.

But mwf with fuel efficient f414 will have better range and payload then mirage for sure.

And avionics weaponry wise lca mk1a will be ahead of mirage. Only advantage mirage has here is enternal ew suite so mwf will cover that too.

 

[Raj Malhotra]

Mirage simple is much bigger and carries much more fuel and can carry almost 2 tons more payload then lca. That's why mwf is required. That's iaf baseline now for two front war iaf needs at least mirage level range so that even jets deployed in Punjab can take on laddakh if necessary.

But mwf with fuel efficient f414 will have better range and payload then mirage for sure.

And avionics weaponry wise lca mk1a will be ahead of mirage. Only advantage mirage has here is enternal ew suite so mwf will cover that too.

That's exactly, what I am disputing. LCA now has same range and payload as Mirage inspite of being smaller as it consumes less fuel.


LCA Engine is 89kn compared to 95kn of Mirage. Fuel Efficiency of LCA engine is 15% better. So LCA is almost as powerful as Mirage while being substantially smaller & lighter.

 

[IndianHawk]

That's exactly, what I am disputing. LCA now has same range and payload as Mirage inspite of being smaller as it consumes less fuel.


LCA Engine is 89kn compared to 95kn of Mirage. Fuel Efficiency of LCA engine is 15% better. So LCA is almost as powerful as Mirage while being substantially smaller & lighter.

What you are missing is that mirage engine has much more dry thrust at 64 kn . Which means it uses afterburner much less then lca combined with more aerodynamic design of mirage it has actually more range and combat radius then lca even at greater payload.

That's why we are developing mwf . That will be the perfect lca and will exceed mirage performance.
F414 has more dry thrust then f404 too which will help a lot.