LCA TEJAS MK1 & MK1A: News and Discussion

IndianHawk

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2016
Messages
6,965
Likes
24,405
Country flag
But think, that sort of drag could seriously jeopardize op.range, especially without droptanks. That 6-bomb layout leaves room for on its centreline.

If Tejas can tandem bombs at centreline like Jags...
IMG_20200608_145941.jpg
...then 6-bomb can be achieved with 2 midboard tanks!
LCA Tejas tandem bomb.jpg

Practically that'll be Mark2.
Tejas can certainly carry lgb at centre pylon it can probably carry tandom bombs too.
 

Bleh

Laughing member
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2017
Messages
2,825
Likes
7,991
Country flag
lca exceeds Jaguars endurance.
???
Add 2 midboard bombs on the above Tejas... I strongly doubt its range will be greater than that Jaguar.
Tejas can certainly carry lgb at centre pylon it can probably carry tandom bombs too.
I prefer not to make overestimated assumptions.
I think there is serious length constraint. Its centre line drop centerline drop-tank is so infuriatingly short that it only adds less than 100nm range overcoming drag penulty, so it's rarely used.
IMG_20200709_172318.jpg

...the tandem bomb structure would be much longer.

And Tejas don't need 7-9 dumb bombs, even6 is bordering at overkill!.. Its A2G delivery system is more accurate, it doesn't need to "bomb diarrhoea" like Jaguar.
 
Last edited:

Chandragupt Maurya

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 23, 2020
Messages
333
Likes
836
Country flag
Tejas FOC has AESA Radars(Elta 2052) or not ? IAF should have ordered 40 FOC Tejas to replace ageing Mig21 bison afterall it’s far better than mig21 bison if not better than Griepen ordering 40 FOC Tejas will also help filling the gap before MK1A arrives and who knows IAF may demand few more modifications when MK1A arrives this is what they did with FOC Tejas
 

IndianHawk

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2016
Messages
6,965
Likes
24,405
Country flag
???
Add 2 midboard bombs on the above Tejas... I strongly doubt its range will be greater than that Jaguar.
HV thakur has clarified lca range and endurance exceeds that of Jaguar. While with heavy bomb load range of lca would drop it would also drop for Jaguars.
Jags has more internal fuel but lca has an engine generations ahead of jags in fuel efficiency.
I prefer not to make overestimated assumptions.
I think there is serious length constraint. Its centre line drop centerline drop-tank is so infuriatingly short that it only adds less than 100nm range overcoming drag penulty, so it's rarely used.
I was speaking weight Wise . Length could be a problem for two bombs I agree .
That's why in previous post I mentioned 7 bombs as practical max load for lca. 1 each on mid board 2 each on inborard and 1 on centreline.
 

Chandragupt Maurya

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 23, 2020
Messages
333
Likes
836
Country flag
Indian government should focus on indigenous jet engines only then we would be able to take the full advantage of LCA Tejas otherwise Tejas will remain prone to American sanctions
 

Raj Malhotra

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Messages
789
Likes
1,335
Country flag
I think a brochure was posted here at DFI that showed that LCA with 1200kg weapon payload has 1500km range.
 

Rajaraja Chola

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2016
Messages
177
Likes
340
Country flag
Opportunity for LCA- trainer??

US Air Force considers leasing trainer jets that lost the T-X competition

Valerie Insinna

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Air Force wants to lease advanced trainers as early as next summer while it waits for Boeing’s T-7 Red Hawk, creating an opportunity for the two training jets that lost out to the Red Hawk during the T-X competition.

The Air Force intends to open a competition for trainer jets that would help it test out a new training concept called “Rebuilding the Forge,” or “Reforge,” said Air Combat Command head Gen. Mike Holmes on June 22. The concept is meant to speed up the time it takes to produce an experienced pilot.

The service initially intended to lease T-50 jets — originally made by Korea Aerospace Industries — from Hillwood Aviation, according to a sources-sought solicitation released in January. But since then, other companies have expressed a desire to bid on the opportunity, called RFX, and Holmes confirmed that the Air Force plans to allow outside firms to propose alternative options.

“In our initial market research, there was some thought that there might be only one airplane there was going to be bid against it. But as we did more market research, we found out that there were multiple people that wanted to bid, and they were going to bid with a couple of different airplanes at least,” Holmes told reporters during an event hosted by the Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies.

“Certainly competition is in our interest, so we want to have that competition to see who can come in and at an affordable cost. And frankly, our budgets are tight,” he added.
The goal of Reforge, Holmes said, is to produce experienced fighter pilots without having to put operators through the “basic course” currently required by any student who has never flown a fighter.

“We proposed to lease some airplanes while we’re waiting on the T-7 to arrive and do some experiments along with AETC [Air Education and Training Command] to try to figure out what’s the best use of this new T-7 that we’re going to buy,” Holmes said. “We think taking advantage of the capabilities of that new trainer along with the [virtual] training systems that AETC has previewed and premiered give us a great opportunity to meet the requirements of the [pilot] shortage that we have in the fastest, best way.”

Holmes added that if no single company comes in with an affordable proposal, the Air Force may back away from the leasing idea.
The service is still refining the specifics of its leasing strategy, but Holmes said the hope is to lease upward of 11 planes starting in the summer of 2021. The original solicitation stated that it could lease anywhere from four to eight trainers to provide approximately 4,500 flight hours annually for about five years.

Opening up RFX could make way for the third entrant in the T-X competition — Italian defense company Leonardo’s M346 Master — to butt heads against the T-50 once again.

In March, Texas-based aviation company Mission Support Systems told Aviation Week that it hoped to propose a version of the M-346 that would, within a year, be integrated with a radar from Leonardo’s GRIFO radar series. However, Air Combat Command expressed a preference for the T-50, which already is equipped with a radar.
If the Reforge concept proves successful, the Air Force may find itself with a requirement in excess of the 351 jets that are planned to be procured in the T-7 Red Hawk program of record. Those T-7s may have different specifications than the Red Hawks used for undergraduate pilot training and could end up becoming a separate variant of the aircraft, Air Force Magazine reported.

Holmes said that while the T-7 is “a great airplane,” it’s possible for Boeing and its partner, Swedish defense firm Saab, to accelerate the program quickly enough to use the Red Hawk for the Reforge proof of concept.

“It’s several years away from us getting their hands on it,” he said. “Boeing and Saab are working through the shift from their prototypes to the operational airplane. They will tell you that they were pretty darn close in their prototypes to an operational airplane. … I agree, but it still takes some time to work through the issues and turn that into an operational platform.
Without selling trainers to IAF there is no way they are marketing that to USAF and that too in 2021. Its not marketing. We don't have capacity yet.
 

Rajaraja Chola

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2016
Messages
177
Likes
340
Country flag
Mig29 are su30 mki are better as they can carry more weapons....
Any other reason s.....
Tejas mk1 will replace mig21 bis and mig27.......and neither su30mki will replace Tejas ..nor Tejas will replace su30 mki
...........and if war with China happen s....you will see Tejas in action..... either in eastern front or in western front....

Bdw why some people says Tejas is not deployable at boarder. Then why iaf bought those 40 costly jets..........

People also forget in gaganshakti exercise iaf used hawk ajt s in ground attack role.......
Tejas is way better than this.
Its not fit and play to deploy anywhere. Infrastructure, technicians, spare support has to be built at an particular base before moving an fighter. It can land all right, but what happens if maintaining is required. It will be a sitting duck. During Gagan Sakthi, if you see Tarmak Talking, one tech explains, they had to go and work in the middle of the night to get the aircraft flying. HAL technicians. But in a base we need IAF tech doing that job.
 

Bleh

Laughing member
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2017
Messages
2,825
Likes
7,991
Country flag
I think a brochure was posted here at DFI that showed that LCA with 1200kg weapon payload has 1500km range.
Hmm... 4 BVRs (200kg each) & 2 CCMs (150kg each) make 1100kg. Great! Can you find the source?

Actually a lot of it will change when the larger low-drag fuel tanks come in.

Present 450lt centreline drop-tank is practically useless, that's why rare (I'd wondered why central pylon remsins empty so often). The 710lt new one will make sense & have an effect on range... The 1200lt tanks will be replaced by 1320lt ones, lower drag.
 
Last edited:

Bleh

Laughing member
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2017
Messages
2,825
Likes
7,991
Country flag
Follow-up.
Like above case, central pylon was usually kept empty until FOC in Air Force version.

Indranil BRF, rare photo of Tejas with 3 drop-tanks, but not practical due to unoptimised old drop-tank design.
EWdGOBkU4AYH9kH.jpeg

I'm not sure why we needed to develope them from scratch, instead of downsizing perfectly good Mirage-2000 droptanks.
2000-5_1280.JPG
 

patriots

Defense lover
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2017
Messages
3,561
Likes
10,076
Country flag
Follow-up.

Like above case, central pylon was usually kept empty until FOC in Air Force version.

Indranil BRF, rare photo of Tejas with 3 drop-tanks, but not practical due to unoptimised old drop-tank design. View attachment 52506
I'm not sure why we needed to develope them from scratch, instead of downsizing perfectly good Mirage-2000 droptanks. View attachment 52517

FOC Features

SP-21 boasts of key features like air-to-air refuelling probe, Gsh-23 mm gun, pressure refuelling with three drop tank configuration, improved wing navigation lamp, tandem pylon and auto-low speed recovery, to name


Fuel system enhancement: Over and above 2350 kg fuel carrying capability of IOC variant with its external drop tanks of 1200 and 800 litres capacity, Tejas FOC has an additional 725 litres centre line drop tank with pressure refuelling.
 

Bleh

Laughing member
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2017
Messages
2,825
Likes
7,991
Country flag
Tejas FOC has an additional 725 litres centre line drop tank with pressure refuelling.
But has it been operationalised yet?.. we have seen it only once during Aero India 19, no trace after that.
 

Raj Malhotra

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Messages
789
Likes
1,335
Country flag
Hmm... 4 BVRs (200kg each) & 2 CCMs (150kg each) make 1100kg. Great! Can you find the source?

Actually a lot of it will change when the larger low-drag fuel tanks come in.

Present 450lt centreline drop-tank is practically useless, that's why rare (I'd wondered why central pylon remsins empty so often). The 710lt new one will make sense & have an effect on range... The 1200lt tanks will be replaced by 1320lt ones, lower drag.

Oh, I made a mistake, Range is 2000km with 1200kg weapon load. It seems to pic of official Display Board.




20200710_125448.jpg
 

Bleh

Laughing member
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2017
Messages
2,825
Likes
7,991
Country flag
So what is the range with max payload and fuel.
Dudes. :facepalm:

It all depends on what makes up the load & resultant drag.
If the extra fuel in those drop-tanks is replaced by tandem 1000lb bombs (like above post), then range would reduce to <500km. Enough for just a CAS bomb run.

IMG_20200710_141446.jpg

But with this case there are 120-150kg BVR missiles instead of 450kg bombs on mid-board pylon, range would be larger than 2000km due to reduced drag...
NSVMMQE.jpg

...But replace the high speed low drag bombs with LGBs & range will reduce significantly below that.

And all that is with central pylon empty. Whatever is mounted there will again vary those numbers.

That looks like the same old 450lt one to me. Much smaller than the 800lt mid-board pylon tanks.

If a 725lt centreline drop-tank was operationalised then we would be seeing Tejas flying with it regularly, not these few old photos.
 
Last edited:

patriots

Defense lover
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2017
Messages
3,561
Likes
10,076
Country flag
Dudes. :facepalm:

It all depends on what makes up the load & resultant drag.
If the extra fuel in those drop-tanks is replaced by tandem 1000lb bombs (like above post), then range would reduce to <500km. Enough for just a CAS bomb run.

View attachment 52526
But with this case there are 120-150kg BVR missiles instead of 450kg bombs on mid-board pylon, range would be larger than 2000km due to reduced drag... View attachment 52529
...But replace the high speed low drag bombs with LGBs & range will reduce significantly below that.

And all that is with central pylon empty. Whatever is mounted there will again vary those numbers.


That looks like the same old 450lt one to me. Much smaller than the 800lt mid-board pylon tanks.

If a 725lt centreline drop-tank was operationalised then we would be seeing Tejas flying with it regularly, not these few old photos.
Bro it too looks smaller to me,but the poster in brf says it's 725 ltr
Bdw ,less photo s of Tejas from iaf are available
And this 725 ltr dt is only for foc,which just entered service
.... We will see in next aero India atleast..
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top