LCA TEJAS MK1 & MK1A: News and Discussion

Chinmoy

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2015
Messages
5,806
Likes
10,264
Country flag
Isn't Sp-41 to Sp-50 also Trainers ?

As the order of 83 have 10 mk1 Trainers and 73 Mk1a ?




So 2028/29 onwards Mk2 ....
Yes. Out of 83, 10 would be trainers. But whether it would be SP-41 to 50 or SP-114 to SP-123, not known as of now. The trainers would be made in a different facility and in all probability these would be last in the line.
 

samsaptaka

तस्मात् उत्तिष्ठ कौन्तेय युद्धाय कृतनिष्चय
Regular Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2016
Messages
716
Likes
2,116
Country flag
THAT'S YOUR PERSONAL OPINION.

An operational Tejas would not exist if we had prioritised our effort on Kaveri (money cannot hasten engine development, as the Chinks found out)... If imported engines weren't used we'd be tampering with engines upto 2030, instead today we're designing TEDBF from scratch in 1 year!
I think you are inferring hidden meanings. Nowhere did I say that we should have built Tejas with indigenous engine only. Money is also very much required along with time when it comes to jet engine development. In fact for any RnD Money is the starting point. Compared to chinks we have spent peanuts in engine development. In fact even the basics are not there, like a flying test bed, etc.. Development of engine and manufacturing of Tejas with GE engine can and should happen in parallel. We simply CANNOT be completely dependant on Unkil for the engine, esp. since now we have a commie Biden as POTUS whose strings are pulled by porkies and leftists
 

Bleh

Laughing member
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2017
Messages
4,772
Likes
17,386
Country flag
I think you are inferring hidden meanings. Nowhere did I say that we should have built Tejas with indigenous engine only. Money is also very much required along with time when it comes to jet engine development. In fact for any RnD Money is the starting point. Compared to chinks we have spent peanuts in engine development. In fact even the basics are not there, like a flying test bed, etc.. Development of engine and manufacturing of Tejas with GE engine can and should happen in parallel. We simply CANNOT be completely dependant on Unkil for the engine, esp. since now we have a commie Biden as POTUS whose strings are pulled by porkies and leftists
Ok my bad. But we've had multipke "commie" US prez before... Nuke test got us into sactions. Not just any political powerplay.
 

Trololo

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2017
Messages
331
Likes
739
Country flag
Yes statistically that makes sense but does it mean Rafale is underpowered because of M88 engines or there is more to it than just the pure thrust numbers?
Obviously aerodynamic shaping, performance requirements, and mission profiles add more to the story than the raw numbers. But in sheer performance terms the Rafale lacks the massive excess power that the Typhoon enjoys, which makes it so capable in the high altitude high performance A2A game (even trumps the MKI here). TEDBF and ORCA will most likely mitigate this problem.
 

Okabe Rintarou

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2018
Messages
602
Likes
2,167
Country flag
Obviously aerodynamic shaping, performance requirements, and mission profiles add more to the story than the raw numbers. But in sheer performance terms the Rafale lacks the massive excess power that the Typhoon enjoys, which makes it so capable in the high altitude high performance A2A game (even trumps the MKI here). TEDBF and ORCA will most likely mitigate this problem.
There is no ORCA. Please stop it. ORCA as mooted as a design, but as the recent videos have shown, we now have a better design in the works for TEDBF. If by ORCA you mean TEDBF-Air Force version (which is still unconfirmed), then please just call it TEDBF-AF or something. ORCA as it was originally mooted is not happening. Period.
 

Bleh

Laughing member
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2017
Messages
4,772
Likes
17,386
Country flag
There is no ORCA. Please stop it. ORCA as mooted as a design, but as the recent videos have shown, we now have a better design in the works for TEDBF. If by ORCA you mean TEDBF-Air Force version (which is still unconfirmed), then please just call it TEDBF-AF or something. ORCA as it was originally mooted is not happening. Period.
I think he meant TEDBF only...
 

Flying Dagger

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 26, 2019
Messages
2,106
Likes
5,104
Country flag
Yes. Out of 83, 10 would be trainers. But whether it would be SP-41 to 50 or SP-114 to SP-123, not known as of now. The trainers would be made in a different facility and in all probability these would be last in the line.
Why will we opt for Mk1 configuration for trainers at the end when we already have Mk1a configuration with AESA radar and other improvements.

What I can understand is these 10 might be a buffer to keep assembly line running.
 

aviationgeek

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2021
Messages
43
Likes
53
Country flag
Why will we opt for Mk1 configuration for trainers at the end when we already have Mk1a configuration with AESA radar and other improvements.

What I can understand is these 10 might be a buffer to keep assembly line running.
they will be from SP41 onwards
 

Roland55

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2020
Messages
35
Likes
73
Country flag
Has the Tejas received any ASM armament ? (Brahmos?, exocet?, maybe something russian?)
 

Chinmoy

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2015
Messages
5,806
Likes
10,264
Country flag
Why will we opt for Mk1 configuration for trainers at the end when we already have Mk1a configuration with AESA radar and other improvements.

What I can understand is these 10 might be a buffer to keep assembly line running.
Who said we are opting for Mk1 configuration in Mk1A trainers?
 

Chinmoy

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2015
Messages
5,806
Likes
10,264
Country flag
Far too lower costs for trainer to nbe Mark1A... Maybe will get AESA radar, but definitely not some other avionic components.
Yeah, it seems the trainer variant would be Mk1 standard instead of Mk1A.
 

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top