LCA TEJAS MK1 & MK1A: News and Discussion

[G10]

Guns are not used in air warfare today.
They are just for "looks" just like sword which is used in military drills.
There is no relevance of having a gun.

 

[Armand2REP]

Guns are not used in air warfare today.
They are just for "looks" just like sword which is used in military drills.
There is no relevance of having a gun.

Is the knife obsolete in hand to hand combat? If both your BVR and WVR missiles miss and you get to the merge, the gun is the best thing you can have. With the advancements in ECM and LO it is more likely now than before that a gun would be of use. When two fighters are closing in on each other at Mach speeds it doesn't take long to merge.

 

[Assassin 2.0]

Is the knife obsolete in hand to hand combat? If both your BVR and WVR missiles miss and you get to the merge, the gun is the best thing you can have. With the advancements in ECM and LO it is more likely now than before that a gun would be of use. When two fighters are closing in on each other at Mach speeds it doesn't take long to merge.

I never talked about knife i was talking about sword which is also obsolete in hand to hand combat.
40 years went on and there is no single kill by a gun nowadays this is one of few reason why F-22 never had a gun.
I wish i could see gun fight at Mach speed before i die it will be awesome to watch i guess. High speed chase maneuvers. Amazing. But possibilities are low.

 

[Armand2REP]

I never talked about knife i was talking about sword which is also obsolete in hand to hand combat.
40 years went on and there is no single kill by a gun nowadays this is one of few reason why F-22 never had a gun.

F-22 does have a gun.

 

[Assassin 2.0]

F-22 does have a gun.

Oh i thought it doesn't have a gun.

But Chinese didn't thought to include a gun.

"China's J-20 stealth fighter jet represents a massive milestone for Beijing's armed forces and the first stealth aircraft ever fielded outside the US, but the impressive effort still falls noticeably short in some areas.

The J-20 doesn't have a cannon, and represents the only entry into the world of fifth-generation fighters that skips the gun, which has seen 100 years of aerial combat."
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bu...ight-with-the-us/amp_articleshow/67649437.cms

 

[HeadlessChicken]

Guns are not used in air warfare today.
They are just for "looks" just like sword which is used in military drills.
There is no relevance of having a gun.

Well the gun could be used to shoot down drones in the future , mostly smaller ones instead of using expensive missiles ...

 

[Saichand K]

Another thing is has anyone noticed that HAL Tejas combat radius under various weapon-load configurations is actually quite close to that of Mig-27 ?? Correct me if I am wrong....

 

[Bhurki]

Another thing is has anyone noticed that HAL Tejas combat radius under various weapon-load configurations is actually quite close to that of Mig-27 ?? Correct me if I am wrong....

Quite unlikely, Mig27 Bahadur carries 4600 kg of internal fuel to tejas 2400 kg...
Mig's R29 engine had TSFC of 95kg/kN/h
F404 has 83 kg/kN/h
Accumulative sortie thrust on one full tank-
Mig 27 - 50kN.h
Tejas - 28kN.h
Thats a difference of about 80%
Also considering mig 27 can swing its wings to increase lift at same speed.
So, on a mission where both fly the same profile( altitude, payload), Mig will have a lot more range.
But it is not designed for high flying...
More attention was placed on low level flying and ground attack capability ( which is counter to range).

 

[Bhurki]

Mig 27 - 50kN.h
Tejas - 28kN.h
Thats a difference of about 80%

My bad ....
Mig 27 with 4600 kg fuel and R29 tsfc means a total of 56 kN.h thrust-time, which is 100% more than tejas.

 

[darshan978]

My bad ....
Mig 27 with 4600 kg fuel and R29 tsfc means a total of 56 kN.h thrust-time, which is 100% more than tejas.

What about Far lower turbine efficiency of just 6.5kn/kg rather than 8kn/kg of ge404

 

[darshan978]

,,,...................................................

 

[Bhurki]

What about Far lower turbine efficiency of just 6.5kn/kg rather than 8kn/kg of ge404

You are using wrong units. Efficiency is dimensionless.
Turbine efficiency is just max thrust/ weight of the engine. It only describes how many times its weight can an engine lift.
The real efficiency measure is TSFC that tells you how many kg of fuel will be used per unit thrust.time. Unit is kg/kN.h
Taking the above example for Tejas at 28kN.h, it means a pilot can set the throttle at 50% dry thrust (28kN) and the jet will fly for 1 hour before it runs out of fuel.
Similarly, if the pilot engages afterburner(90kN), tank will be empty after mere 18 minutes.

 

[Saichand K]

Quite unlikely, Mig27 Bahadur carries 4600 kg of internal fuel to tejas 2400 kg...
Mig's R29 engine had TSFC of 95kg/kN/h
F404 has 83 kg/kN/h
Accumulative sortie thrust on one full tank-
Mig 27 - 50kN.h
Tejas - 28kN.h
Thats a difference of about 80%
Also considering mig 27 can swing its wings to increase lift at same speed.
So, on a mission where both fly the same profile( altitude, payload), Mig will have a lot more range.
But it is not designed for high flying...
More attention was placed on low level flying and ground attack capability ( which is counter to range).

Actually I meant based on pure numbers from wiki. I do understand that both are different weight class fighters.

 

[Bhurki]

Actually I meant based on pure numbers from wiki. I do understand that both are different weight class fighters.

There are no numbers mentioned for tejas without external fuel tanks anywhere...
It'll always carry fuel tanks other than for demo purposes..

 

[HariPrasad-1]

Quite unlikely, Mig27 Bahadur carries 4600 kg of internal fuel to tejas 2400 kg...
Mig's R29 engine had TSFC of 95kg/kN/h
F404 has 83 kg/kN/h
Accumulative sortie thrust on one full tank-
Mig 27 - 50kN.h
Tejas - 28kN.h
Thats a difference of about 80%
Also considering mig 27 can swing its wings to increase lift at same speed.
So, on a mission where both fly the same profile( altitude, payload), Mig will have a lot more range.
But it is not designed for high flying...
More attention was placed on low level flying and ground attack capability ( which is counter to range).

It's an outdated design. Rafale with lower thrust can carry double payload. Tejas MK2 with % of

Turbine efficiency is just max thrust/ weight of the engine.

This efficiency is different from fuel efficiency of Turbine which is measured in terms of thrust produced per Kg of fuel. When it is fitted in Plane, aerodynamics, weight of the plane etc also become one variable affecting the fuel efficiency of the plane.

 

[Saichand K]

There are no numbers mentioned for tejas without external fuel tanks anywhere...
It'll always carry fuel tanks other than for demo purposes..

Yes. The specs of Mig-27 provided in wiki and other open source forums are also with drop tanks. Also, it is well known that Tejas combat radius is 300-350km without drop tanks.

 

[armyofhind]

I never talked about knife i was talking about sword which is also obsolete in hand to hand combat.
40 years went on and there is no single kill by a gun nowadays this is one of few reason why F-22 never had a gun.
I wish i could see gun fight at Mach speed before i die it will be awesome to watch i guess. High speed chase maneuvers. Amazing. But possibilities are low.

There have been plenty of gun kills in Vietnam, Yom Kippur, '71 etc.

In the forty year time frame that you're talking about, there hasn't been any major Air to Air conflict except for Desert Storm. There too, most of the Iraqi Air force was destroyed on the ground.

Back in Vietnam, the USAF though that the advent of missiles made the gun obsolete. That's why the frontline workhorse of the USAF, the F-4 Phantom didn't have a gun in the initial marks.
When real engagements started, it was observed that missiles aren't always the ideal option to engage all targets. Hence guns found a way back onto the F-4, initially as an external pod and then inbuilt from the F-4E onwards.

 

[Bhurki]

It's an outdated design. Rafale with lower thrust can carry double payload

Obvio its outdated, its 60 years old design.
Rafale with lower thrust? Rafale has two engines and much more thrust than mig27.

When it is fitted in Plane, aerodynamics, weight of the plane etc also become one variable affecting the fuel efficiency of the plane.

Thats is the reason i mentioned swing wing and difference in mission profiles. You can only go as far as talking about definitive data before getting into muddied mission characterisitics.

Also, it is well known that Tejas combat radius is 300-350km without drop tanks.

I'm in no position to argue that.. Could be more, less. Although, it is futile giving a range like 350 km without mentioning what payload you are including.
A guy did quite good analysis of JF17 range and armament on def.pk. Since tejas is almost similar(<10% diff) in OEW, MTOW, thrust, TSFC, internal fuel, i think the analysis could apply to tejas too..
https://defense.pk/pdf/threads/jf-17s-ferry-and-combat-ranges.462726/

 

[WolfPack86]

With American F414/F404 engine families set to rule the skies of India, Why India needs to have alternatives

40 Tejas Mk1 and 83 Tejas Mk1A will be powered by American developed F404-GE-IN20 after-burning engines to be followed up with F414-GE-INS6 after-burning engines which will be sourced for 200 Tejas MkII and it is also confirmed now that 40 AMCA Mk1 will also be powered by F414-GE-INS6 after-burning engines till a locally developed after-burning engine is ready for AMCA MkII. With 360+ jet to be powered by F414/F404 family engines in their lifetime whole fleet will require nearly 1300 engines and its number will only grow if India decides to stick with F414EPE engines for the AMCA MkII also. HAL plans to develop Lead-in fighter training (LIFT) based on trainer variant of the Tejas Mk1 which means more American engines. In short, IAF will have nearly 360+ jets with American developed F414/F404 family engine which will make up nearly 50% of the future IAF fleet by 2040 without even local production of spares available in India. American engines will not only dominate the Indian fighter fleet even if IAF never inducts any American fighter jet in its arsenal leaving the IAF fleet vulnerable to sanctions and restriction on the supply of spares to India in the event of the fallout of relationships with US Government. India not to be depended on American developed F414/F404 family engine will need to develop at least two engine variants that can be locally developed with a foreign aero-engine maker. India should strive to develop a de-tuned 100kN thrust class engine based on the 110kN thrust class engine which we plan to develop for the AMCA MkII program in the country. Tejas MkII and Tejas Mk1A fleet will require 3.5 engine swap for its entire flight worthy life of nearly 40 years so India will neither should upgrade the fleet of Tejas MkII and Tejas Mk1A fleet with the same 110kN thrust class engine we plan to develop for the AMCA MkII program or we can plan to develop a de-tuned variant of the same engine with lower thrust. Selection of the same 110kN thrust class engine for all three programs will mean that the production rate of the engines will be high and due to the commonality of engine among all three fighter jet fleet, logistics and maintenance of the jets at a base level will also improve considerably. India will require at least 10 years for the new engine to be ready for the production so, in next two to three years, India will need to take a call on development partner it was to choice for the new engine and also invest in the required infrastructure like flying test-bed and multiple rig and ground engine facility for the program to succeed.
https://idrw.org/with-american-f414...india-needs-to-have-alternatives/#more-214191

 

[Chanakya 002]

With American F414/F404 engine families set to rule the skies of India, Why India needs to have alternatives

40 Tejas Mk1 and 83 Tejas Mk1A will be powered by American developed F404-GE-IN20 after-burning engines to be followed up with F414-GE-INS6 after-burning engines which will be sourced for 200 Tejas MkII and it is also confirmed now that 40 AMCA Mk1 will also be powered by F414-GE-INS6 after-burning engines till a locally developed after-burning engine is ready for AMCA MkII. With 360+ jet to be powered by F414/F404 family engines in their lifetime whole fleet will require nearly 1300 engines and its number will only grow if India decides to stick with F414EPE engines for the AMCA MkII also. HAL plans to develop Lead-in fighter training (LIFT) based on trainer variant of the Tejas Mk1 which means more American engines. In short, IAF will have nearly 360+ jets with American developed F414/F404 family engine which will make up nearly 50% of the future IAF fleet by 2040 without even local production of spares available in India. American engines will not only dominate the Indian fighter fleet even if IAF never inducts any American fighter jet in its arsenal leaving the IAF fleet vulnerable to sanctions and restriction on the supply of spares to India in the event of the fallout of relationships with US Government. India not to be depended on American developed F414/F404 family engine will need to develop at least two engine variants that can be locally developed with a foreign aero-engine maker. India should strive to develop a de-tuned 100kN thrust class engine based on the 110kN thrust class engine which we plan to develop for the AMCA MkII program in the country. Tejas MkII and Tejas Mk1A fleet will require 3.5 engine swap for its entire flight worthy life of nearly 40 years so India will neither should upgrade the fleet of Tejas MkII and Tejas Mk1A fleet with the same 110kN thrust class engine we plan to develop for the AMCA MkII program or we can plan to develop a de-tuned variant of the same engine with lower thrust. Selection of the same 110kN thrust class engine for all three programs will mean that the production rate of the engines will be high and due to the commonality of engine among all three fighter jet fleet, logistics and maintenance of the jets at a base level will also improve considerably. India will require at least 10 years for the new engine to be ready for the production so, in next two to three years, India will need to take a call on development partner it was to choice for the new engine and also invest in the required infrastructure like flying test-bed and multiple rig and ground engine facility for the program to succeed.
https://idrw.org/with-american-f414...india-needs-to-have-alternatives/#more-214191

The same thing when and wherever I try to know about LCA, and I am really fed up Seeing the current pace Please let me know how many years HAL need to make the 40 mk1 till then forget about other things MkII and AMCA.