Naval LCA Tejas

[Rahul Singh]

This is the time when Naval prototypes were in goa. So that means one thing and one thing only; a lot of tests at SBTF.

Launches or ski jumps for sure. Not sure if they undertook wire trapping.

So i was right, wasn't i??????

 

[Gessler]

T Not sure if they undertook wire trapping.

Neither NP-1 nor NP-2 are seen with an arrestor hook. So only the STO part of STOBAR is validated so far.

Doing a recovery test will obviously require the hook to be installed in the first place.

 

[Rahul Singh]

^^^^Yeah it is evident from pictures. No wire trapping. However surely mock approaches (3rd pic) and may be some Touch and Gos.

 

[Narasimh]

Some updates on Tejas coming from ADA chief.
-Navy funding 40% of the program.
-Mark 1 capable of operating in 200m with load of 2 R-73, confirmed.
-2017 will see deck based tests.
http://ajaishukla.blogspot.com/2016/05/as-sea-harriers-retire-naval-tejas.html

Does anybody know if third prototype is going to be with F-414?

 

[Gessler]

Does anybody know if third prototype is going to be with F-414?

Incorporation of F414 requires an almost completely redesigned airframe. Only the NLCA Mk-2 and the IAF Mk-2 can have it.

All Mk-1 and Mk-1A aircraft, from both services, will have F404 only.

 

[Narasimh]

Incorporation of F414 requires an almost completely redesigned airframe. Only the NLCA Mk-2 and the IAF Mk-2 can have it.

All Mk-1 and Mk-1A aircraft, from both services, will have F404 only.

As far as I know, Navy has not planned to induct any F404 LCAs, wants only mk-2 F414. Seems the new Vikrant would not be operating NLCAs in the near future after its launch in 2018.

 

[Gessler]

As far as I know, Navy has not planned to induct any F404 LCAs, wants only mk-2 F414. Seems the new Vikrant would not be operating NLCAs in the near future after its launch in 2018.

They need Mk-1 for testing for the time being. Mk-2 is years away.

No Mk-2 is going to enter service before 2020, so yeah, Vikrant will be having MiG-29K alone for a nice long time.

 

[gadeshi]

Naval LCA testing photos:

 

[Indx TechStyle]

Naval Version Of India’s Light Combat Aircraft Completes Flight Tests

The naval version of India’s home grown Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) Tejas has completed flight test in Goa.

The aircraft will operate from indigenous aircraft carrier, INS Vikrant after it is commissioned in 2018, Business Standard reported Tuesday.

The aircraft underwent taking off and landing from a 200 meter deck and ‘hot-refuelling or topping up the aircraft after a sortie with the engine running and the pilot in the cockpit, the newspaper quoted Commodore (Retired) CD Balaji, chief of the Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA), which oversees the Tejas development programme.

Tejas will be filling in as the light fighter whereas the MiG-29K aircraft will be the medium fighter on INS Vikrant.

Balaji reveals a committed navy is funding 40 per cent of the development cost of the Naval Tejas. The MoD has allocated Rs 3,650 crore ($548 million) for the naval programme.

The ADA chief described the flight trials in Goa between March 27 and April 25, in which two Naval Tejas prototypes flew 33 sorties from a Shore Based Test Facility (SBTF) -- a full-scale replica of an aircraft carrier deck. Built on land, the SBTF allows carrier deck take-offs and landings to be validated, without unduly endangering an aircraft carrier, or an aircraft prototype and pilot.

 

[Rahul Singh]

200 m launch is great. Recently, Tejas also demonstrated very short take off capability at Bahrain airshow. With demonstration of ski jump launch from maximum possible length on carrier i.e 200 m, NLCA is now half way mark.

But dummy approaches to recovery area is interesting. Since, there is still no three colour light at nose gear, which can be clearly seen in all the pics of NP-1 & 2, i am more than sure that these test were aimed at testing different settings (deflection angles) of LEVCON. And LEVCON is a very interesting control surface. In general it allows NLCA to approach to recovery area at lower speeds(~140 knots) than Tejas; which touches runway at around 100 knots higher. But in particular, LEVCON is a control surface which generates greater lift at same speed with Tejas. Which in other words meas NLCA has better AoA performance than Tejas, smaller STR, lesser drag and better low level flying ability. In tactical terms NLCA has better dog fight performance, low level penetration capability and range than Tejas.

Now, comes the NLCA MK-2; which will have greater thrust, lesser weight, lesser drag, more fuel load, which in a tactical sum total will make it a clear winner in the LCA family, as well as in international light fighter market (not considering Mig-29 SMT and F-16 block 52 onward). This brings me to wonder, why IAF is still cold on asking a Land based variant of NLCA MK-2 which will definitely be lighter than deck based variant considering the fact that deck landing requires extra strengthening which puts lot of weight on airframe? Joint development will only make the project more smooth during development.

PS. Just look at the size of LEVCON. Argument that it is just an extension of 'Slates' couldn't be more flawed.

 

[Zebra]

Incorporation of F414 requires an almost completely redesigned airframe. Only the NLCA Mk-2 and the IAF Mk-2 can have it.

All Mk-1 and Mk-1A aircraft, from both services, will have F404 only.

Why.........................................................?........!

 

[Rahul Singh]

It has been many times posted that dimensions of both F-404 and F-414 are same except that latter is slightly heavier. So there is little required to be changed inside bay. Air intake is however another story because of requirement of larger volume of air.

 

[Gessler]

@Zebra @Rahul Singh

It is not so easy.

The problem is that LCA was never designed keeping a particular family of engines in mind. The F414 weighs more & requires higher airflow which means larger air intakes - which upsets the CoG & reduces the amount of wing area available to generate lift (which in turn requires larger wings), and that leads to the need to stretch the overall length of airframe (from nose to nozzle) further in order to offset that increase in wing-area (which increases drag)...and therefore requires a total re-calibration of the design.

If you observe the changes made in the Tejas Mk-2's published 'expected specs' when compared to the specs of Mk-1 airframe, you'll see that all these factors are taken into account and the Mk-2 design is different from the Mk-1 along these specific lines.

To put it short & sweet, putting an F414 on an Mk-1 airframe serves no technical or practical purpose. If it did, we'd have already seen Tejas flying with the F414 by now.

 

[Rahul Singh]

^^^^^ In retrospect: Ever before requirement for higher thrust engine came, it was known that Naval LCA needs to be designed from ground up. However when IAF jumped on prospect of having a IAF version of it, that is then people started repeating the mistake by again speaking on maximum comanality. Hence numerous designs were put forward, which were nothing but re- engined MK-1s. However sense prevailed and because of Navy' s no- compromise attitude almost new design was put forward. Which is longer, wider and has a new landing gear with differently placed undercarriage. This aircraft is longer and wider but lighter and has better compliance to area rule, hence better aerodynamic performance.

Now, the point is, if F-414 can be put into MK-1 with less work?. Answer is yes. Will it increases the performance in air to air combat? Ans is yes. But just by re-engining MK-1, will its overall performance increase? Ans is no, not without certain compromises. And one such compromise is lesser endurence.

So, no, no one in here saying just re- engining is sufficient. At least not me.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

It was cleared via official sources that no redesigning is required to mount new engine ..

 

[Gessler]

It was cleared via official sources that no redesigning is required to mount new engine ..

Downside is that F414 in Mk-1 airframe will be inefficient and will not be able to achieve it's potential due to inadequate air-flow owing to it's smaller inlets. So while it is possible to install the new engine, thanks to the interoperable nature of this series of GE engines, it won't grant a performance increase significantly different from an F404.

Hence it serves no practical purpose to mount F414 on Mk-1 airframe. An F404 is far more efficiently utilized.

Only the Mk-2 airframe can put the F414 to a reasonable use.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

According to official report regarding mounting new engine, The aircraft air-intake has no change except slightly longer air-frame ..

Navy`s terminology for its NLCA is different from Airforce`s ..

Downside is that F414 in Mk-1 airframe will be inefficient and will not be able to achieve it's potential due to inadequate air-flow owing to it's smaller inlets. So while it is possible to install the new engine, thanks to the interoperable nature of this series of GE engines, it won't grant a performance increase significantly different from an F404.

Hence it serves no practical purpose to mount F414 on Mk-1 airframe. An F404 is far more efficiently utilized.

Only the Mk-2 airframe can put the F414 to a reasonable use.

 

[sasum]

One of the major differences between the F404 and the F414 is the fan section. The fan of the F414 is larger than that of the F-404. The larger fan increases airflow by 16% and is 5 inches longer. To keep the engine in the F404's footprint, the afterburner section was shortened by 4 sigfig=2 NaNsigfig= 2 and the combustor shortened by 1 sigfig= 2 NaNsigfig= 2. (Little change in dimension !) Another change from the F404 is the fact that the first three stages of the high pressure compressor are blisks rather than dovetailed blades, saving 50lb in weight. Furthermore, the FADEC guided F-414 uses a fuel actuated system to manipulate the afterburner section rather than a separate hydraulic system.

*sigfig= significant figures ignoring leading zero & trailing zeroes after dec.

 

[Superdefender]

Loved to see "NauSena" in HINDI written on the tail fin of N-Tejas instead of "Navy" - looks different/unique.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

From the horses mouth

To address the IAF's 1995 ASR fully, work is now underway on the Tejas Mk-II which will sport a new and more powerful engine in the form of General Electric's (GE's) 98 kilo newton generating F414-GE-INS6 , 99 units of which have already been ordered. The F414-GE-INS6 replaces the current MK-I engine which is the F404-GE-IN20. Contrary to earlier speculation, Dr Tamilmani says that the Tejas Mk-II does not require an intake re-design since the MK-I intake was in any case intended to be used with the Kaveri engine which has a greater mass flow than the current F404-GE-IN20 . Studies have shown that the existing intake can easily handle the additional mass flow from the F414-GE-INS6.

Author : Saurav Jha on @SJha1618
Source : Saurav Jha's Blog : The Radiance of Tejas: A bright prospect for 'Make in India'

@Gessler

============

Experts also argue the Tejas' constricted air intake will prevent the F-414 from sucking in the air it requires, even with extensive redesign. In that case, the engine would not deliver its rated 98 kN thrust.

Rejecting this view, GE and ADA officials say they will accommodate the F-414 without problem or extensive redesign, and that it will perform to its designed potential.

Their claim is supported by the engine data on the GE website (see graphic), which indicates the F-414 is no larger than the F-404. Nor is it significantly heavier, says ADA.

Source : http://www.business-standard.com/ar...ne-to-arrive-in-september-115070600054_1.html

============

Engines

ADA along with GE have carried out Computer assessment of the F414-GE-INS6 engine with 98 kN of thrust in Tejas MK-2 aircraft and have concluded that no major changes in Air intakes are required. GE too has confirmed that the development of F414-GE-INS6 engines is progressing well and will be on schedule and GE engineers will be in India Into carry out mating of the engine with the aircraft when first aircraft is ready.

Source : Focus Shifts to Tejas MK-2, Project all set to go Critical | idrw.org