Tejas Mk.2: News & Discussions - 25 February 2018
Re: Tejas Mk.2: News & Discussions - 25 February 2018
Ok, so hopefully someone who's going to AI-'19 can get that point clarified.
Re: Tejas Mk.2: News & Discussions - 25 February 2018
Also it seems that the air brakes are gone due to canards.
Some more empty space.
Some more empty space.
Re: Tejas Mk.2: News & Discussions - 25 February 2018
You're right..may not be empty space that could be utilised but surely some weight will come down as the actuators won't be required. But that will be more than compensated by the addition of the canards, their actuators and their weight.
Re: Tejas Mk.2: News & Discussions - 25 February 2018
No. The air brakes are not shown. They cannot be replaced by canards. The canards can only be used as airbrakes on ground. Not in the air.
Re: Tejas Mk.2: News & Discussions - 25 February 2018
https://goo.gl/images/MSBjupKartik wrote:So the Avionics cover is basically composite skin?
Another question that arose, is there going to be a Tejas Mk2 twin seater? Or will the Tejas Mk1 trainers support conversion onto the Mk2 fleet as well along with simulators?
In the image there, you can see the composite avionics cover behind the canopy. There is no reason to go for trasperency which is rather costly. IR is correct in saying this will be way cheaper. NLCA was a jugaad case.
Re Trainer version, I wonder if the 20 trainers on order would be sufficient for type conversion. But of coarse IAF may feel they need separate Mk2 trainer too. I'll try to remember to ask this question.
Re: Tejas Mk.2: News & Discussions - 25 February 2018
If that was the case (cost) then why would it be there on the LCA Navy Mk2 design?
The canopy transparency goes all the way over the avionics bay and affords much better view for the pilot at the back versus the LCA AF Mk2.
The canopy transparency goes all the way over the avionics bay and affords much better view for the pilot at the back versus the LCA AF Mk2.
Re: Tejas Mk.2: News & Discussions - 25 February 2018
Yes, please do ask that. Although I do believe that if the two seater is not going to be used as a combat fighter and only for type conversion, then it could be considered a waste of resources building a new Mk2 trainer. Unless the commonality between the types (Mk1/Mk1A and Mk2) is so low and performance so different, that pilots feel the need for a type conversion trainer. Some officers may even argue that twin seaters help some pilots maintain currency on the type, so the IAF could build a case for a Mk2 twin seater as well. But given the lack of adequate human resources and with AMCA and LCA Navy Mk2 also running concurrently, it will stretch ADA.JayS wrote:
Re Trainer version, I wonder if the 20 trainers on order would be sufficient for type conversion. But of coarse IAF may feel they need separate Mk2 trainer too. I'll try to remember to ask this question.
Similar situation for the Navy as well, where they would probably just go with the LCA Navy Mk1 twin seaters for type conversion and maintaining currency. For them, with much smaller LCA Navy Mk2 numbers overall, there is simply no case for a dedicated LCA Navy Mk2 twin seater.
Re: Tejas Mk.2: News & Discussions - 25 February 2018
@ Kartik: The Rafale C and Rafale M uses the canopy to cover the avionics bay, but under the canopy there is another cover (black in colour). Do you know what that is? It looks like the Naval Tejas Mk2 uses a similar design, but minus the cover. The air force variant of the Tejas Mk2 adopts the Rafale B design. For some weird reason, despite it clearly stating otherwise, I thought the Tejas Mk2 picture you posted above, would share the same design for the Air Force and the Navy.
Rafale C
Rafale M
Rafale B
Rafale C
Rafale M
Rafale B
Re: Tejas Mk.2: News & Discussions - 25 February 2018
Kartik, regarding spillway, its part of fuselage assy. See in the image below, no wings, but spillway is there. It should be right above the inlet and splitter plate. But if you see the CAD images from RFI, there is no spillway in FF and in CF there is no gap shown between fuselage and inlet duct. So unless a piece is missing between FF and CF I see no spillway. But since IR says there is, I'll wait for explanation. I am hoping to see a nice model in AI2019 of this canard version. That should clear all doubts.
Re, trainers, trainers will be fully combat ready and will be used for missions even though usually they will be used for training sorties. But you can imagine trainers have shorter legs than single seater versions typically as additional seat add weight and eats into internal fuel capacity, so their utility will be slightly lower. BTW just to clarify, by type conversion here, I meant only training specific to LCA.
Regarding canopy, another thing I felt is that the canopy for MK2 is shorter axially than what we have for MK1.
Re, trainers, trainers will be fully combat ready and will be used for missions even though usually they will be used for training sorties. But you can imagine trainers have shorter legs than single seater versions typically as additional seat add weight and eats into internal fuel capacity, so their utility will be slightly lower. BTW just to clarify, by type conversion here, I meant only training specific to LCA.
Regarding canopy, another thing I felt is that the canopy for MK2 is shorter axially than what we have for MK1.
Re: Tejas Mk.2: News & Discussions - 25 February 2018
Those are interfaces where wing attaches. No fattening. The yellow surface, well its just a surface between intake upper portion and wing lower surface until the two fuse. Since the CAD is in semi-transperent mode its bit confusing, it shows more lines which would be hidden otherwise.gaurav.p wrote:
1. Indeed saar, the wing has been pushed back.
4. Yes, the nose seems to be elongated to me as well. Shown in green. Also interesting to note is that the shape of canopy has changed. The joint connected with the avionics cover isn't straight as in mk1. maybe more space for LRUs
5. Also in the rear fuselage, the trail edges end till the end of the fuselage. But in mk1 it isn't the case.
7. There is also something called longerons in the center fuselage. I guess, it is added in order to tackle the vortex of canards.
8. Can someone explain this image? Also the yellow thing in the image, below the stub wing?
Re: Tejas Mk.2: News & Discussions - 25 February 2018
Agreed. As IR mentioned that it is there in the Mk2 design, I'll believe him. But the CAD model should have probably shown that. My guess was that the spillway was no longer required as the canards vortices did the job of strengthening the boundary layer over the wing and wing tip but who knows what the designers found during wind tunnel analysis? And yes, a good quality model would clear a lot of our doubts, although given previous Aero India LCA models, one cannot say for sure.JayS wrote:Kartik, regarding spillway, its part of fuselage assy. See in the image below, no wings, but spillway is there. It should be right above the inlet and splitter plate. But if you see the CAD images from RFI, there is no spillway in FF and in CF there is no gap shown between fuselage and inlet duct. So unless a piece is missing between FF and CF I see no spillway. But since IR says there is, I'll wait for explanation. I am hoping to see a nice model in AI2019 of this canard version. That should clear all doubts.
But will they need a specific Tejas Mk2 combat capable trainer or just use the Mk1 trainer to convert pilots with extensive ground simulators?
Re, trainers, trainers will be fully combat ready and will be used for missions even though usually they will be used for training sorties. But you can imagine trainers have shorter legs than single seater versions typically as additional seat add weight and eats into internal fuel capacity, so their utility will be slightly lower. BTW just to clarify, by type conversion here, I meant only training specific to LCA.
Even for the Tejas Mk1A, there is no plan for a specific Mk1A trainer. They plan on using the Mk1 FOC trainer as the type conversion trainer and that makes sense, since the Mk1A is basically the same flight envelope wise, as the Mk1.
So did I. Which is what led me to ask whether the Avionics cover was a continuation of the canopy, like on the LCA Navy Mk2 CAD images, or not. Again, Aero India 2019 should hopefully clear all that doubt.Regarding canopy, another thing I felt is that the canopy for MK2 is shorter axially than what we have for MK1.
Re: Tejas Mk.2: News & Discussions - 25 February 2018
I thought the same too wrt canard and spillway. That may be its dropped due to canards. The canard tip vortex will be still slightly outboard to the spillway. Lets wait and watch.Kartik wrote:Agreed. As IR mentioned that it is there in the Mk2 design, I'll believe him. But the CAD model should have probably shown that. My guess was that the spillway was no longer required as the canards vortices did the job of strengthening the boundary layer over the wing and wing tip but who knows what the designers found during wind tunnel analysis? And yes, a good quality model would clear a lot of our doubts, although given previous Aero India LCA models, one cannot say for sure.JayS wrote:Kartik, regarding spillway, its part of fuselage assy. See in the image below, no wings, but spillway is there. It should be right above the inlet and splitter plate. But if you see the CAD images from RFI, there is no spillway in FF and in CF there is no gap shown between fuselage and inlet duct. So unless a piece is missing between FF and CF I see no spillway. But since IR says there is, I'll wait for explanation. I am hoping to see a nice model in AI2019 of this canard version. That should clear all doubts.
But will they need a specific Tejas Mk2 combat capable trainer or just use the Mk1 trainer to convert pilots with extensive ground simulators?
Re, trainers, trainers will be fully combat ready and will be used for missions even though usually they will be used for training sorties. But you can imagine trainers have shorter legs than single seater versions typically as additional seat add weight and eats into internal fuel capacity, so their utility will be slightly lower. BTW just to clarify, by type conversion here, I meant only training specific to LCA.
Even for the Tejas Mk1A, there is no plan for a specific Mk1A trainer. They plan on using the Mk1 FOC trainer as the type conversion trainer and that makes sense, since the Mk1A is basically the same flight envelope wise, as the Mk1.
So did I. Which is what led me to ask whether the Avionics cover was a continuation of the canopy, like on the LCA Navy Mk2 CAD images, or not. Again, Aero India 2019 should hopefully clear all that doubt.Regarding canopy, another thing I felt is that the canopy for MK2 is shorter axially than what we have for MK1.
IN terms of handling and pikot interface, Mk2 should also be quite the same. The changes could be taken care through simulator, I feel. So a pilot trained on MK1 Trainer with some simulator training should be able to handle MK2 easily I feel.
Re: Tejas Mk.2: News & Discussions - 25 February 2018
Spillway is there in the cad drawings of the mid section. You have to see carefully. The transparency of the model makes it difficult to see. It is not so much for energizing the wake, but simply boundary layer deposition.
Jay, please check mail.
Jay, please check mail.
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 5882
- Joined: 04 Apr 2005 08:17
- Location: Dera Mahab Ali धरा महाबलिस्याः درا مهاب الي
Re: Tejas Mk.2: News & Discussions - 25 February 2018
Width of the fuselage is increased. IIRC MK1 was something like 750mm. MK2 is 1100mm. Can put in nice 'cinemascope istyle' glass cockpit
Re: Tejas Mk.2: News & Discussions - 25 February 2018
Did you mean width at the cockpit area..? The Radome base dia for MK1 is 883 mm for reference. MK1 has rather thin section at the cockpit till the where intakes start. That must be ~750mm. The link below shows FF structural sub-assy from behind. The rear section looks closer to 1100 mm than 750 mm to my eyes. Si it expands a bit after the intakes.Dileep wrote:Width of the fuselage is increased. IIRC MK1 was something like 750mm. MK2 is 1100mm. Can put in nice 'cinemascope istyle' glass cockpit
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/ind ... 363473.cms
The shown section in the RFI seems to be from somewhere behind the cockpit, in the avionics bay to me. Its difficult to say dimensions at the cockpit. You may be right. But I am just thinking, the fattening is too much if we consider 750mm to 1100mm, given addition of canards and canopy shape change, area rule wise.
Just back of the envelope calculations say MK2 should have additional apprx 1.5-2 cubic m internal space. So we should see significant increase in internal fuel.
Re: Tejas Mk.2: News & Discussions - 25 February 2018
Not 900mm? I remember reading somewhere, cant quite find the link now.The Radome base dia for MK1 is 883 mm
Re: Tejas Mk.2: News & Discussions - 25 February 2018
883.5Prasad wrote:Not 900mm? I remember reading somewhere, cant quite find the link now.The Radome base dia for MK1 is 883 mm
Just google for "LCA Radome". First one itself is Radome schematic from that Radome tender.
Re: Tejas Mk.2: News & Discussions - 25 February 2018
IR sir you better have that article ready tomorrow or we will send dossiers to you everyday
Re: Tejas Mk.2: News & Discussions - 25 February 2018
Come on surya ji! What has the good Admiral taught us? Sabr ka fal mitha(i) hota hai.
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 2131
- Joined: 30 Apr 2009 02:02
- Location: Standing at the edge of the cliff
- Contact:
Re: Tejas Mk.2: News & Discussions - 25 February 2018
But the good admiral has still not given his quota of Mitha(I) yet!!Indranil wrote:Come on surya ji! What has the good Admiral taught us? Sabr ka fal mitha(i) hota hai.
Re: Tejas Mk.2: News & Discussions - 25 February 2018
Bad example! Since we never saw even an ounce of the promised mithai. I can only conclude that the Admiral ate all 10000 tonnes of it himself!Indranil wrote:Come on surya ji! What has the good Admiral taught us? Sabr ka fal mitha(i) hota hai.
Re: Tejas Mk.2: News & Discussions - 25 February 2018
remember, we need space for retractable refueller as well.
re: canopy extension: I read it as "avionics cover" in the dig of the first pdf.
re: canopy extension: I read it as "avionics cover" in the dig of the first pdf.
Re: Tejas Mk.2: News & Discussions - 25 February 2018
Waiting waiting waiting for IRsir
Re: Tejas Mk.2: News & Discussions - 25 February 2018
http://www.pib.nic.in/PressReleaseIframePage.aspx?PRID=1564890#.XGgt-6sYsi0.twitter
Looks like mk2 is officially designated MWF now.
Looks like mk2 is officially designated MWF now.
Re: Tejas Mk.2: News & Discussions - 25 February 2018
Yes, it is called MWF now.
Surya ji, the skeletons are ready. Fleshing it now. Great to have JayS as my co-writer.
The write up will carry some details of MK1 that are not yet covered outside, and Mk2.
Sorry for the delay.
Surya ji, the skeletons are ready. Fleshing it now. Great to have JayS as my co-writer.
The write up will carry some details of MK1 that are not yet covered outside, and Mk2.
Sorry for the delay.
Re: Tejas Mk.2: News & Discussions - 25 February 2018
Would be interesting is to know : What is the delta between the IAF'S ASR between MWF & MMRCA?
Re: Tejas Mk.2: News & Discussions - 25 February 2018
clean up on aisle MK2 requested.. Mig29 has no place here.
-
- BRFite
- Posts: 866
- Joined: 17 Oct 2016 14:18
Re: Tejas Mk.2: News & Discussions - 25 February 2018
Please consider to rename this thread as well.Indranil wrote:Yes, it is called MWF now.
Re: Tejas Mk.2: News & Discussions - 25 February 2018
All MiG-29 discussions have been moved to the Indian Air Force: News & Discussion thread. Thank You.Cybaru wrote:clean up on aisle MK2 requested.. Mig29 has no place here.
Re: Tejas Mk.2: News & Discussions - 25 February 2018
Guys take a hundred pics of MWF at Def Expo, so that we have enough material for discussion for next two years.
-
- BRFite -Trainee
- Posts: 89
- Joined: 02 Oct 2017 07:31
Re: Tejas Mk.2: News & Discussions - 25 February 2018
IR sir, no pressure at all. However it will be great if it is possible to share a tentative timeline on the article. I have been visiting this thread every hour hoping to see it for last 3 days. Really looking forward to it.Indranil wrote:Yes, it is called MWF now.
Surya ji, the skeletons are ready. Fleshing it now. Great to have JayS as my co-writer.
The write up will carry some details of MK1 that are not yet covered outside, and Mk2.
Sorry for the delay.
Re: Tejas Mk.2: News & Discussions - 25 February 2018
Vicky sir, a good tailor takes time IR and JayS sir will release the document at a time of their choosing after all these guys have big day jobs
Re: Tejas Mk.2: News & Discussions - 25 February 2018
I have had enough time from Thursday onwards, but the Pulwama attack has dampened my enthu significantly. I spent couple of days following only that.
Re: Tejas Mk.2: News & Discussions - 25 February 2018
It was a most depressing last few days.....
Re: Tejas Mk.2: News & Discussions - 25 February 2018
India’s Medium Weight Fighter, The Rechristened LCA Tejas Mk.2, To Be Unveiled
https://www.livefistdefence.com/2019/02 ... eiled.html
https://www.livefistdefence.com/2019/02 ... eiled.html
Re: Tejas Mk.2: News & Discussions - 25 February 2018
It is HERE!!!! YES!!! I count 11 hardpoints!
https://twitter.com/livefist/status/1098049259868430338 ---> FIRST LOOK! India’s ‘Medium Weight Fighter’, the rechristened LCA Tejas Mk.2 sports canards.
https://twitter.com/livefist/status/1098049259868430338 ---> FIRST LOOK! India’s ‘Medium Weight Fighter’, the rechristened LCA Tejas Mk.2 sports canards.
Re: Tejas Mk.2: News & Discussions - 25 February 2018
VIDEO
https://twitter.com/livefist/status/1098049714828861440 ---> We’re live first & exclusive with India’s new canard concept — the Medium Weight Fighter (the re-christened LCA Mk.2)
https://twitter.com/livefist/status/1098049714828861440 ---> We’re live first & exclusive with India’s new canard concept — the Medium Weight Fighter (the re-christened LCA Mk.2)
Re: Tejas Mk.2: News & Discussions - 25 February 2018
I see no spill away opening. May be obscured by the canard but not visible to me in the video. Folks going there please confirm. Integrated IRST I suppose and also 11 hard points make it a beast.
Re: Tejas Mk.2: News & Discussions - 25 February 2018
Canards
Conformal fuel tank ???
Infra-red search and track
F414
Conformal fuel tank ???
Infra-red search and track
F414
Re: Tejas Mk.2: News & Discussions - 25 February 2018
Beautiful bird!
1. Canards
2. IRST?
3. Fixed IFR probe?
4. Wing tip pylons!
5. Twin racks with Derbys!
6. Gun bay relocated with pylon added on starboard inlet chin
7. 11 pylons total!
8. No gun visible on wing root.
9. Very slight wing fuselage blending on the bottom.
10. Unclear if MLG configuration is within fuselage or retracts into wing root.
1. Canards
2. IRST?
3. Fixed IFR probe?
4. Wing tip pylons!
5. Twin racks with Derbys!
6. Gun bay relocated with pylon added on starboard inlet chin
7. 11 pylons total!
8. No gun visible on wing root.
9. Very slight wing fuselage blending on the bottom.
10. Unclear if MLG configuration is within fuselage or retracts into wing root.