Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
darshhan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2280
Joined: 12 Dec 2008 11:52

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby darshhan » 18 May 2018 12:00

A question to the gurus.What is the typical weight of a complete IRST system on an aircraft.?pls give some examples. Consider both pod as well as aircraft intrgrated ones like the one present in SU30s.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3155
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby Cain Marko » 18 May 2018 12:12

No Guru, but fwiw...For the ols k, a2g and ols uem, a2a on the newer fulcrums, weight was around 100kg, and 75kg respectively. IIRC, it weighs much more if it's on the flanker, closer to 150kg because it's a lot bigger.

Gripen ng system is Around 40kg...
http://www.leonardocompany.com/en/-/skyward-1

jaysimha
BRFite
Posts: 636
Joined: 20 Dec 2017 14:30

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby jaysimha » 18 May 2018 13:13

found a link where IAF is seeking IRST.. posting for records only..
----------------
QUESTIONAIRE ON MAKE PROJECT NO. IAF/06/16-17
LONG RANGE DUAL BAND INFRARED IMAGING
SEARCH AND TRACK SYSTEM (IRST)

http://makeinindiadefence.gov.in/IAF-%20Imaging%20Serch%20and%20Track%20System%20(IRST).pdf

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3388
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby JayS » 18 May 2018 13:15

There are multiple ways of doing things. IAF might as well use other fighter which does IRST work more effectively and pass on the info through datalink to others which are not that effective. With network centric systems and better data fusion, not every fighter will need to have everything. Having a smaller and lighter plan implies compromised right from the outset anyhow for LCA. The designers do whatever is maximum possible in given constraints.

For all we know, LCA MK2 might as well have an FLIR on the nose in future. Or even MK1/MK1A might see that in MLU if with miniaturization some more space gets freed up. I am pretty sure about one thing - it something can be done to increase LCA's efficacy, IAF will get it done eventually.

I don't see point in anymore discussion on the issue.

darshhan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2280
Joined: 12 Dec 2008 11:52

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby darshhan » 18 May 2018 19:55

Cain Marko wrote:No Guru, but fwiw...For the ols k, a2g and ols uem, a2a on the newer fulcrums, weight was around 100kg, and 75kg respectively. IIRC, it weighs much more if it's on the flanker, closer to 150kg because it's a lot bigger.

Gripen ng system is Around 40kg...
http://www.leonardocompany.com/en/-/skyward-1


Thanks a lot cain marko

naird
BRFite
Posts: 155
Joined: 04 Jun 2009 19:41

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby naird » 18 May 2018 20:27

Since the context is IRST OLS - see this video of Su 27 OLS. Gaming , but has got good visuals and information



ashishvikas
BRFite
Posts: 288
Joined: 17 Oct 2016 14:18

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby ashishvikas » 19 May 2018 09:43

^^ Original article by Ajay Shukla

Tejas Mark 1A faces delay as air force adds to demands


http://mybs.in/2VmuYRS

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15356
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby Karan M » 19 May 2018 11:32

ashishvikas wrote:^^ Original article by Ajay Shukla

Tejas Mark 1A faces delay as air force adds to demands


http://mybs.in/2VmuYRS


Lets first see HAL's claims:
Now, however, the IAF has added to that wish list. Among several additional demands are: “smart multi-function displays” for the cockpit, a “combined interrogator and transponder” to differentiate friendly aircraft from foes, a digital map generator and an improved radio altimeter.

While some of these systems can be bought off the shelf, integrating these on to the Tejas would require comprehensive redesign of the fighter’s mission computer. HAL estimates doing so and integrating the additional software could take up to three to four years.

“The existing ‘open architecture mission computer’ cannot support the software upgrades that are now needed for the Tejas Mark 1A”, says HAL chairman, T Suvarna Raju.

With HAL planning to deliver the 40 Tejas Mark 1 fighters currently on order by mid-2020, the Mark 1A must enter final assembly by that date. Before that, two years are needed for building the systems and assemblies that come together on the final assembly line.

This schedule requires the IAF to contract for the Tejas Mark 1A by mid-2018. That order is still awaited.

“The time line is certainly important from the IAF’s operational perspective. But, it is equally important from the standpoint of industrial production”, a HAL manager told Business Standard during a visit to the Tejas production line.

Another question: who will re-design the Tejas’ mission computer? The Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA), a Defence R&D Organisation entity, designed the current version. “We have extensive experience, having designed mission computers for the Jaguar, Mirage and, more recently, the Hawk-i trainer. Furthermore, we are responsible for the Tejas Mark 1A project and time lines and would not like to be dependent on an external entity”, says Raju.

Worldwide, aircraft designers (ADA in this case) cede control to the manufacturer (HAL in this case), which is subsequently responsible for supporting the users (IAF), through spares, overhauls and upgrades during an aircraft’s service life cycle.

With both ADA and HAL keen on re-designing the Tejas’ mission computer, the former argues it is already developing a more powerful mission computer for the Tejas Mark 2. HAL, however, counters that the Mark 2 will be a decade in the making, ADA is targeting 2025 – while the Mark 1A has much tighter time lines.



So HAL claims its in-house design experience is equal to ADAs and they want internal control.

Right.

So why is HAL not the lead designer for CABS AEW&C? Its CABS and DARE leading it.

The CABS AEW&C mission computer hosts a far more powerful radar, a Combined Interrogator Transponder, is also linked to large display and mission system generators..

DARE's mission computer is also on the MiG-27 UPG which has a Display Map Generator, has MFDS combined with a separate display processor (smart MFDS only mean the Display processing moves into the Mission computer), a Combined Interrogator Transponder can be integrated as well, the issue seems to be more about fixing the software to make all this work together.

Basically, IAF is perfectly well within its rights to ASK all of this. And ADA was planning ALL this for LCA MK2, because of which they are confident they can pull this off.

Leave this to HAL and they will import it from IAI and pass off the so called integation as their "indigenous achievement". Its fairly obvious HAL wants to take this project, more complex than anything they have done, for their own empire building and if that doesn't work out.. they will promptly import.

HAL's previous record in avionics has hardly been impressive. They are yet to even certify and deliver a radio, the INCOM was a complete failure. Their work on the MMR was another flop. Their Mission Computers - time will tell. The Primary MC on the Mirage remains the French MDPU. The HAL MC is an add-on. For the DARIN-3, the HAL design seems promising, but again, how much time did HAL take to fix things and deliver?

For other IAF projects - DARE has delivered - LCA MC & DP, MiG-27 MC & DP, DARIN-2 MC, Su-30 MKI MC&DP, and right now, they are also handling the SU-30 MKI Upgrades MC.

So again, what prevents ADA/DARE from doing this?

Image

And here is the LCA Mk2 plan - again, HALs comments about this taking too long while they can do it inhouse for control, don't at all sound convincing.

Image

Here is the CABs AEW & C
Combined Interrogator and Transponder
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-RfhhXVg6hLU/T ... ster-4.jpg
Mission Computer
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-XsneTR3Mxbk/T ... ster-1.jpg

Note - sensor data management, track management, battle management.

Again, CABS did this - and it is flying today.

I would keep HAL far far away from the development of the mission computing and the software. They lack the experience and will gladly subcontract it out to some foreign vendor citing timelines and urgency once they discover the in-house effort is lagging. That already appears to be the plan.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15356
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby Karan M » 19 May 2018 11:40

So to summarize:
Experience apart from HAL

DARE - MiG-27 upg, Jaguar DARIN-2, Su-30 & upgrade, LCA TD
ADA - LCA Mk1 OAC, LCA Mk2 planned
CABS - AEW&C (with input from DARE etc)
HAL - only Jaguar DARIN-3 (so far), back-up MC on Mirage 2000 (to integrate future capabilities).

There is no reason for HAL to pick up this program, in the interests of consistency with Mk2 and development complexity, its best given to a consortium of DARE & ADA.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21768
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby Austin » 19 May 2018 11:53

IT is mission creep better to keep the original specs of Mk1A and get the ball rolling rather then add new things and delay this , they have their plate full with Mk1A specs forzen and now mid way coming with new things will delay Mk1A production ....Wonder if this is IAF is doing this deliberately

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2453
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby tsarkar » 19 May 2018 12:55

The quest for political control of the program isnt helping. Mk1A is run by HAL AR&DC while MK1 and Mk2 are run by ADA.

HAL needs to have a block based approach for new IAF changes. Let half of 83 Mk1A be built to original Mk1A standards and the remaining to new Mk1A standards like mission computer.

Something like below for the lack of a better example.

Image

HAL needs to explain continuity of production to Raksha Mantri instead of getting caught in the trap of repeated incremental upgrades causing delays.

And yes, DARE needs to be the lead agency so that there is a smooth roadmap between Mk1A MC and Mk2 MC.

Dileep
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5178
Joined: 04 Apr 2005 08:17
Location: Dera Mahab Ali धरा महाबलिस्याः درا مهاب الي

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby Dileep » 19 May 2018 18:27

ADA is no longer an "LRU design entity". Not as long as the current boss is in place. The LRU projects I am aware of are moved to CABS. We are waiting for the dust to settle and the "tenders" to appear on the website.

ADA had a lot of freedom to operate. Now, everything need to go through the eprocure process and L1. Not sure if the concept of "L2 being offered half of the job if price can be met" is still around. Maybe not. We haven't seen that with any of the DRDO entities we deal with.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21768
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby Austin » 19 May 2018 19:01

Why India needs to invest more in indigenously built Tejas fighter jet to power up Indian Navy

https://www.financialexpress.com/defenc ... y/1163650/

Will
BRFite
Posts: 609
Joined: 28 Apr 2011 11:27

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby Will » 19 May 2018 20:37

Dileep wrote:
ADA had a lot of freedom to operate. Now, everything need to go through the eprocure process and L1. Not sure if the concept of "L2 being offered half of the job if price can be met" is still around. Maybe not. We haven't seen that with any of the DRDO entities we deal with.


Exact reason why private industry needs to be involved in defence R&D and production. This tendering business and L1 nonsense causes delays and encourages laxity.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50070
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby ramana » 20 May 2018 08:46

So MK1A requirements are being changed when so close to initial order being issued?

All these will cause further delay.
Is this to justify imports as Mk1A will be delayed due to state of the art hardware?

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7800
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby Pratyush » 20 May 2018 10:00

It's time to share how not to sabotage your organisation with defense minister

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby shiv » 20 May 2018 11:30

Made for each other. Ajai Shukla reports and we believes.

darshhan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2280
Joined: 12 Dec 2008 11:52

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby darshhan » 20 May 2018 11:45

shiv wrote:Made for each other. Ajai Shukla reports and we believes.


It is actually interesting that one hand we diss media all the time and then end up believing the reports published by the same media organisations. Couldn't get more ironical than this.


What is even more interesting is then these reports are used to cast aspersions on the character of decision makers.

Forum hai. Kuch bhi type kar do.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21768
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby Austin » 20 May 2018 12:03

shiv wrote:Made for each other. Ajai Shukla reports and we believes.


I dont trust Ajai Shukla unless he quotes direct and not use terms like sources but in this case he has quoted HAL Chairman if I read it right

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3155
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby Cain Marko » 20 May 2018 12:19

It is precisely for such reasons that I was so disappointed when NS could only get IAF to buy hawa mein teer 324 tejas. I'd have preferred it if iaf would have ordered 60 more MK1 foc std instead of all this bird in bush lalach. If this is true, which it seems to be, NS should step in and make iaf sign order for 80 additional mk1, let Ada / Hal sort out mk1a/mk2 whenever.

But my guess is that Hal will get its extra MKI order to keep it happy, Ada will be allowed to continue tinkering with Tejas when it should be focusing on AMCA or at least mk2, and IA will happily get more Rafale or some phoren sundari. Phuck it. :evil:

Picklu
BRFite
Posts: 1653
Joined: 25 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby Picklu » 20 May 2018 12:27

A slight delay in desi Mk1A (order is already confirmed) enables additional screwdriver-giri su30 order to arrest squadron number fall as well as IAI pass-through avionics revenue.

For HAL chairman, what not to love?

Dileep
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5178
Joined: 04 Apr 2005 08:17
Location: Dera Mahab Ali धरा महाबलिस्याः درا مهاب الي

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby Dileep » 23 May 2018 10:58

Just heard that Uttam is all set and ready for first flight.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 22777
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby SSridhar » 23 May 2018 11:14

Dileep wrote:Just heard that Uttam is all set and ready for first flight.

AoA.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3388
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby JayS » 23 May 2018 11:37

Dileep wrote:Just heard that Uttam is all set and ready for first flight.


Time to put lungis on high alert. Ready deploy on short notice.

sahay
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 33
Joined: 11 Apr 2017 19:45

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby sahay » 23 May 2018 12:16

Jane's has independently confirmed Ajai Shukla's article http://www.janes.com/article/80238/indi ... quirements

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 62694
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby Singha » 23 May 2018 13:05

I guess top brass has seen the massive edge to edge 3.5d gorilla glass bezel less mfd on jsf and wants that, with 10 finger smart gestures and thought guided weapon systems

Someone should just give them a iphonex and let mk1a proceed as scheduled. Its already smart enough and can get in a avionics mlu within a decade of production

Real reason may be the jaguar reengine is dead and the airframes are aeging and engines now old and hard to maintain as we are sole large operator worldwide

Hence its all tejas fault and it must turn into a dpsa system overnight

The moving map generator and radio altimeter is the clue

We will hear of demand for 50m tfr mode mandatory on the radar for night and fog flying ... elta will provide that for a hefty fee and lots of time

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7800
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby Pratyush » 23 May 2018 13:17

Dileep wrote:Just heard that Uttam is all set and ready for first flight.



It will phail onlee :(( :((

JTull
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2277
Joined: 18 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby JTull » 23 May 2018 13:33

Seems Shuklaji is cultivating sources at HAL for some long-term aims. We need more data points before we can get an idea about those aims.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3388
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby JayS » 23 May 2018 14:38

This is 2nd time HAL Chairman has raised such issue where production go ahead is held by IAF (Trainers and MK1A). We don't know what transpires behind close doors between HAL, IAF, ADA and MoD, but if HAL chairman publically makes such statements its not to be dismissed lightly. Looks like Manohar Parrikar is being missed.

I don't why is IAF stopping Serial production if these news articles to be believed..? If manufacturing starts today, it will take min 2yrs for the fighter to come to equipping stage. By that time they can work on integration and SW changes. Its OK to do SW updates even after the jet in pushed in service. These are not mission critical features. We have fighters already in service without these features, don't we..?

IAF should not stop production unless they want changes in airframe itself (and they should not demand such changes for MK1A now, which is no brainer. All such changes be pushed to MK2). If existing functionalities on LCA MK1 are good enough (which they must be else MK1 would not be getting FOC), these kind of updates should be pushed to post-production updating cycle - to be applied as and when available (like how everyone else other than India does). They should be delinked from actual airframe production.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3388
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby JayS » 23 May 2018 14:54

sahay wrote:Jane's has independently confirmed Ajai Shukla's article http://www.janes.com/article/80238/indi ... quirements


Well Rahul Bedi is no better and he attributes it to some unnamed sources. This is hardly any independent verification.

But since the original quote is attributed to HAL Chairman in Shuk-law ji's article, it holds some credence, unless we see official source dismissing it.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50070
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby ramana » 23 May 2018 20:57

RB is a Leftist Defense correspondent. Which is an oxymoron.

Reading Christopher interview to the Week, Mk1A orders were to be firm with the AESA radar.

Most likely a section of brass think they can still stall LCA by demanding new features for the unobtanium US fighter jets.
Best is always enemy of good. And worst is the power to say No is with everyone like NOTA
But power to say Yes all have to agree.

JayS, Take for arguments sake that AS and RB reports are accurate, what would all those changes mean for the MK1A mission?

Serial production of India’s indigenously developed Tejas Mk 1A Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) could face further delays as the Indian Air Force (IAF) demands the incorporation of new and upgraded systems.

Sources from within manufacturer Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) told Jane’s on 22 May that the IAF recently informed the state-owned aerospace company that the Mk 1A model needs to feature advanced ‘smart cockpit’ multi-function displays and identification friend-or-foe (IFF) systems.

Moreover, the service demands that digital map generators and upgraded radio altimeters be fitted onto the aircraft before it is approved for serial production.


Industry sources said that although some of these systems can be commercially sourced, integrating them with the software currently installed on the fighter’s mission computer would be “time-consuming” and could defer the fighter’s production schedule by about two years.



We know will result in schedule and cost overruns for Mk1A?

Are those structural changes that prevent the aircraft being manufactured?

Looks like not. They why not have the planes structures assembled and then include the new instruments.

Is the Jaguar dead that they want those digital maps and better radar altimeter?

If so come clean and not impose new requirements on Mk1A.

So of these instruments, how many can be integrated with current mission computer?
May be the first 40 should be made with that plan and meantime rest of the requirements can be met.

I don't understand the word 'demand"? Its not like they have lots of planes and can wait for more than two years.
Are these requirements formally flowed to HAL or through journalists?

Haridas
BRFite
Posts: 286
Joined: 26 Dec 2017 07:53

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby Haridas » 23 May 2018 20:59

JayS wrote:This is 2nd time HAL Chairman has raised such issue where production go ahead is held by IAF (Trainers and MK1A). We don't know what transpires behind close doors between HAL, IAF, ADA and MoD, but if HAL chairman publically makes such statements its not to be dismissed lightly. Looks like Manohar Parrikar is being missed.

I don't why is IAF stopping Serial production if these news articles to be believed..? If manufacturing starts today, it will take min 2yrs for the fighter to come to equipping stage. By that time they can work on integration and SW changes. Its OK to do SW updates even after the jet in pushed in service. These are not mission critical features. We have fighters already in service without these features, don't we..?

IAF should not stop production unless they want changes in airframe itself (and they should not demand such changes for MK1A now, which is no brainer. All such changes be pushed to MK2). If existing functionalities on LCA MK1 are good enough (which they must be else MK1 would not be getting FOC), these kind of updates should be pushed to post-production updating cycle - to be applied as and when available (like how everyone else other than India does). They should be delinked from actual airframe production.

Looks like IAF feels comfortable with current count of fighters and can wait out for additional planes. No hurry, all is well, country is secure, trust us. That is the message I am reading from all this tamashaa.

srin
BRFite
Posts: 1554
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby srin » 23 May 2018 21:06

Well, promise IAF to upgrade the Mk1As to Mk1Bs at an appropriate time (after the new flight computer is qualified). What's wrong with that ?

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50070
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby ramana » 23 May 2018 21:15

srin wrote:Well, promise IAF to upgrade the Mk1As to Mk1Bs at an appropriate time (after the new flight computer is qualified). What's wrong with that ?




But seriously means the Jaguar is dying.

Why cant they buy that engine or fund HAL to complete the turbofan engine?

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 62694
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby Singha » 23 May 2018 21:25

it a well laid IED to delay the Tejas, make it jump through 10 more hoops and meantime use the numbers depletion issue to get more Rafale.

a blr company makes a moving map generator among other avionics pieces http://www.comavia.com/products.asp

*cough cough*
The Rafale’s navigation suite includes two Sagem SIGMA 95 laser gyro inertial navigation system (LINS) platforms with embedded hybrid NSS-100 GPS units. The LINS allows flight plans with up to 600 waypoints to be programmed and stored.

Additional navigation equipment includes the NC-12E TACAN radio navigation system, the TLS-2020 multimode receiver, which includes VOR and ILS/MLS functions, a digital map generator (DMG), a digital terrain reference navigation system, and the digital AHV 2930 radar altimeter, operational to 10,000 feet and optimized for discretion and high performance at very low altitudes.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6736
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby Indranil » 23 May 2018 22:48

The HAL chairman has passed the buck on IAF for the delays. That's not completely true. Is the Mk1A prototype flying? What if IAF had not asked for modifications. How would HAL start delivering from 2020, if the the prototype is not even in build right now?

Anyways, on the flight computer (FC), I saw a tender from ADE for the FC. They are trying to port the Mk2 FC with the Mk1A frontend for the Mk1A.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50070
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby ramana » 24 May 2018 00:20

Singha wrote:it a well laid IED to delay the Tejas, make it jump through 10 more hoops and meantime use the numbers depletion issue to get more Rafale.

a blr company makes a moving map generator among other avionics pieces http://www.comavia.com/products.asp

*cough cough*
The Rafale’s navigation suite includes two Sagem SIGMA 95 laser gyro inertial navigation system (LINS) platforms with embedded hybrid NSS-100 GPS units. The LINS allows flight plans with up to 600 waypoints to be programmed and stored.

Additional navigation equipment includes the NC-12E TACAN radio navigation system, the TLS-2020 multimode receiver, which includes VOR and ILS/MLS functions, a digital map generator (DMG), a digital terrain reference navigation system, and the digital AHV 2930 radar altimeter, operational to 10,000 feet and optimized for discretion and high performance at very low altitudes.


So per those two reports IAF wants Rafale electronics on Tejas Mk1A!!!! Not even on Mk2!!!

its not like they came up with original requirement but a copy paste from the Rafale.

How can you have Rolls Royce requirements on Tata Nano car?

Something is very wrong here.

Early February there was a presentation that claimed No Tejas No way.

I think this is follow-up to that.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15356
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby Karan M » 24 May 2018 00:56

Indranil, that's excellent news. It means the complaints about lack of existing MC may be overblown and a common sensical approach to leveraging a (probably), well-into-development design is being taken.

Singha, the COMAVIA solution was supported by ADA, and was meant for both LCA and additional upgrade programs. They usually have a pretty decent stall at Aero India.

Guys,

Smart MFDs are usually those with GFx capability in the display itself and also enhanced display capabilities. In short, LCA Mk1A wont need an extra display processor. Its a weight, volume saving exercise in a way.

Digital Map Generators have been added by DARE for IAF to MiG-27 Upgrade, DARIN-2, Su-30 MKI (this was with Russkaya Avionika leading the effort). For a strike aircraft, DMGs are de jure.

Upgraded radio altimeter - again, to my brain, this means IAF is exploring low alt strike profiles.

Combined Interrogator and Transponder - again, this is probably the one piece of hardware that is not ready available in a compact form factor for the LCA, and may have to be procured off the shelf from Israel. So be it.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3876
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby Kartik » 24 May 2018 02:01

sahay wrote:Jane's has independently confirmed Ajai Shukla's article http://www.janes.com/article/80238/indi ... quirements


Lol..Jane's reporter is Rahul Bedi. Not the most trustworthy of reporters and the content seemed to be almost the same..which indicates that the source for Rahul Bedi may well be Ajai Shukla himself.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 30 guests