Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

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.
Avinandan
BRFite
Posts: 195
Joined: 12 Jun 2005 12:29
Location: Pune

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Postby Avinandan » 23 Aug 2019 16:53

JTull wrote:
Avinandan wrote:What does this mean ? Less payload but more TWR ?


Please read the first post of the thread.

JTull ji,
Apologies for the brevity, my question was with respect to the published specs in the 1st post only.
Is the article referring the same GE F414-INS6 or there is some scope of for GE 414 Enhanced Engine.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4373
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Postby JayS » 23 Aug 2019 17:01

Avinandan wrote:
JTull wrote:
Please read the first post of the thread.

JTull ji,
Apologies for the brevity, my question was with respect to the published specs in the 1st post only.
Is the article referring the same GE F414-INS6 or there is some scope of for GE 414 Enhanced Engine.

GE F414-INS6 as of now.
EE or EPE, when it becomes reality will be accepted with both arms extended by ADA and IAF, for obvious reasons. But USN has to fund the program first. I feel, increased stake in F/A-18 fleet by USN indicates that F414 EPE will definitely come sometime in future. But when, is the question. May be brar_w can give more details. But I think it will be too late for MWF, at least for initial production batches.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4332
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Postby srai » 23 Aug 2019 18:06

ashishvikas wrote:ADA will unveil the LCA Tejas Mark II with a heavier stand-off weapon capacity in the 75th year of India’s independence, in 2022, and the long-awaited indigenous fighter, which will be manufactured by state-owned HAL will go into production by 2025-2026.

Indigenous light combat aircraft targeted by 2022
https://m.hindustantimes.com/india-news ... H_amp.html

These guys set up some unrealistic expectations... and then complain about delays later. Which modern combat aircraft has ever gone from “unveiling” to production in 3 years?

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2823
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Postby tsarkar » 23 Aug 2019 18:21

JayS wrote:^^ I wonder if the writer knows what he was writing. Amateurish report.

No.
Off topic but the author is a bestie of Arms Dealer Sanjay Bhandari
https://www.outlookindia.com/magazine/s ... ari/297263
Read the report to understand the full extent of the rot.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4332
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Postby srai » 23 Aug 2019 18:32

tsarkar wrote:
JayS wrote:^^ I wonder if the writer knows what he was writing. Amateurish report.

No.
Off topic but the author is a bestie of Arms Dealer Sanjay Bhandari
https://www.outlookindia.com/magazine/s ... ari/297263
Read the report to understand the full extent of the rot.

From that article:
...
A total of 478 calls to Hindustan Times executive editor Shishir Gupta. The journalist refused to comment. (Journalists speak to all kinds of people in their line of work).
...

JTull
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2661
Joined: 18 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Postby JTull » 23 Aug 2019 18:36

srai wrote:
These guys set up some unrealistic expectations... and then complain about delays later. Which modern combat aircraft has ever gone from “unveiling” to production in 3 years?


MWF is not a new aircraft. Just bigger LCA.

srin
BRFite
Posts: 1815
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Postby srin » 23 Aug 2019 19:53

^^^
It'll have quite different aerodynamic characteristics - canards, etc - and that's not even including new engines, new radar etc. And we haven't even built the prototype, forget testing in different speeds, altitudes, payloads etc. IMO, there is zero chance it'll enter service in next 5-6 years.

I'd be really happy to be proved wrong on this one, though.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4373
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Postby JayS » 23 Aug 2019 21:54

srai wrote:
ashishvikas wrote:ADA will unveil the LCA Tejas Mark II with a heavier stand-off weapon capacity in the 75th year of India’s independence, in 2022, and the long-awaited indigenous fighter, which will be manufactured by state-owned HAL will go into production by 2025-2026.

Indigenous light combat aircraft targeted by 2022
https://m.hindustantimes.com/india-news ... H_amp.html

These guys set up some unrealistic expectations... and then complain about delays later. Which modern combat aircraft has ever gone from “unveiling” to production in 3 years?


Does Gripen qualify as modern combat aircraft..??

After roll out in mid 1987 and first flight in Dec 1988, the first production variant was induced by 1993 itself. You can figure our when the production would have started (I could dig out more accurate date but I am being lazy now). Production continued after prototype production without any gap to Serial production. MWF is going to have the same approach. Its very much doable and is a logical extension of the program.

MWF is much more known quantity than Gripen A was then.

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7391
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Postby Prasad » 23 Aug 2019 22:21

We have to take into account the fact that the IAF wants 200(+?) numbers of the MWF. That means, you can do tranche/blocks development with it. You don't need to prove everything initially while starting production. Progressive capability enhancement can be done while in service. And building them will take a year. Even if HAL is stuck at 16/yr that will be a 10+ year run. Easily doable.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4332
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Postby srai » 24 Aug 2019 03:01

JayS,

Gripen A example timelines you gave took 6-years :wink:

From what I remember, HAL will be trying out “Designed for Production” approach for a more smoother and quicker path to final build version. No more TD -> PV (differing specs) -> LSP (differing specs) -> SP that was undertaken for LCA Mk1. Instead it would be something like LSP -> SP. With LSP itself as close to final assembly specs and tolerance as possible.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4615
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Postby Kartik » 24 Aug 2019 04:01

srin wrote:^^^
It'll have quite different aerodynamic characteristics - canards, etc - and that's not even including new engines, new radar etc. And we haven't even built the prototype, forget testing in different speeds, altitudes, payloads etc. IMO, there is zero chance it'll enter service in next 5-6 years.

I'd be really happy to be proved wrong on this one, though.


Radar is very likely to be the Uttam which is already in flight tests and should be pretty much tested out by the time the MWF radar integration begins. Engine is basically an in-service thoroughly tested out F-414 engine. the FCS will be an upgrade of the Tejas FCS, ECS will likely be an upgrade as well, Brake Management System, Fuel Management System, Mission Computer, Stores Management, etc..that is the beauty of the Tejas program..it has given us all these complex technologies for various systems on board a modern 4th gen fighter and none are being developed from scratch that would require the level of testing and fixing that it took for the Tejas program.

Of course there'll be thousands of test points to be covered, but the likelihood of running into major issues with any of the systems will be smaller than what it was on the Tejas program. Plus, ADA and NFTC are now experienced and could possibly optimize the flight testing to try and get to IOC within 3 years. FOC would take another 2-3 years after that. IAF should agree to take the first batch of MWF fighters in IOC config to expedite getting the MWF into service. Once IOC certified, HAL should launch assembly. Even then, it will take them at least 24 months before the first MWF is rolled out. Entry to service will be possibly another 6 months..which takes us into 2026-27 or thereabouts.

It is ambitious but doable, given that the MWF is an evolution of the basic Tejas. It isn't a clean sheet design. It is doable given adequate funding and if the customer is not going to try to shift goalposts midway through.
Last edited by Kartik on 24 Aug 2019 04:37, edited 1 time in total.

Sumeet
BRFite
Posts: 1464
Joined: 22 May 2002 11:31

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Postby Sumeet » 24 Aug 2019 04:30

If its Uttam AESA we can integrate Meteor BVRAAM instead of I-Derby ER to complement ASTRA.

If its El/M 2052, Meteor will not be integrated.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4373
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Postby JayS » 24 Aug 2019 15:23

srai wrote:JayS,

Gripen A example timelines you gave took 6-years :wink:

From what I remember, HAL will be trying out “Designed for Production” approach for a more smoother and quicker path to final build version. No more TD -> PV (differing specs) -> LSP (differing specs) -> SP that was undertaken for LCA Mk1. Instead it would be something like LSP -> SP. With LSP itself as close to final assembly specs and tolerance as possible.


if the first induction happened in 1993, when would the production have started for SP jets..?

First PT rolled out on 26th April 1987 on 50th Anni. of SAAB - interestingly a half completed PT was unveiled showing only starboard side.
First flight on 9 Dec 1988 - 18 month delay due to various issues
Three more prototypes followed, last of which had first flight in March 1991.
First Production aircraft entered Final assembly in Mid-1990.
First handover happened on 8 June 1993 (contract for 1st batch was signed way back in 82). (Actually this was second production aircraft, the first one was used as replacement for one of the crashed prototypes. So technically first production aircraft was ready in Sept 1992 itself).

As per that shitty report, 2022 is roll out and 3-4 year later it will go into production.
Gripen A rolled out in 1987 and Production for serial aircraft started sometime in 1990-91.

Test flight for Gripen A/B continues well after 1993. In fact it never really seems to have stopped, but smoothly transitioned into that for C/D. Again C/D was produced and handed over, even before some of its features were flight tested (e.g. IFR) of coarse they were cleared for use in service only after due certification only.

Also, what ADA had said, the very first prototype itself will be production standard. total 4 PT will be built and without any break production for SP will continue. They will not (and they should not) wait for certification milestones as was the case for LCA MK1. Of coarse induction in service will only happen after IOC.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4373
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Postby JayS » 24 Aug 2019 17:10

Dileep wrote: I got confirmation that MWF/AMCA/Ghatak are all funded now, and good progress is being made.


Saar, very very important one, this one liner. So asking for clarification here.

- MWF is by default approved thru LCA FSED-3, but ADA/DRDO asked for 800Cr more for MWF, last year. Is that money approved..??

- Funded as in FSED approved for AMCA and Ghatak..??? Both have development funds already approved. FSED was pending. But we have not seen any mention of GOI approving these projects in any GOI documents so far.

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7391
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Postby Prasad » 24 Aug 2019 17:37

GripenE has two prototypes flying with third almost ready midway this year. And they've started serial production. So not far fetched to have concurrent production.

Dileep
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5695
Joined: 04 Apr 2005 08:17
Location: Dera Mahab Ali धरा महाबलिस्याः درا مهاب الي

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Postby Dileep » 24 Aug 2019 21:44

Jays, what I am told is that they were told by the powers that be that the FSED is sanctioned, and don't wait for the paperwork and start cracking. And cracking they are. We never talk actual numbers, so can't say if it is the 800Cr etc.

Also, MWF seems to be "not invented here". It is still MarkTwo in talks.

Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4225
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Postby Manish_Sharma » 24 Aug 2019 21:48

https://twitter.com/hvtiaf/status/11648 ... 10924?s=20

Harsh Vardhan Thakur
@hvtiaf
LCA Mk-2, not MWF, is indeed the project approved by GoI. Prelim QRs issued. t's an LCA++ with larger size, more fuel, more payload, more range, more thrust, better maneuverability, newer features, newer sensors & newer weapons. Dev time expected 5-7 years. Concurrent production.

sankum
BRFite
Posts: 679
Joined: 20 Dec 2004 21:45

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Postby sankum » 25 Aug 2019 17:58

Request For Information (RFI) for Tyres of MWF Aircraft.

https://hal-india.co.in/Tender_Details.aspx?Mkey=63&lKey=&Ckey=MjMzNDQ=&Divkey=MTY=

MTOW is 18200 kg, 700 kg more than known so far.

sankum
BRFite
Posts: 679
Joined: 20 Dec 2004 21:45

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Postby sankum » 25 Aug 2019 18:04

TAKE-OFF CONFIGURATION
SL.No PARAMETERS UNITS NORMAL MAXIMUM HIGH ALTITUDE
1 Take off Mass kg 17500 18200 13500
2 Take off speed km/hr 360 360 400
3 Taxi speed (before takeoff) km/hr 60 90 90
4 Taxi distance(before takeoff) m 3000 4000 4000
5 Take-off roll distance m 1350 1400 1780
6 Altitude m Sea level Sea level 3300


LANDING CONFIGURATION
SL.No PARAMETERS UNITS NORMAL OVERLOAD HIGH ALTITUDE
1 Landing Mass kg 12500 13000 12500
2 Landing roll distance m 1080 1120 1780
3 Landing speed km/hr 310 320 400
4 Taxi speed (after landing) km/hr 60 90 90
5 Taxi distance(after landing) m 3000 4000 4000
6 Altitude m Sea level Sea level 3300

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4373
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Postby JayS » 25 Aug 2019 18:52

sankum wrote:Request For Information (RFI) for Tyres of MWF Aircraft.

https://hal-india.co.in/Tender_Details.aspx?Mkey=63&lKey=&Ckey=MjMzNDQ=&Divkey=MTY=

MTOW is 18200 kg, 700 kg more than known so far.


If we add per tyre max static load then it comes out to be 19000 kg. I think we need not take these numbers too seriously. They are likely rounded off, or have some safety factor.

sankum
BRFite
Posts: 679
Joined: 20 Dec 2004 21:45

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Postby sankum » 25 Aug 2019 19:46

I was also taking it a design margin if empty weight creeps up to 7.7 T from intended 7T as it happened in the case of Tejas mk1 were empty weight went up to 6.5 T from 5.5T and MTOW went up to 13.5T from 12.5T.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4373
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Postby JayS » 27 Aug 2019 00:18

Mk-2 is not rebranded. It's an old name.
Thrust/weight & payload better than M-2000. Payload & Life doubled. ROA increased. Definitely big bump in perfo.
IRST, MAWS, sensor fusion, side stick, LAD, AESA radar, AESA SPJ, Digital RWR, ODL+SDR, twin-launcher.
A huge jump over Mk-1.


https://twitter.com/hvtiaf/status/1164951680644870150

sankum
BRFite
Posts: 679
Joined: 20 Dec 2004 21:45

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Postby sankum » 27 Aug 2019 00:32

Wow

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4615
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Postby Kartik » 27 Aug 2019 04:55

If the MWF design meets the new 2019 SQRs, it will be one fantastic cost-effective fighter for the IAF and a worthy replacement for Mirage-2000, MiG-29 and Jaguars in IAF service. The IAF is getting a chance to build its dream 4th gen single engine fighter here, their very own desi Mirage-2000. Those SQRs will represent their whole wish-list and will be ambitious. I just hope there is some understanding on a block wise induction program to allow for quick induction of the first couple of blocks that can be later upgraded. Attempting to get it all in the first aircraft on the production line will delay the program. Being our own IP, technology insertions and block upgrades will be possible throughout the 40-50 years that it will be in service with the IAF.

A lot is at stake for HAL with this program, in terms of future fighter backlog. I hope they rise to the occasion.

With this program, India would've bridged the gap between our aerospace industry and Sweden's, to within 6-7 years of each other, with Gripen E entry into service this year in IOC form and possible MWF entry into service in 2026 in IOC form.

Good to see the urgency on the side of ADA and HAL to not wait for any paperwork and instead use the FSED approvals for Mk2 to get cracking on this project. So much depends on getting it right this time!

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20177
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Postby Philip » 27 Aug 2019 12:26

If we pursue this with concentrated effort, redlines, deadlines, et al; have alternative engine options too so that one OEM does not take us for a ride like Raytheon ( Jag engine upgrade cancelled due to v.high engine cost), there would be less of the requirement for the MMRCA 2 contest.More MKIs, MIG-29s, Rafales could give us at least 6-8 sqds- the 120+ aircraft required for the contest, plus another 80+ LCA MK-1As giving us 10-12 sqds with 200-240 new aircraft along with the MK-2s entering service as the Jags start retiring.Add to this upgrading the large number of MKIs to SS / BMos std. and perhaps 2 sqds. of SU-57s if the IAF is satisfied with the first avatar of the bird entering RuAF service, could maintain numbers as well as the qualitative advantage over China and Pak combined.This would give us a decent number of aircraft and sqds.

The future indigenous content of the IAF can be resolved only by extracting the most out of the LCA programmes which will lead to the future AMCA.This should be its top priority.Adding another foreign type of the 4th-gen. not in service with the IAF would cost a bomb plus beggar the budget for the LCAs. It will end up stunting our indigenous fighter capability for another decade of two.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4373
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Postby JayS » 27 Aug 2019 17:18

Kartik wrote:If the MWF design meets the new 2019 SQRs, it will be one fantastic cost-effective fighter for the IAF and a worthy replacement for Mirage-2000, MiG-29 and Jaguars in IAF service.


Worthy replacement for those medium combat jets would be AMCA in the true sense, given the era they will operate in. Even though we will be replacing those jets with MWF as their life ends, in essence we would be actually raising the bottom line of IAF from MiG21/MiG23/MiG27 to LCA/MWF. MWF would be gap filler, giving breather for AMCA, until it comes in in numbers.

Shekhar Singh
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 20
Joined: 16 Sep 2018 14:55

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Postby Shekhar Singh » 27 Aug 2019 22:53

Tejas Mk-2 Construction started? Mass production By 2024 even possible?

Last edited by Rakesh on 27 Aug 2019 23:04, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Please put youtube videos as shown above. Edit your post to see the code.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4615
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Postby Kartik » 28 Aug 2019 02:46

That video has some very nice shots of a 3D model of the Mk2/ MWF..the design looks gorgeous!!

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4332
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Postby srai » 28 Aug 2019 04:10

I would add 3-years to the timelines given. The Indian aerospace industry (and the end users) are still not mature enough to deliver in the optimistic/ideal timeframes. Problems will be encountered in a complex program. From other Indian programs, we can see risk aversion as a crash means a setback of a decade or more.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4373
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Postby JayS » 28 Aug 2019 11:50

srai wrote:I would add 3-years to the timelines given. The Indian aerospace industry (and the end users) are still not mature enough to deliver in the optimistic/ideal timeframes. Problems will be encountered in a complex program. From other Indian programs, we can see risk aversion as a crash means a setback of a decade or more.

IMO we are beyond that point now where a crash could derail LCA program seriously.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4373
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Postby JayS » 28 Aug 2019 11:54

Has anyone seen any reference where its said the outboard wing pylon (the one which used to be CCM pylons in MK1A) would be able to carry a BVR missile..? I am thinking its no brainer that those pylon should be able to carry at least one BVR each, if not more. But I could not find any reference to confirm.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4332
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Postby srai » 28 Aug 2019 18:42

^^^
Not heard of it yet.

If this twin CCM/SPJ combo is possible, then a BVR missile weight-wise shouldn’t be a problem.

Image

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7775
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Postby Indranil » 28 Aug 2019 20:32

I dont know about the MWF, but for mk1A I was wondering if they need to stiffen the wing for the two pylon set up. The answer was a no. So, i think a BVR is certainly doable on Mk1/Mk1A.

sankum
BRFite
Posts: 679
Joined: 20 Dec 2004 21:45

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Postby sankum » 28 Aug 2019 22:19

Light BVR like Mica and Derby less than 120 kg may be dolable. But AMRAAM class missiles are dolable only on wing tiip stations. Astra class missile will hang out more in the front for outboard pylon while it can be balanced equidistance on wingtip pylon. I wanted to see Astra on wingtip pylon of MWF on model displayed in Aeroindia. Hope the final prototype will carry it just like in F 16.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7775
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Postby Indranil » 28 Aug 2019 23:01

That is a good point. Carriage is not limited by weight alone.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4373
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Postby JayS » 28 Aug 2019 23:36

The additional protrusion of longer BVR is precisely why I am thinking more about it. The dual pylon setup for MK1A did cross my mind and its not too much to expect the outboard pylon will easily host a BVR in terms of weight, when a CCM can be put at wing tip.

The length difference in CCM and BVR is about 0.5m or so.

Given many fighters do have BVR mounted with significant protrusion ahead of the wing LE, I think, MWF should have no problem.

SajeevJino
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 52
Joined: 03 Sep 2016 22:14

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Postby SajeevJino » 19 Sep 2019 19:27

I think many of you came across by seeing this article in duttar , But, wondering why BRF not commented on it

Indian Air Force should drop its plan to make more Tejas Mark-2s & focus on AMCA fighter jets
https://theprint.in/opinion/indian-air- ... ts/293883/

Indian Air Force should drop its plan to make more Tejas Mark-2s & focus on AMCA fighter jets
The fourth generation MWF will probably be ready by end of next decade. China already has two fifth-generation fighter jets, and it can sell to Pakistan.

To maintain a qualitative edge over its adversaries, put scarce resources to better use and look at over 50 years at the horizon, the Indian Air Force should drop its plan to make 200 fourth generation LCA Tejas Mark-2 fighter jets and focus on the fifth generation Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft – AMCA – stealth fighter jets.

Otherwise, the Indian Air Force risks the AMCA becoming obsolete on arrival, while flying an even more obsolete LCA Mark-2 jet into the 2070s. Even the Indian Navy requires the AMCA because the Light Combat Aircraft – LCA – that is currently being tested is not good enough for carrier operations.

MWF is a bad bet

The Indian Air Force (IAF) has to consider the timeline and the investments being made from an ever-shrinking budget. The LCA is a fourth generation fighter jet and the LCA Mark-2, which is now being converted to the Medium Weight Fighter (MWF) programme, is an entirely new fighter jet that is expected to first fly around 2023. That is if the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO), Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) and others involved in the project manage to deliver on time, something they are not known for.

Even the LCA Mark 1A, which the IAF wants 83 of, is expected to fly only by 2022.

Although the MWF will draw on the experience and technologies developed for the LCA Mark 1 and the LCA Mark 1A, it is going to be a new fighter jet and will undergo rigorous testing, which will last several years before it is ready for induction and mass production – probably at the end of the next decade.

This is simply not good enough for the IAF, which is grappling with both a drop in its squadron strength and its qualitative edge over adversaries.

China has two fifth generation fighter jets. The twin-engine heavy fighter, the J-20, is already in service and in squadron strength in the People’s Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF). China is also developing a medium weight fifth generation fighter, the FC-31, which is likely to be exported to potential customers. Pakistan could be its first.

The LCA programme development has already cost India over Rs 10,000 crore. The cost of the LCA Mark 1A has shot up. The 83 Mark 1As are going to cost Rs 45,000 crore, which is about Rs 542 crore each, or $77 million. Compare this to the production cost of the American F-35 fifth generation fighter jet. By leveraging economies of scale, advanced and efficient production methods, the cost of the F-35 has been brought down to less than $80 million each. The LCA Mark-2 is likely to cost much more, probably close to $90-$100 million – very expensive for a homegrown fourth generation fighter jet. The comparable SAAB Gripen E, costs about $85 million.

Investing further into the programme for a jet that will only be ready by the end of the next decade is not wise. The IAF should instead cancel the MWF programme and focus on the AMCA.

Focus on AMCA

The AMCA has already been shelved once because the entire focus was on the development of the LCA. However, work on its design has been going on. The IAF should define the qualitative requirements and throw its weight behind the AMCA instead of funding the fourth generation MWF.

Barring the Su-30 MKI and the Rafales that are going to be inducted soon, the entire current inventory of MiG-29, Jaguar and Mirage in the IAF will be phased out by 2035-2040. That is about 250 fighter jets. Even first of the Su-30s will be over 40 years old and start getting phased out. Inducting a fourth generation MWF to replace them will not give the IAF a qualitative advantage and makes no sense as the timeline suggests its service life running through to the 2070s.

After India backed out from the joint development of the Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft (FGFA) with Russia, because the IAF was not satisfied with both quality and the work share that was proposed, and uncertainty over whether the US will offer the F-35 to India after we bought the Russian S-400 air defence system, the IAF needs a fifth generation option quickly.

The development of the MWF will take away all the money and attention from the critical fifth generation fighter that the IAF needs, and push its introduction beyond the 2030s and induction sometime into the 2040s. By this time, many countries, which are already working on sixth generation fighters, will start its introduction, making the Indian AMCA a generation behind its contemporaries.

The Indian Navy, which has rejected the LCA for carrier operations, will likely prefer the twin-engine AMCA. The twin-engine jet will give it the requisite power to take off from its ski jump carriers and also carry the sufficiently useful payload, while also giving it stealth capabilities, rather than a naval MWF, which will still be underpowered for carrier operations and not carry sufficient payload.

What the IAF can do in the meantime is increase the order for the Rafale, for which India has sunk in costs for India-specific enhancements. Probably order another 36-54 jets to cover the falling squadron numbers along with the 40 LCA Mark 1 and the planned 83 LCA Mark 1A. India should also cancel the fourth generation MRCA 2.0 programme, which is likely to cost over $15 billion for 110 jets.

If the IAF does not throw its weight behind the AMCA now, it will likely end up with a situation where the development of the AMCA is lagging and it is forced to buy the Russian fifth generation PAK-FA, which it has already declared as not suitable for its requirements. That will set the AMCA programme back and repeat the cycle of imported fighter jets over indigenous ones well into the middle of the century.

VikramA
BRFite
Posts: 168
Joined: 29 Aug 2018 15:41

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Postby VikramA » 19 Sep 2019 19:50

^^ the central premise of the article about timelines is accurate. But don't know how AMCA will be ready by 2030 with stealth radar absorbing coating etc. 5th gen is not just the stealthy looking airframe which might get ready by 2027-28 as a TD but involves a host of other tech. Drdo might need at least a decade to do core R&D to come up with solutions unless we find someones like the Russian/french/japs to hold our hand

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18669
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Postby Karan M » 19 Sep 2019 20:01

As far as crazy articles go, the above is a prime example and given the authors recent predilection in pushing F-16s for MMRCA, one may well ask what were his motives? Is it to now push a F-35 purchase instead of the MWF, a fighter which is neither on offer for the IAF, especially post S-400 and if it did come, would have so many strings attached so as to hobble our warfighting capability?

So moment IAF decides to double down on an indigenous program, which directly cuts into the MMRCA kitty, these articles emerge.

Never mind, if the MWF is obsolete on arrival, how is the Rafale not obsolete? Or the EF, or the F-16, F-18 etc? If there is no MWF, what happens to the IAF in the gap between Mk1A and AMCA, it will just have to double down on imported MMRCAs.

Fact: The IAF feels the Rafale and the MMRCA are enough to take on the J-20 and FC-31 threat. If so, how will the MWF fare worse?

Fact is the MWF will have a state of the art sensor suite, some amount of signature reduction, good amount of payload/range and defensive aids - ECM, MAWS, towed decoy etc. It will be well suited to carry a host of long range PGMs to range. Its operational capability will match whatever current 4.5 Gen aircraft bring & even exceed them.

From the technology & manufacturing point of view, it will be the right bridge to the AMCA. With a 300 fighter LCA/MWF production run, it will ensure AMCA hits the ground running with HAL & a bunch of private partners capable of managing the entire production & sustainment.

In short, the above article is just a pile of crock.

That it had to emerge when it did, just reinforces the fact that it was meant to peddle an agenda and a rather obvious one at that. The IAFs support for the LCA has rattled some folks who had looked at the IAFs airframe scarcity, and thought it meant a huge lucrative order was in the books. Cancelling the MWF would be idiocy of the highest kind. The IAF has to be supported in pursuing a proper development path from LCA to MWF and then the AMCA, as versus sabotaging the MWF program and again risking a Marut experience and LCA style development challenge when making the AMCA, as many LCA skills and capabilities would have atrophied.

Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4225
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

Postby Manish_Sharma » 19 Sep 2019 20:48

SajeevJino wrote:I think many of you came across by seeing this article in duttar , But, wondering why BRF not commented on it

Indian Air Force should drop its plan to make more Tejas Mark-2s & focus on AMCA fighter jets
https://theprint.in/opinion/indian-air- ... ts/293883/

Yusuf Unzhawala advocating to CANCEL TEJAS Mk.2 COMPLETELY!

So much poison against Tejas.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 47 guests