Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 23 February 2019

Kakkaji · Post by **Kakkaji** » 08 Jun 2020 06:51

^^

But why can’t jammer pods be installed now on IOC/ EOC aircraft. It with provide some protection, as compared to none currently, against incoming missiles.

IIRC there was no jammer pod on Abhinandan’s Bison

srai · Post by **srai** » 08 Jun 2020 07:10

^^^
It will in time!

Integration is no trivial task. SPJ, by its nature, interferes with existing avionics, EW and radar. Requires additional power and wirings. Flight tests on all expected Gs and maneuvers. And so on.

Be thankful FOC has been achieved. If the IAF had increased its scope to make SPJ mandatory, FOC would still not have completed.

basant · Post by **basant** » 08 Jun 2020 09:51

HVT Tweet

HV @hvtiaf
Ah! Brutal work-days.
Tejas take-off roll values published on OS are way-off.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 08 Jun 2020 12:29

HVT Tweet

Twitter link

Why is there so much duff-gen on Tejas, everywhere you look on internet?

The aircraft takes-off from a carrier without catapult, and within two markers on a runway. Not underpowered by any yardstick in the world.

2 runway markers = 2000 feet.

So the Tejas can take off within 2000 feet distance on a runway.

Neela · Post by **Neela** » 08 Jun 2020 12:35

HVT mentioned that parachute brakes will be a thing of the past and Carbon brakes are next.
How do the Carbon brakes work ?

srai · Post by **srai** » 08 Jun 2020 13:00

Kartik wrote:HVT Tweet

Twitter link
Why is there so much duff-gen on Tejas, everywhere you look on internet?

The aircraft takes-off from a carrier without catapult, and within two markers on a runway. Not underpowered by any yardstick in the world.
2 runway markers = 2000 feet.

So the Tejas can take off within 2000 feet distance on a runway.

500-600 meters

chola · Post by **chola** » 08 Jun 2020 13:15

csaurabh wrote:
chola wrote:^^^ I imagine even the US and Russia have tooling from many different countries. No one country makes everything. At least currently (might change in post chini virus world.)

It is also a matter of investment for which goal. If goal is the production of aircraft then it makes sense to buy the necessary tooling off the shelf and concentrate human and financial resources on the manufacturing and assembly of aircraft parts.

If the goal is complete self-reliance then maybe you need to invest the tooling as well. That would be going into a rat hole. There will always something that we don't make even tools are made by other tools.

A better way is developing a thriving and growing manufacturing ecosystem where consistent investment in growth and replacement encourages local firms to make machines that compete for those cogs in the build chain. Again, you need consistent investment decades upon decades to build up local industry.
Chola ji I disagree with this goal thing. If you really look at it then the 'goal' is not producing aircrafts but defending the country. Which can be done just as well by buying Rafales or whatever from other countries. In the case of space industry, the goal ( such as obtaining satellite images or communication bandwidth ) can also be achieved by buying the same from other countries.

I think we at BR are mature enough to understand (atleast by now) that these are things of national importance and prestige, and sovereignty cannot simply be bought off the shelf anytime we like with no consequence. Why not extend the same logic to the machinery, components, raw material input, software and so on?

Like you said this is not going to happen quickly notwithstanding slogans of atmanirbharta or whatever. And we don't need complete self reliance. Lets have around 60-70% self reliance instead of the current 20-30%. Great powers like France and Russia are probably at that level. What is required is a consistent push in incentives for the development of technologies and not looking down upon our 1-2 yr efforts in comparison to some 30-40 year old Western company already in the business for decades. ( I am involved in this so I see this kind of thing happening ).

Goals are set to focus resources so things are not scattershot. A 60-70% self reliance is a proper goal. That can only be achieved through a consistent market for local goods. Without it, indigenous institutions and companies cannot survive and grow in enough numbers to give you that 60-70 percent.

I'll point to Cheen as an example again. The chini mil aerospace sector is under embargo so today it is pretty much 100% self-reliant. Their consumer IC is (was) not so they ended up dependent on foreign imports for about 70% of the chips they use in their consumer electronics. But their HPC industry is under embargo so the chips for their HPCs are local. Embargoes are double-edged swords. They can slow down development and reduce standards by locking you from the best products on the market but they also protect the local industry by removing foreign competition.

Our examples of the duel nature of embargos are best exemplified by the excruciating delay of the LCA program and the monumental success of ISRO in indigenizing rockets.

India's aviation industry is not under embargo (currently) so it means there is constant competition everywhere in the build chain from established foreign firms. It has to be a conscious effort to buy local. This by necessity has to be GOI led. There must be mandate for PSU's to but local and subsidies for products made in country. You need to fund this development with orders consistently year after year, decade after decade to grow an ecosystem.

basant · Post by **basant** » 08 Jun 2020 13:39

Kartik wrote:HVT Tweet

Twitter link
Why is there so much duff-gen on Tejas, everywhere you look on internet?

The aircraft takes-off from a carrier without catapult, and within two markers on a runway. Not underpowered by any yardstick in the world.
2 runway markers = 2000 feet.

So the Tejas can take off within 2000 feet distance on a runway.

Isn't take-off distance a function of weight? Wonder what is the generic take-off distance refers to for fighters.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 09 Jun 2020 06:33

LCA Mk1 itself already has Carbon-carbon brakes.

What HVT mentioned is a more optimized, newer gen of carbon-carbon brakes.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 09 Jun 2020 06:34

From the Tejas LCA FB page

LA-5017 over Bangalore

LA-5017 (the first FOC standard Tejas) over Bangalore during a scheduled production test flight.

#TejasLCA #Tejas #TejasOfficialArchive #HAL
#HindustanAeronauticsLimited #ADA

srai · Post by **srai** » 09 Jun 2020 07:35

Neela wrote:HVT mentioned that parachute brakes will be a thing of the past and Carbon brakes are next.
...

That will open up a fairly large space (parachutes storage) for additional gear!

khan · Post by **khan** » 09 Jun 2020 08:53

srai wrote:
Neela wrote:HVT mentioned that parachute brakes will be a thing of the past and Carbon brakes are next.
...
That will open up a fairly large space (parachutes storage) for additional gear!

Or fuel. Thats a drop-tank worth of fuel I would imagine.

yensoy · Post by **yensoy** » 09 Jun 2020 09:40

Kartik wrote:From the Tejas LCA FB page
LA-5017 over Bangalore

LA-5017 (the first FOC standard Tejas) over Bangalore during a scheduled production test flight.
#TejasLCA #Tejas #TejasOfficialArchive #HAL
#HindustanAeronauticsLimited #ADA

Did they take off the refueling probe?

karan_mc · Post by **karan_mc** » 09 Jun 2020 10:10

yensoy wrote:
Kartik wrote:From the Tejas LCA FB page
LA-5017 over Bangalore

Did they take off the refueling probe?

Its Plug and Play can be removed when not needed

basant · Post by **basant** » 09 Jun 2020 10:41

khan wrote:
srai wrote: That will open up a fairly large space (parachutes storage) for additional gear!
Or fuel. Thats a drop-tank worth of fuel I would imagine.

F-16 drouge parachute weighs about 10kg! Hardly any useful fuel that can replace it!

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 09 Jun 2020 11:28

yensoy wrote:
Kartik wrote:From the Tejas LCA FB page
LA-5017 over Bangalore

Did they take off the refueling probe?

Yes it is a bolt on /Bolt off refueling probe. But what is more important that the orange lid of the landing Parachute is also missing- have they fitted better carbon fiber brakes on the FOC aircraft?

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 09 Jun 2020 13:04

Parachutes exist. The cover is no longer painted red.

Tejas already uses C-C brakes with life of 300 landings. Next generation brakes with 700 landings in qualifications. Goal is to reach brakes with life of 1000 landings.

ashishvikas · Post by **ashishvikas** » 09 Jun 2020 13:29

Who makes tyres for LCA Tejas ?

MRF was planning to make it, but not sure if this has clear all tests.

https://twitter.com/rahulsinghx/status/ ... 88704?s=19

ks_sachin · Post by **ks_sachin** » 09 Jun 2020 14:11

Indranil wrote:Parachutes exist. The cover is no longer painted red.

Tejas already uses C-C brakes with life of 300 landings. Next generation brakes with 700 landings in qualifications. Goal is to reach brakes with life of 1000 landings.

Why is it called Carbon-Carbon Indranil?
Is one carbon not enough?

basant · Post by **basant** » 09 Jun 2020 14:35

^^^
Called C-C as it combines structural carbon discs with carbon brake pads. There are also carbon-ceramic brakes available.

csaurabh · Post by **csaurabh** » 09 Jun 2020 20:08

basant wrote:^^^
Called C-C as it combines structural carbon discs with carbon brake pads. There are also carbon-ceramic brakes available.

Not sure if this is has a specific meaning for brakes. But Carbon Carbon is a generic name for a type of composite material which has carbon fibres embedded inside a matrix of graphite ( graphite is also carbon ).
C-C is a super material used for the toughest and hottest parts of aerospace industry (like nose cones ). Very few orgs. in the world have the capability to manufacture it because it is really hard to make. ISRO is one of them.
That is why it is also very expensive. I once held a small piece of C-C about 10cmx2cmx2cm in my hand and was told it cost around Rs. 10000!

basant · Post by **basant** » 09 Jun 2020 20:29

csaurabh wrote:
basant wrote:^^^
Called C-C as it combines structural carbon discs with carbon brake pads. There are also carbon-ceramic brakes available.
Not sure if this is has a specific meaning for brakes. But Carbon Carbon is a generic name for a type of composite material which has carbon fibres embedded inside a matrix of graphite ( graphite is also carbon ).
C-C is a super material used for the toughest and hottest parts of aerospace industry (like nose cones ). Very few orgs. in the world have the capability to manufacture it because it is really hard to make. ISRO is one of them.
That is why it is also very expensive. I once held a small piece of C-C about 10cmx2cmx2cm in my hand and was told it cost around Rs. 10000!

I could be wrong. Thanks for the correction.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 09 Jun 2020 21:29

csaurabh wrote:
basant wrote:^^^
Called C-C as it combines structural carbon discs with carbon brake pads. There are also carbon-ceramic brakes available.
Not sure if this is has a specific meaning for brakes. But Carbon Carbon is a generic name for a type of composite material which has carbon fibres embedded inside a matrix of graphite ( graphite is also carbon ).
C-C is a super material used for the toughest and hottest parts of aerospace industry (like nose cones ). Very few orgs. in the world have the capability to manufacture it because it is really hard to make. ISRO is one of them.
That is why it is also very expensive. I once held a small piece of C-C about 10cmx2cmx2cm in my hand and was told it cost around Rs. 10000!

Correct. But AFAIK it is not built by ISRO, but Graphite India.

Raveen · Post by **Raveen** » 09 Jun 2020 21:43

basant wrote:
csaurabh wrote:
Not sure if this is has a specific meaning for brakes. But Carbon Carbon is a generic name for a type of composite material which has carbon fibres embedded inside a matrix of graphite ( graphite is also carbon ).
C-C is a super material used for the toughest and hottest parts of aerospace industry (like nose cones ). Very few orgs. in the world have the capability to manufacture it because it is really hard to make. ISRO is one of them.
That is why it is also very expensive. I once held a small piece of C-C about 10cmx2cmx2cm in my hand and was told it cost around Rs. 10000!
I could be wrong. Thanks for the correction.

Basant, you are actually correct from the perspective of brakes

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 09 Jun 2020 23:12

Indranil wrote:Parachutes exist. The cover is no longer painted red.

Tejas already uses C-C brakes with life of 300 landings. Next generation brakes with 700 landings in qualifications. Goal is to reach brakes with life of 1000 landings.

Thanks for the update Indranil.

Vamsee · Post by **Vamsee** » 09 Jun 2020 23:59

When will SP-22/18 fly?

nam · Post by **nam** » 14 Jun 2020 19:28

Just compared the Mig21 length to that of LCA. The Mig21 is actually around 3 mtrs longer than LCA!

I wonder why did we make it so shorter than Mig21. Looks like IAF specified a "better Mig21" spec and these were met by a 3 mtr shorter LCA! Then they compained about short legs!

Gripen E is actually .5 mts shorter than Mig21!

We are doing 1.5 mtrs shorter than Mig21, for the same spec as Gripen E.

LCA: 13M Gripen C: 14.3M Gripen E: 15.5M MWF: 14.5M Mig21: 16M

manjgu · Post by **manjgu** » 14 Jun 2020 21:52

what the Gnat length??

anupamd · Post by **anupamd** » 14 Jun 2020 22:29

manjgu wrote:what the Gnat length??

Around 29 ft 8 inch (9 m) as per this Team BHP article

https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/commerci ... e-6-a.html

fanne · Post by **fanne** » 14 Jun 2020 23:14

so LCA-2/MWF will still be shorter than Mig 21, that means all the PENS in JK and Awantipur and throughout west and north border that was made for Mig 21 (our smallest plane) can be used without modification for LCA-2/MWF (and of course LCAMK1A).
The bigger PENS used for Mig 29, Jags, SU30mki etc. can be also used by our Tejas and its siblings.

basant · Post by **basant** » 14 Jun 2020 23:25

fanne wrote:so LCA-2/MWF will still be shorter than Mig 21, that means all the PENS in JK and Awantipur and throughout west and north border that was made for Mig 21 (our smallest plane) can be used without modification for LCA-2/MWF (and of course LCAMK1A).
The bigger PENS used for Mig 29, Jags, SU30mki etc. can be also used by our Tejas and its siblings.

LCA is wider by 1m wrt Mig-21. Hope that would not be an issue.

Cyrano · Post by **Cyrano** » 15 Jun 2020 01:06

I always wondered about the large wing area Tejas presents in a WVR fight to incoming missiles detonating with proximity fuses or to strafing by guns.

ks_sachin · Post by **ks_sachin** » 15 Jun 2020 09:44

amar_p wrote:I always wondered about the large wing area Tejas presents in a WVR fight to incoming missiles detonating with proximity fuses or to strafing by guns.

Wing area large in relation to what?

Bala Vignesh · Post by **Bala Vignesh** » 15 Jun 2020 13:59

amar_p wrote:I always wondered about the large wing area Tejas presents in a WVR fight to incoming missiles detonating with proximity fuses or to strafing by guns.

That is always going to be there, unless you go with a short stubby wing like the ones on F104, but that would not work when you want hot and high performance.

sudeepj · Post by **sudeepj** » 16 Jun 2020 03:16

amar_p wrote:I always wondered about the large wing area Tejas presents in a WVR fight to incoming missiles detonating with proximity fuses or to strafing by guns.

The large wing means its ITR is going to be superlative.

srai · Post by **srai** » 16 Jun 2020 05:20

^^^
ITR of nearly 30 degrees per second

basant · Post by **basant** » 19 Jun 2020 12:11

Gurus, is it possible to arm Mk.1 IOCs with BVR quickly? We can dream of self-reliance if we could have got the 3 other FOCs delivered by now! How long are we going to put up with 'in a few days'?

srai · Post by **srai** » 19 Jun 2020 12:43

IOC to FOC mostly software upgrade from my understanding.

Heard IFR might be an issue but all rest should be doable either at one go or in phases. It is probable some of the upgrades might have already been released on IOC aircraft.

Khalsa · Post by **Khalsa** » 19 Jun 2020 14:26

Afaik
no gun
No IFR

hemant_sai · Post by **hemant_sai** » 23 Jun 2020 22:11

I m curious on why we r nt gng for 414 on Mk1A?
Till Dec 2017 - Tejas mk2 was lca with 414. It is gr8 that we branched out for MWF.
But same almost frozen airframe config of Dec 2017 can be used for Mk1A? Does 414 adds too much of cost?