Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A: News & Discussions: 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.
nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2580
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

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

Postby nam » 11 Oct 2019 23:45

ArjunPandit wrote:or does the raw material also come from mother russia?


We would not been having DS blades in Kaveris, if HAL was producing SC, using AL31 tech. There has hardly any gains, despite HAL's claim on producing from raw material.

Given the low MTBF of Russian engines, we cannot even reduce the risk by ordering a larger lot.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18489
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 11 Oct 2019 23:48

Kartik wrote:
Karan M wrote:I dont think this has been analyzed yet. For all the reportage the EL/L-8222 WB won the Mk1A deal, reports suggest it was Elisra instead. A podded version of their UEWS is likely.
https://s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/esuk ... al-new-pdf
https://www.elbitsystems-uk.com/what-we ... irborne-ew
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/ne ... s?from=mdr


Interesting. But the links that you had here were all for LRUs that would need to be on the airframe itself. Didn't see a podded version of the Elisra EW suite..and this seems to include a RWR as well as jammer and CMDS..but didn't we have indigenous solutions for RWR and CMDS? or am I understanding it wrong, which could be, since I am no expert in this matter.


No big deal in taking these LRUs and putting them on a pod. The main thing would be to develop the interfaces to the RWR, mission computer so that the jammer does not affect the radar/RWR timing and get electrical power from the aircraft. Its doable and actually easier in some ways from distributing the LRUs across the aircraft.

Now, regarding RWR, the IAF has specified a Digital RWR for the Mk1A, this could be the Dhruti, or to keep things simpler, the above Elisra system. The CMDS is now made by BDL, with chaff & flares coming from BDL and pvt industry.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7821
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

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

Postby Rakesh » 11 Oct 2019 23:55

nachiket wrote:When has the IAF actually expressed this concern about the Tejas specifically? That their main problem is the American engine? If that was the case, wouldn't or shouldn't they have categorically said so when the engine for the Mk2 was being selected? Such a concern from the IAF would have surely tilted that competition in favor of the EJ200.

I am sorry Admiral, but I think you are imagining things here. All the concerns that IAF has expressed about the Tejas were in terms of performance and maintainability, many of which are being addressed in the Mk1A and Mk2 and some might have been unfounded altogether looking at what we have seen of the Mk1 till now.

Perhaps, I am imagining things. The IAF has probably expressed that concern in private. If they thought the F-16 and F-18 were sanction prone, it is probable that they believe the F404 to be equally sanction prone.

Has the order for the 98 GE F414 engines been completed? How many of them have been delivered to date? AFAIK, there have been only two delivered. And that could be because no Mk2 prototype exists yet, so two is more than sufficient.

Perhaps it was an easier transition - for the designers - from the F404 to the F414 from the Mk1 to the Mk2.

srin
BRFite
Posts: 1802
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

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

Postby srin » 11 Oct 2019 23:59

ArjunPandit wrote:
or does the raw material also come from mother russia?


I suspect that was probably a rhetorical question, but I remembered an article from long back and the answer is: apparently, it does.
http://ajaishukla.blogspot.com/2014/10/first-sukhoi-30-overhauled-at-nashik.html
Of the 43,000 components that go into a Su-30MKI, 31,500 components --- or 73 per cent --- are now being built in India.

Further indigenisation is blocked since the Indo-Russian contract mandates that all raw materials that goes into the Su-30MKI --- including 5,800 titanium blocks and forgings, aluminium and steel plates, etc --- must be sourced from Russia. The contract also stipulates that another 7,146 items like nuts, bolts, screws and rivets must be sourced from Russia.

HAL has also partially indigenised the Su-30MKI’s giant AL-31FP engines, which are built in Koraput, Odisha. 53 per cent of the engine by cost has been indigenised, with the remaining 47 per cent consisting of high-tech composites and special alloys --- proprietary secrets that Russia will not part with. Even so, HAL builds 87.7 per cent of the engine’s components in India.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7866
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby brar_w » 12 Oct 2019 00:02

It is best to look at the success of the GE F404/414 family when it comes to it being chosen for the sheer number of different applications across stealth aircraft, fighter aircraft, unmanned aircraft and even technology demonstrators. One obvious reason is that it fits in the goldilocks performance specification and class but one major reason is that the team has had great success in delivering on integrating the system across a diverse fleet and demonstrator vehicles. The swedes could have just gone in for the EJ-200 (just like they did with the radar) and removed a big source of their ITAR headache, but they chose not to do so..I don't think the 404/414 family has yet lost an open competition when pitted against any of its European peers. Having a track record of working with different aero and airframe teams and delivering results likely played a significant role.

ArjunPandit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2922
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

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

Postby ArjunPandit » 12 Oct 2019 02:05

srin wrote:
ArjunPandit wrote:
or does the raw material also come from mother russia?


I suspect that was probably a rhetorical question, but I remembered an article from long back and the answer is: apparently, it does.
http://ajaishukla.blogspot.com/2014/10/first-sukhoi-30-overhauled-at-nashik.html
Of the 43,000 components that go into a Su-30MKI, 31,500 components --- or 73 per cent --- are now being built in India.

Further indigenisation is blocked since the Indo-Russian contract mandates that all raw materials that goes into the Su-30MKI --- including 5,800 titanium blocks and forgings, aluminium and steel plates, etc --- must be sourced from Russia. The contract also stipulates that another 7,146 items like nuts, bolts, screws and rivets must be sourced from Russia.

HAL has also partially indigenised the Su-30MKI’s giant AL-31FP engines, which are built in Koraput, Odisha. 53 per cent of the engine by cost has been indigenised, with the remaining 47 per cent consisting of high-tech composites and special alloys --- proprietary secrets that Russia will not part with. Even so, HAL builds 87.7 per cent of the engine’s components in India.

no it wasn't rhetoric, i quoted the link. I was curious why HAL claims to make engine from raw material. i do understand production v/s designing are different games altogether, but what caught my eye was that even Russian ware would be less sanction proof.
1. I dont even know if russia has even sanctioned anyone.
2. Even if they do, the system would have enough leakage and corruption to get finished maal.
3. Thanks for the providing more details. But again, i doubt if russians would have any issue with us building large buffers, more money is always welcome in russia anytime, unlike khan where even money doesnt guarantee.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3789
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

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

Postby Cain Marko » 12 Oct 2019 02:37

Rakesh wrote:
nachiket wrote:When has the IAF actually expressed this concern about the Tejas specifically? That their main problem is the American engine? If that was the case, wouldn't or shouldn't they have categorically said so when the engine for the Mk2 was being selected? Such a concern from the IAF would have surely tilted that competition in favor of the EJ200.

I am sorry Admiral, but I think you are imagining things here. All the concerns that IAF has expressed about the Tejas were in terms of performance and maintainability, many of which are being addressed in the Mk1A and Mk2 and some might have been unfounded altogether looking at what we have seen of the Mk1 till now.

Perhaps, I am imagining things. The IAF has probably expressed that concern in private. If they thought the F-16 and F-18 were sanction prone, it is probable that they believe the F404 to be equally sanction prone.

Has the order for the 98 GE F414 engines been completed? How many of them have been delivered to date? AFAIK, there have been only two delivered. And that could be because no Mk2 prototype exists yet, so two is more than sufficient.

Perhaps it was an easier transition - for the designers - from the F404 to the F414 from the Mk1 to the Mk2.


The Admiral's concern is the only justifiable reason I think why the IAF did not order more. Btw, when it came to Mk2 engine competition, didn't the ADA have the most say in the matter?

Mort Walker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7876
Joined: 31 May 2004 11:31
Location: The rings around Uranus.

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

Postby Mort Walker » 12 Oct 2019 03:49

brar_w wrote:It is best to look at the success of the GE F404/414 family when it comes to it being chosen for the sheer number of different applications across stealth aircraft, fighter aircraft, unmanned aircraft and even technology demonstrators. One obvious reason is that it fits in the goldilocks performance specification and class but one major reason is that the team has had great success in delivering on integrating the system across a diverse fleet and demonstrator vehicles. The swedes could have just gone in for the EJ-200 (just like they did with the radar) and removed a big source of their ITAR headache, but they chose not to do so..I don't think the 404/414 family has yet lost an open competition when pitted against any of its European peers. Having a track record of working with different aero and airframe teams and delivering results likely played a significant role.


This is correct. Over 1000 F414 have been delivered by GE and is a stellar performer.

Admiralji mentioned Safran engine development. Safran is in partnership with GE. More than likely If Safran is in financial trouble or GE spins off its engine division, then one of the two will become the managing company, however it’s partnership will only strengthen. The Safran partnership for India is all well and good, but I see no reason not to place an order for 300 F414 and 200 F404 as the Tejas II and IA production is being ramped up through 2025.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7821
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

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

Postby Rakesh » 12 Oct 2019 04:29

Cain Marko wrote:The Admiral's concern is the only justifiable reason I think why the IAF did not order more. Btw, when it came to Mk2 engine competition, didn't the ADA have the most say in the matter?

Brar's post on the matter is apt. From a designer standpoint, I think it was a no-brainer decision to go in for the F414 engine.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7821
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

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

Postby Rakesh » 12 Oct 2019 04:44

Mort Walker wrote:Admiralji mentioned Safran engine development. Safran is in partnership with GE. More than likely If Safran is in financial trouble or GE spins off its engine division, then one of the two will become the managing company, however it’s partnership will only strengthen. The Safran partnership for India is all well and good, but I see no reason not to place an order for 300 F414 and 200 F404 as the Tejas II and IA production is being ramped up through 2025.

No ji please :)

AFAIK, Safran is in partnership with GE on the civil aviation market ---> https://www.safran-group.com/aviation/a ... ft-engines

But with military engines, both engine houses do their own thing. Please correct me if I am wrong.

That the F404/F414 family of engines are stellar is no doubt. That in Gagan Shakti, over 90% availability of the Tejas is a huge testament to the engine itself. If the Tejas did not have an engine of that calibre, then that percentage would not exist.

But long term, perhaps the IAF is looking at 300 F414 engines and 200 F404 engines (which would translate to 200 Tejas Mk2, 50 AMCA and 200 Tejas Mk1/Mk1A) and perhaps they are not happy with leaving 50% of her combat fleet in the hands of the Americans. Perhaps the MRCA is meant to offset that very risk. If they go in for an American bird in the MRCA, the Govt of India is not only making the MRCA sanction prone, but the Tejas as well. But Nachiket could very well be right though - perhaps I am imagining this onlee.

However if India and France indeed pull off an Indo-French engine and the Tejas Mk2 and AMCA fly with that engine - instead of the F414 engine - then the equation changes in India's favour. They are doing this right now, with the Shakti engine for the HAL Dhruv, the Light Combat Helicopter and the Light Utility Helicopter.

The sad reality is that no money has been invested in a local engine. And now we are holding the short end of the stick and making (as always) ad hoc purchases. These two posts from Indranil and Cybaru are so apt. Unfortunately nothing is moving on this front.

Indranil ---> viewtopic.php?f=3&t=3351&start=4880#p2386762

Cybaru ---> viewtopic.php?f=3&t=3351&start=4880#p2386767
*Point 6 in CY's post is what needs to be done with utmost urgency.

agupta
BRFite
Posts: 221
Joined: 13 Oct 1999 11:31

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

Postby agupta » 12 Oct 2019 07:56

Rakesh wrote:
Mort Walker wrote:Admiralji mentioned Safran engine development. Safran is in partnership with GE. More than likely If Safran is in financial trouble or GE spins off its engine division, then one of the two will become the managing company, however it’s partnership will only strengthen. The Safran partnership for India is all well and good, but I see no reason not to place an order for 300 F414 and 200 F404 as the Tejas II and IA production is being ramped up through 2025.

No ji please :)

AFAIK, Safran is in partnership with GE on the civil aviation market ---> https://www.safran-group.com/aviation/a ... ft-engines

But with military engines, both engine houses do their own thing. Please correct me if I am wrong.

That the F404/F414 family of engines are stellar is no doubt. That in Gagan Shakti, over 90% availability of the Tejas is a huge testament to the engine itself. If the Tejas did not have an engine of that calibre, then that percentage would not exist.

But long term, perhaps the IAF is looking at 300 F414 engines and 200 F404 engines (which would translate to 200 Tejas Mk2, 50 AMCA and 200 Tejas Mk1/Mk1A) and perhaps they are not happy with leaving 50% of her combat fleet in the hands of the Americans. Perhaps the MRCA is meant to offset that very risk. If they go in for an American bird in the MRCA, the Govt of India is not only making the MRCA sanction prone, but the Tejas as well. But Nachiket could very well be right though - perhaps I am imagining this onlee.

However if India and France indeed pull off an Indo-French engine and the Tejas Mk2 and AMCA fly with that engine - instead of the F414 engine - then the equation changes in India's favour. They are doing this right now, with the Shakti engine for the HAL Dhruv, the Light Combat Helicopter and the Light Utility Helicopter.

The sad reality is that no money has been invested in a local engine. And now we are holding the short end of the stick and making (as always) ad hoc purchases. These two posts from Indranil and Cybaru are so apt. Unfortunately nothing is moving on this front.

Indranil ---> viewtopic.php?f=3&t=3351&start=4880#p2386762

Cybaru ---> viewtopic.php?f=3&t=3351&start=4880#p2386767
*Point 6 in CY's post is what needs to be done with utmost urgency.


Great post, Rakesh.

Absolutely right... GE/SAFRAN have the SNECMA partnership and its limited to Commercial. The Military engines is coalescing into a few poles, and both the European houses (RR, Safran) have some significant product and market strategizing to do to sustain themselves. The others have found niches at the "Tier 2" level (MTU, Avio)

France/SAFRAN offers us ToT/collaboration more willingly than the others because they have a stronger motivation to get some sort of secondary revenue streams in place... or risk seeing their base dissipate or get picked over by the Chinese. Sometimes this will manifest itself as an "indigenous" (fig leaf) Shakti and sometimes it will go into a real deep ToT.

Its true that the $$ invested in Gas Turbine R&D in India have been small by international standards - certainly vs. China; but its also real that there is a real lack of trustworthiness/believability in this area's leadership over the last 20 years (the level of obfuscation and smoke & mirrors has been egregious ...not quite OFB levels of brazen-ness ) and its also clear that as a result of both these things, when we compare to say other core discipline areas (e.g., composites, rotorcraft systems, space propulsion and systems, missile systems, avionics ) the net competence levels are not at the same relative level. One has to remember that most non-trivial ToT is almost as dependent on the recipient's competence + willingness + ability to digest as the givers.

Haridas
BRFite
Posts: 538
Joined: 26 Dec 2017 07:53

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

Postby Haridas » 13 Oct 2019 10:09

Mort Walker wrote:
Haridas wrote:IAF told that India can't have the airforce that even rich countries now find difficult to flaunt.

Here is what our means are, and now live within the limit and make best use of what we can afford.

Flying above cloud nine, IAF crashed into ceiling of reality ... ouch !


I think we need to dispel the notion that the IAF will have to settle for less with the LCA Tejas. The Tejas has 90% availability and any downtime will be short as the logistics support chain is within India. Further, the Tejas performance is comparable to any 4th generation fighter on the market today. Imagine if there were 3 squadrons of LCA flying combat patrol on the northwest border on Feb. 27th. The PAF would not have even dare tried to enter Indian airspace.

GoI has taken out IAF argument of taking the cheapest option of western MMRCA option aka Gripen, to the mat. IAF had to agree that LCA mk1A/mk2 matches Gripen, with LCA curry in many benifits including cost and local economy.
IAF cloud nine wish was expensive Rafale. Where India lacks in LCA is AI driven information fusion (v different from data fusion). India has squandered it's own AI, statestical physics talent. It could recapture by framing institution to build center of excellence.

BTW Rafale & EF info fusion math framework is based on a desi working for videshi.

Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2427
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

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

Postby Cybaru » 13 Oct 2019 12:57

Haridas wrote:
Mort Walker wrote:
I think we need to dispel the notion that the IAF will have to settle for less with the LCA Tejas. The Tejas has 90% availability and any downtime will be short as the logistics support chain is within India. Further, the Tejas performance is comparable to any 4th generation fighter on the market today. Imagine if there were 3 squadrons of LCA flying combat patrol on the northwest border on Feb. 27th. The PAF would not have even dare tried to enter Indian airspace.

GoI has taken out IAF argument of taking the cheapest option of western MMRCA option aka Gripen, to the mat. IAF had to agree that LCA mk1A/mk2 matches Gripen, with LCA curry in many benifits including cost and local economy.
IAF cloud nine wish was expensive Rafale. Where India lacks in LCA is AI driven information fusion (v different from data fusion). India has squandered it's own AI, statestical physics talent. It could recapture by framing institution to build center of excellence.

BTW Rafale & EF info fusion math framework is based on a desi working for videshi.



AI based sensor / data fusion??????? WTF???? Where is all this coming from??

Dileep
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5660
Joined: 04 Apr 2005 08:17
Location: Dera Mahab Ali धरा महाबलिस्याः درا مهاب الي

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

Postby Dileep » 14 Oct 2019 06:33

LCA is still in the age of Brain MK1 for information fusion. The focus is to give maximum data to the pilot and let him do the fusion. There is of course "data fusion". For example, the HUD layers all kinds of data for the pilot to see.

We need to wait till the pilot folk see what the next gen fighters do in information fusion, and the cycle will start to "indigenize". Expect some R&D (rona dhona) about LCA not having "infarmashun fyushun onlee" soon.

Answering a few older points:

Phase change material can not be used for Radar. It is not cyclic.

"Death Rays" is old term. "Directed Energy Weapon" is the correct terminology. Anyone remember KALI. Well, it was chemical laser, and it is dead. We already have new technology that is much better. We sure can generate the rays, but how to tame it is the problem.

Haridas
BRFite
Posts: 538
Joined: 26 Dec 2017 07:53

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

Postby Haridas » 14 Oct 2019 10:47

^^ human brain can't process the data torrent, hence first the need to present information. Next is information that has limited accuracy/confidence level due to sensors operating at limits of statistics. Then comes belief propagation to provide much accurate situational awareness & threat perception.gain key few seconds to take right decision to overcome enemy.'

Chinese University & labs learnt much from imported masters in the last 4 years. In few years they will beat unkill. India unfortunately is a wannabe neophyte.
JMT.

nits
BRFite
Posts: 987
Joined: 01 May 2006 22:56
Location: Some where near Equator...

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

Postby nits » 14 Oct 2019 11:58

Copying this Pic from Rafale Thread:


Image

Now imagine a Tejas near Rafale and compare all three planes and reduction in there comparative signature; so Q to Gurus - if a Sukhoi and Tejas fly in tight and close co-ordination - can Tejas signature get hidden / negligible by Sukhoi. This can be done in a imaginary scenario where sukhoi act as interceptor and Tejas to drop the payload...

Possible ?

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3817
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

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

Postby chola » 14 Oct 2019 12:19

Rakesh wrote:
Mort Walker wrote:Admiralji mentioned Safran engine development. Safran is in partnership with GE. More than likely If Safran is in financial trouble or GE spins off its engine division, then one of the two will become the managing company, however it’s partnership will only strengthen. The Safran partnership for India is all well and good, but I see no reason not to place an order for 300 F414 and 200 F404 as the Tejas II and IA production is being ramped up through 2025.

No ji please :)

AFAIK, Safran is in partnership with GE on the civil aviation market ---> https://www.safran-group.com/aviation/a ... ft-engines

But with military engines, both engine houses do their own thing. Please correct me if I am wrong.

That the F404/F414 family of engines are stellar is no doubt. That in Gagan Shakti, over 90% availability of the Tejas is a huge testament to the engine itself. If the Tejas did not have an engine of that calibre, then that percentage would not exist.

But long term, perhaps the IAF is looking at 300 F414 engines and 200 F404 engines (which would translate to 200 Tejas Mk2, 50 AMCA and 200 Tejas Mk1/Mk1A) and perhaps they are not happy with leaving 50% of her combat fleet in the hands of the Americans. Perhaps the MRCA is meant to offset that very risk. If they go in for an American bird in the MRCA, the Govt of India is not only making the MRCA sanction prone, but the Tejas as well. But Nachiket could very well be right though - perhaps I am imagining this onlee.

However if India and France indeed pull off an Indo-French engine and the Tejas Mk2 and AMCA fly with that engine - instead of the F414 engine - then the equation changes in India's favour. They are doing this right now, with the Shakti engine for the HAL Dhruv, the Light Combat Helicopter and the Light Utility Helicopter.

The sad reality is that no money has been invested in a local engine. And now we are holding the short end of the stick and making (as always) ad hoc purchases. These two posts from Indranil and Cybaru are so apt. Unfortunately nothing is moving on this front.

Indranil ---> viewtopic.php?f=3&t=3351&start=4880#p2386762

Cybaru ---> viewtopic.php?f=3&t=3351&start=4880#p2386767
*Point 6 in CY's post is what needs to be done with utmost urgency.


Great post, Admiral Saar!

It is a no-brainer that we should always have an option for a Kaveri-powered Tejas. The LCA was initially designed for the Kaveri and if GTRE and/or SAFRAN ever figure it out, HAL should be ready with a variant of the Tejas to use it, no?

The Tejas is already radiating into different variants -- MK1, MK1A, NLCA, MWF. An all-MII version with indigenous would just another variant that not impact the other variants if the engine disappoints or fails. The Tejas is now mature unlike when the LCA needed to be de-coupled from the Kaveri to ensure that future of the aircraft is not impaired by the engine.

This is the most exciting part to me about the Tejas. Here is something we own completely and can make as many as we want and in as many variations as we want.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4311
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby JayS » 14 Oct 2019 15:08

Sadly no better image avaible of this board which shows entire manufacturing of LCA in summary.

Also note SP-32 already on Assembly line. :D

Image

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4288
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

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

Postby srai » 14 Oct 2019 18:34

^^^
Good find!

The whole “Structural Assemblies” section is being outsourced gradually to L&T, VEM, Alpha Tocol, TATA and NAL.

Mort Walker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7876
Joined: 31 May 2004 11:31
Location: The rings around Uranus.

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

Postby Mort Walker » 14 Oct 2019 20:54

Admiral,

The Safran engine division does not appear to be separate entities for military and civilian aircraft. It is very possible the engines for the IN P-8I may have come from Safran. Safran may provide GE the opportunity to free itself from some parts of ITAR. That said significant technical expertise is being shared between GE and Safran. I don't know the financial position of Safran vs. GE jet engine division.

There are too many other weapon system platforms and components dependent on the US now. Particularly transport aircraft and surveillance systems. Had sanctions been a concern, these platforms would not have been purchased nor would continuing interest by the services been entertained by the GoI.

The long term purchase of the GE F414 and F404 will kick start the Tejas production into high gear. By 2025, the resources should be available to develop a domestic engine.

GE does make the F404-IN20 in a version specific for the LCA (scroll down):
https://www.geaviation.com/military/engines/f404-engine

It is very possible this engine, and variants of the F414, may be out of ITAR and relatively sanction proof. Some 99 of the F414 engines have been selected by the ADA in 2010, but its not clear if the order has been placed. The delay may be the Mk.II development and funding. However, the time has come now to go ahead.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3389
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

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

Postby kit » 14 Oct 2019 21:14

Mort Walker wrote:Admiral,

The Safran engine division does not appear to be separate entities for military and civilian aircraft. It is very possible the engines for the IN P-8I may have come from Safran. Safran may provide GE the opportunity to free itself from some parts of ITAR. That said significant technical expertise is being shared between GE and Safran. I don't know the financial position of Safran vs. GE jet engine division.

There are too many other weapon system platforms and components dependent on the US now. Particularly transport aircraft and surveillance systems. Had sanctions been a concern, these platforms would not have been purchased nor would continuing interest by the services been entertained by the GoI.

The long term purchase of the GE F414 and F404 will kick start the Tejas production into high gear. By 2025, the resources should be available to develop a domestic engine.

GE does make the F404-IN20 in a version specific for the LCA (scroll down):
https://www.geaviation.com/military/engines/f404-engine

It is very possible this engine, and variants of the F414, may be out of ITAR and relatively sanction proof. Some 99 of the F414 engines have been selected by the ADA in 2010, but its not clear if the order has been placed. The delay may be the Mk.II development and funding. However, the time has come now to go ahead.


How is it outside ITAR and sanction proof ? I don't think it is.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7866
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby brar_w » 14 Oct 2019 22:25

None of GE's Military products are ITAR proof.

Mort Walker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7876
Joined: 31 May 2004 11:31
Location: The rings around Uranus.

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

Postby Mort Walker » 15 Oct 2019 08:42

brar_w wrote:None of GE's Military products are ITAR proof.


Companies have gone around ITAR. Northrop sold airport surveillance radar components to Iran about 10 years back.

venkat_r
BRFite
Posts: 327
Joined: 20 Feb 2001 12:31

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

Postby venkat_r » 15 Oct 2019 08:57

Sounds more like the case of once bitten twice shy, but India has been exposed to the sanctions a lot more than just engines. I think GOI does not fear the sanctions the same way anymore, but no harm in discussion.

As far as engine development is concerned, we need a much comprehensive development program which includes full spectrum of them, no use or sense doing bania math on the strategic pieces. Still the development is inching along. For mil helicopters, we might own above 50% of them with Desi engines in about a decade, not bad. Imagine if we can have one or two more variants.

For Desi fighters, Safraan help can be taken if India does not have to hand over IP or royalties for all engine development in India to them. If there is a way to limit the co-operation to specific engine or even for a co-development (yeah why not dream and delude while at it) then Safran is a good option. What’s a few hundreds of million, in the big scheme of things. Get every single help and advantage to GTRE as possible to get the engines right.

It feels like there are not enough experts to work on MK1 and MK2 and AMCA, all at the same time, this seem like limiting and there is a need to expand the orgs that are working on such tech. I would think that using an existing platform like LCA, a new trainer or unmanned vehicle can be created with Kauveri derivative. I am not an expert, but just dreaming a bit.
Last edited by venkat_r on 15 Oct 2019 09:11, edited 1 time in total.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7866
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby brar_w » 15 Oct 2019 08:58

Mort Walker wrote:
brar_w wrote:None of GE's Military products are ITAR proof.


Companies have gone around ITAR. Northrop sold airport surveillance radar components to Iran about 10 years back.


As I mentioned in my previous post, none of GEs military engines are ITAR free as far as I know. If you have evidence to the contrary, please share it.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20231
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

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

Postby chetak » 15 Oct 2019 09:33

brar_w wrote:
Mort Walker wrote:
Companies have gone around ITAR. Northrop sold airport surveillance radar components to Iran about 10 years back.


As I mentioned in my previous post, none of GEs military engines are ITAR free as far as I know. If you have evidence to the contrary, please share it.


ameriki companies were surreptitiously working in iraq even the day before the attacks using non ameriki personnel.

A classmate of mine was deployed there by a well known ameriki technology company and they were supplying what would be classified as ITAR sensitive today but in those days it needed the express permission of the state dept for both sales and service. No such permission was ever obtained and profit was the sole driver of such deals.

many countries have various ways of beating their own sanctions.

northrop's deal, I am very sure, would have fallen under such dubious and very profitable interpretations of ITAR related exports.

Kakarat
BRFite
Posts: 1864
Joined: 26 Jan 2005 13:59

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

Postby Kakarat » 15 Oct 2019 12:26

https://twitter.com/SpokespersonMoD/sta ... 8710572035

Tejas TD-1 as Gate Guardian at DRDO Bhawan

Image
Image

The Best place for Tejas TD-1 would have been a museum but i think this is the next best thing

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2580
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

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

Postby nam » 15 Oct 2019 15:22

I dont think that is the real TD-1. It has that extra intake on the spine, which TD1 did not have.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7866
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby brar_w » 15 Oct 2019 17:41

chetak wrote:
brar_w wrote:
As I mentioned in my previous post, none of GEs military engines are ITAR free as far as I know. If you have evidence to the contrary, please share it.


ameriki companies were surreptitiously working in iraq even the day before the attacks using non ameriki personnel.

A classmate of mine was deployed there by a well known ameriki technology company and they were supplying what would be classified as ITAR sensitive today but in those days it needed the express permission of the state dept for both sales and service. No such permission was ever obtained and profit was the sole driver of such deals.

many countries have various ways of beating their own sanctions.

northrop's deal, I am very sure, would have fallen under such dubious and very profitable interpretations of ITAR related exports.


So does the GE 404/414 family include any variants that are ITAR free and if so do you have evidence to support that claim?

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20231
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

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

Postby chetak » 16 Oct 2019 09:44

brar_w wrote:
chetak wrote:
ameriki companies were surreptitiously working in iraq even the day before the attacks using non ameriki personnel.

A classmate of mine was deployed there by a well known ameriki technology company and they were supplying what would be classified as ITAR sensitive today but in those days it needed the express permission of the state dept for both sales and service. No such permission was ever obtained and profit was the sole driver of such deals.

many countries have various ways of beating their own sanctions.

northrop's deal, I am very sure, would have fallen under such dubious and very profitable interpretations of ITAR related exports.


So does the GE 404/414 family include any variants that are ITAR free and if so do you have evidence to support that claim?


most military stuff and dual use stuff are ITAR regulated.

but ITAR is a convenient tool and with the SD and Dept of defence, especially, when wearing their special political hats it becomes more of an "in the eyes of the beholder" thing.

the hypocrisy of the US's duplicity with respect to the paki acquisition of nuclear tech is evident for all to see. There are books on this very topic.

Straight up, the GE 404/414 family including variants are fully ITAR constrained but one suspects that under some circumstances, this will be observed more in the breach.

the amerikis often use creative bills of lading, surreptitious shipping through third countries, dodgy end user certificates, sales through CIA paltu arms dealers and what not.

vishvak
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5450
Joined: 12 Aug 2011 21:19

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

Postby vishvak » 16 Oct 2019 13:21

One cannot ignore the fact that amriki gear works well. In post balakot air battle, their aams with pakis hit flares while su-30mkis dodged them, another hit MiG 21. Have to be very sure dealing with the amriki gears. Maybe right moment to think about risk mitigation is now when variants of Tejas are designed, now that the platform is working.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4288
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

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

Postby srai » 16 Oct 2019 14:34

^^^
...their aams with pakis hit flares...

:?:

Yagnasri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9530
Joined: 29 May 2007 18:03

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

Postby Yagnasri » 17 Oct 2019 13:42

ramana wrote:I propose we name Tejas Sridevi
Svelte, Desi and totally bewitching

https://twitter.com/ramana_brf/status/1 ... 82752?s=19


Stronly disagree.

Nithya - Permanent as it is ours. Perfectly suitable name - A class of her own, Small in size (not all aspects :mrgreen: ), beautiful, multi- talented, unsupported by anyone, largely unkonwn, unappreciated until proven ability, down to earth.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nithya_Menen

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7821
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

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

Postby Rakesh » 18 Oct 2019 00:55

Mort Walker wrote:Companies have gone around ITAR. Northrop sold airport surveillance radar components to Iran about 10 years back.

chetak wrote:most military stuff and dual use stuff are ITAR regulated.

The same concern that I am echoing on this thread....

https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/1184750486005547008 ---> Having a fighter-class low-bypass turbofan that can power Tejas variants is a strategic imperative for India. There can be no two ways about it. Being dependent on a CAATSA-wielding, Kurd-betraying and F-35-peddling America for any length of time is NOT a great idea.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7821
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

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

Postby Rakesh » 18 Oct 2019 01:02

^^^ If one looks at the long term viability of the fleet...it does not look rosy with a fleet largely flying on American engines. Based on the numbers that are known, this is the scenario that the IAF is looking at;

40 Tejas Mk1: F404-IN20
83 Tejas Mk1A: F404-IN20
200 Tejas Mk2: F414-GE-INS6
AMCA: F414-GE-INS6 (Boeing's proposal with the selection of the F-18). Let us assume a production run of at least 100 aircraft.
114 MRCA: F414-GE-400 if it is the F-18 or likely the F110-GE-132 if it is the F-21.

423 desi aircraft and 114 phoren aircraft - that is close to 540 aircraft flying with an American engine. The only other birds that will be flying (along with the above) will be the 36 Rafales (M88 turbofan) and the 272 Su-30MKIs (AL-31FP turbofan). Even if the MRCA deal is cancelled and the 114 birds are replaced with Tejas or AMCA, the situation does not change. Either bird - AMCA or Tejas - will be flying with a GE engine.

When more than 50% of your combat fleet is flying with an American engine, how independent can India really be?

It is not the sanctions that is worrisome, but the lack of independence.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7821
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

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

Postby Rakesh » 18 Oct 2019 01:05

https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/1184759371063939072 ---> Well, in recent months @delhidefence has gone into the issue of precisely where India stands at the moment with respect to jet engine development. Significant progress has been made in some areas such as TBC, etc. I'll return with a set of articles on this issue.

vishvak
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5450
Joined: 12 Aug 2011 21:19

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

Postby vishvak » 18 Oct 2019 12:44

srai wrote:^^^
...their aams with pakis hit flares...

:?:

Meaning anti aam decoy countermeasure flares (released by Su MKI) while Su-MKI s escaped. This is from pakis claims that their aams hit something after let loose on su 30s.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4288
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

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

Postby srai » 18 Oct 2019 12:53

^^^
Flares are countermeasures for IR seekers (i.e. R-73) while chaff are for RF seekers (i.e. AMRAAM).

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7821
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

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

Postby Rakesh » 18 Oct 2019 17:47

Visit the MiG-21 shoots down F-16 thread ----> viewtopic.php?f=3&t=7699&start=3280

nash
BRFite
Posts: 840
Joined: 08 Aug 2008 16:48

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

Postby nash » 18 Oct 2019 21:15


Trials of upgraded LCA (Light Combat Aircraft) Tejas are conducted in Pokhran field firing range.The aircraft is being tested on various parameters from last two days.DRDO and air force officials were present in the range during trials.HAL has introduced new features in the engine of LCA Tejas.


http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/arti ... aign=cppst


Now which Trial it is and which upgraded version or a typical DDM article.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Aarvee and 21 guests