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

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 12 May 2020 05:24

Thanks IR and JayS for the responses. Your own article in DDR had mentioned the aerodynamic improvements that were being studied. Nose strakes or a fuselage mounted strake is an easy fix that doesn't require remanufacturing airframes and can be retrofitted to Mk1s apart from being on Mk1A from day one.

If the directional stability at higher AoA can be improved with strakes as the papers suggested, I see no harm in adding those especially if it further increases the AoA limit of the Tejas. The weight penalty is negligible (~10-20 kgs) compared to trying to increase the size of the vertical tail and rudder. Mirage-2000 has it, Gripen has it (was added on, didn't exist in the first Gripen A/Bs).

The wing-tip mounted CCMs seem especially lucrative, given that they improve L/D ratio in all regimes of flight.

IMO, these are small enough changes that could result in performance improvements.

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 12 May 2020 08:02

Karan M wrote:The HVT thing is shocking. I hope he's back.

$#(&%! Dalals must have complained! Demystifying their BS was top of his agenda all day long!

Prasad · Post by **Prasad** » 12 May 2020 09:30

He's on Instagram fwiw

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 12 May 2020 21:00

Kartik,

Let me share a couple of papers with you offline.

For MWF, increasing the size and height of the fin was imperative. For Mk2 (as we stated in the report) the strakes significantly improved CnB, but adversely affected Cmy (directional stability). The nose chine improved the CnB with marginal degradation of Cmy. For NLCA Mk1 deflecting the Levcon downwards does the trick. There was no requirement for a strake. On NLCA Mk2 they studied the strakes as I had reported in my previous comment for delaying pitchup at transonic speeds. As the NLCA Mk2 design progressed they got rid of the Levcons and added large LE extensions. I do not think that the strake would help in this case.

Coming to Mk1A, I am a bit disappointed. There arise due to ADA/HAL divide IMHO. Mk1A is a strictly HAL-only project. HAL has shut out ADA as much as it could and ADA never came to the front in providing support. There was even delays in making LSPs available for conversion. So many refinements to the airframe could be done but now there is no time to test those out.

Frankly speaking, adding a nose chine (or fuselage strake), changing the engine bay door, better drop tanks and pylons can be done to in service aircraft.So all Mk1s and Mk1As can be retrofitted with those. But, there are some more major changes that could have been affected on Mk1As. I hope that Mk1A orders are split into 40 Mk1As and 43 Mk1Bs. While HAL is delivering the Mk1As which would take around 2.5-3 years they can incorporate and test the bigger changes that are obvious from detailed CFD/wind-tunnel studies.
1. Work on area behind the canopy
2. Move the outboard pylon to wingtip pylons
3. Extend the inlet and cant it for better area ruling (you can see this on the MWF).

srai · Post by **srai** » 12 May 2020 21:37

^^^
Let the 83 be 83 ... additional orders for next batch configuration. 40 units are too small a number IMO

maitya · Post by **maitya** » 12 May 2020 21:58

Indranil wrote:Kartik,

<snip>
Coming to Mk1A, I am a bit disappointed. There arise due to ADA/HAL divide IMHO. Mk1A is a strictly HAL-only project. HAL has shut out ADA as much as it could and ADA never came to the front in providing support. There was even delays in making LSPs available for conversion. So many refinements to the airframe could be done but now there is no time to test those out.
<snip>
While HAL is delivering the Mk1As which would take around 2.5-3 years they can incorporate and test the bigger changes that are obvious from detailed CFD/wind-tunnel studies.
1. Work on area behind the canopy
2. Move the outboard pylon to wingtip pylons
3. Extend the inlet and cant it for better area ruling (you can see this on the MWF).

What I really really find disappointing wrt MK1A is lack of initiative to even try out the most obvious of the changes ... i.e. make the tail-fin sit a little higher over the rear fuselage and dedicate the space around the rear spine, to a wider and higher bay to house the UREP and the DRFM based RWJ - similar to what we see (structurally) in the F-16s.

More so, when they themselves are implementing something similar for D-29 in the MiG-29s or even for for the Jaguars.

Or even a wing-tip station to house MAWS pairs on each tip - yes there's only so much weight you can attach at the wing tips without changing the wing structurally, which would have made it out of scope of the 1A program immediately - but a MAWS-pair "pod" won't be too much more than 30-40 odd Kgs max each, and that much should be quite achievable etc.

Only some mgmt-gibberish "ïntent"-talk about weight reduction this and weight reduction that, but that has been quietly buried.

There's just no risk appetite whatsoever, it seems ... oh well!!

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 12 May 2020 23:47

The counter point is: Should we be in perpetual concurrent design phase? Is it not wise to stabilize production on Mk1/Mk1A just the way it is. Build up numbers as soon as possible. Focus all design energy to get to MWF. Get to that as soon as possible.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 13 May 2020 00:01

Why do people want to continue to tinker with the MK1? In itself - at FOC standard this bird should have been ordered in large numbers. Then you have the thing moved to MK1A, and now we want to refine this? nahi nahi, kabhi nahi! That's what you have the Mk2 for and the TEDBF and AMCA etc. for. Order another 75 MK1A and be done with it until the Mk2 comes online.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 13 May 2020 01:02

Indranil wrote:Kartik,

Let me share a couple of papers with you offline.

For MWF, increasing the size and height of the fin was imperative. For Mk2 (as we stated in the report) the strakes significantly improved CnB, but adversely affected Cmy (directional stability). The nose chine improved the CnB with marginal degradation of Cmy. For NLCA Mk1 deflecting the Levcon downwards does the trick. There was no requirement for a strake. On NLCA Mk2 they studied the strakes as I had reported in my previous comment for delaying pitchup at transonic speeds. As the NLCA Mk2 design progressed they got rid of the Levcons and added large LE extensions. I do not think that the strake would help in this case.

Coming to Mk1A, I am a bit disappointed. There arise due to ADA/HAL divide IMHO. Mk1A is a strictly HAL-only project. HAL has shut out ADA as much as it could and ADA never came to the front in providing support. There was even delays in making LSPs available for conversion. So many refinements to the airframe could be done but now there is no time to test those out.

Frankly speaking, adding a nose chine (or fuselage strake), changing the engine bay door, better drop tanks and pylons can be done to in service aircraft.So all Mk1s and Mk1As can be retrofitted with those. But, there are some more major changes that could have been affected on Mk1As. I hope that Mk1A orders are split into 40 Mk1As and 43 Mk1Bs. While HAL is delivering the Mk1As which would take around 2.5-3 years they can incorporate and test the bigger changes that are obvious from detailed CFD/wind-tunnel studies.
1. Work on area behind the canopy
2. Move the outboard pylon to wingtip pylons
3. Extend the inlet and cant it for better area ruling (you can see this on the MWF).

So basically so many studies that were done for aerodynamic improvements will result in no aerodynamic improvements on the Mk1A. Sigh.

The nose strake is the smallest change and could be tested relatively quickly to see it's impact on handling qualities. It is a small change when compared to many of the bigger changes that are being made for the Mk1A. Just for comparison, Gripen has both a nose strake as well as fuselage mounted strake.

If they're already modifying LSPs to convert them into Mk1A prototypes then, modifying the geometry aft of the canopy could have been done if they wanted to as well as adding wingtip CCMs if the structure could handle it. It would require more testing for vibration and flutter but doable.

Inlet changes too could have been tested for Mk1A though I suspect it would require a lot more testing.

Anyway, right now the focus is on getting it out the door as fast as possible and anything that adds schedule delay may be considered unacceptable. Hopefully we'll see it added on later batches of the Mk1A and then retrofitted to the Mk1s.

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 13 May 2020 02:49

Agree with IR - need to declare victory with design and move to production for Mk1 and Mk1A. MK1B can come in for an additional 50+ follow on order.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 13 May 2020 03:35

https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/126 ... 19392?s=20 ---> First and ultimate test of new Swadeshi ideology:

Clear orders *ASAP* for all major indigenously developed systems. Examples:

1. 83 x Tejas Mk1A
2. 118 x Arjun MK1A
3. 6 x Pinaka MBRL Regiments
4. A range of radars.

There's more.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 13 May 2020 03:56

Indranil wrote:The counter point is: Should we be in perpetual concurrent design phase? Is it not wise to stabilize production on Mk1/Mk1A just the way it is. Build up numbers as soon as possible. Focus all design energy to get to MWF. Get to that as soon as possible.

Product design is all about improvements Indranil. Especially when the changes are minimal and the results they give are more discernible.

None of the changes we talked about are not doable on the Mk1A. From a production stand-point, some of them (nose strake or wing tip CCMs) should definitely be doable without major changes to the production set-up.

And they've all been incorporated into the MWF, which tells you that they are desirable. Of course, MWF is a design derived from an existing one, so schedule will permit the changes. Maybe Mk1A schedule did not do so.

srai · Post by **srai** » 13 May 2020 04:16

At this point in time, IMO it is more important to “mass” produce than to seek perfection. Once produced and inducted, the airframes will be in service some 30-40 years. Plenty of time to keep tinkering. Major refinements could be attempted at MLU in 15-years. Smaller refinements/improvements would be an ongoing exercise.

Mort Walker · Post by **Mort Walker** » 13 May 2020 10:08

Rakesh wrote:https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/126 ... 19392?s=20 ---> First and ultimate test of new Swadeshi ideology:

Clear orders *ASAP* for all major indigenously developed systems. Examples:

1. 83 x Tejas Mk1A
2. 118 x Arjun MK1A
3. 6 x Pinaka MBRL Regiments
4. A range of radars.

There's more.

All of those numbers need to be multiplied by 10.

Khalsa · Post by **Khalsa** » 13 May 2020 15:56

Can I see documented evidence or a document of the final order ?
For 83 Mk1A.

Same for the Arjun. Funds cleared etc etc.
I have not seen the ink from the army.

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 13 May 2020 18:48

Khalsa wrote:Can I see documented evidence or a document of the final order ?
For 83 Mk1A.

Same for the Arjun. Funds cleared etc etc.
I have not seen the ink from the army.

That is a wishlist. Orders not yet signed.

Vamsee · Post by **Vamsee** » 14 May 2020 22:36

anantha krishnan
@writetake

#TejasUpdate

* SP21 to have 2 more sorties followed by 3/4 CAFs, then to AFS Sulur.
* SP22 couple of tests + LSTT + HSTT-cum-1st flight. Now getting the painting done.
* SP23/SP24 got into #Covid delays, awaiting some components.
* SP25/SP26 on coupling stage.

Link

Picklu · Post by **Picklu** » 14 May 2020 23:59

Where's the order of 83mk1a?

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 15 May 2020 00:06

Picklu wrote:Where's the order of 83mk1a?

As per HVT, it is due for signing this summer. And that is as per procedure. COVID has delayed it, but the order will get signed.

Expect another order of Mk1As to come as well.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 15 May 2020 00:16

Vamsee wrote:anantha krishnan
@writetake

#TejasUpdate

* SP21 to have 2 more sorties followed by 3/4 CAFs, then to AFS Sulur.
* SP22 couple of tests + LSTT + HSTT-cum-1st flight. Now getting the painting done.
* SP23/SP24 got into #Covid delays, awaiting some components.
* SP25/SP26 on coupling stage.

Link

SP-17 (earlier SP-21) should be handed over to the IAF soon then. Soon to be followed by SP-18 (earlier SP-22). Will 2 single seaters be enough to stand up No.18 Squadron? Possibly, given that they're co-located with No.45 Squadron.

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 15 May 2020 02:25

Plan was to form the Sq with 4 jets. 2 is too few I think. But may be Sq 45 could loan a couple of theirs if things need to be expedited. IAF will decide on this one I suppose.

Yesterday, 14th May, was 77th Birthday of Dr Kota Harinarayana, the Father of LCA. FYI.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 15 May 2020 02:31

From Anantha Krishnan's Twitter

The next major milestone for #Tejas project COULD be the formation of 2nd Sqn #FlyingBullets at AFS Sulur. I understand that #IAF had to postpone their April plans owing to #Covid19 and it could now be anytime soon. #Avgeeks

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 15 May 2020 02:33

JayS wrote:Plan was to form the Sq with 4 jets. 2 is too few I think. But may be Sq 45 could loan a couple of theirs if things need to be expedited. IAF will decide on this one I suppose.

Yesterday, 14th May, was 77th Birthday of Dr Kota Harinarayana, the Father of LCA. FYI.

No.45 Squadron too was formed with 2 jets. They had 1 trainer at the ceremony as well, but just 2 single seaters, SP-1 and SP-2 that were handed over. There was SP-3 there as well, but it hadn't yet been handed over.

article link

The first two contemporary or fourth generation Light Combat Aircraft ‘Tejas,’ designed and built in India, joined the Indian Air Force’s squadron called Flying Daggers in Bengaluru on Friday. It was a ceremonial but low-key affair.

...

Two more in pipeline

Two more LCA will join No. 45 Squadron in a few months. “With 45 Squadron commencing operations on Friday, soon the Tejas will be employed to defend the Indian skies,” the IAF said.

..

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 15 May 2020 02:33

Kartik, what we see in papers is just a tip of the iceberg. Smallest changes may need a lot of flight testing efforts still. I am sure the PM team of LCA would have 100s of items on the To Do list. I think the priority is to get the FOC version sorted completely, backport key changes to IOC like BVR capability, Astra integration, Uttam integration, Mk1A and then MWF to get going and so on. All these small changes can follow later. They are not awefully important or urgent. I am sure the PM team have much better perspective of all things, priorities and constraints in front of their eyes. A lot of times the smallest changes take longest time in Aerospace due to lower priorities and much headache even if its of just drawing changes. For better or for worse, Aerospace has too much bureaucracy these days.

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 15 May 2020 02:39

Well the formation of Sq 45 with 2 jets was also a less than ideal situation. IIRC even then the plan was to raise the Sq with 4 jets. Though since Sq 45 is already there to handhold the new Sq a bit initially, current situation is not all that dire. Plus they will be colocated with the Sq 45.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 15 May 2020 02:54

JayS wrote:Kartik, what we see in papers is just a tip of the iceberg. Smallest changes may need a lot of flight testing efforts still. I am sure the PM team of LCA would have 100s of items on the To Do list. I think the priority is to get the FOC version sorted completely, backport key changes to IOC like BVR capability, Astra integration, Uttam integration, Mk1A and then MWF to get going and so on. All these small changes can follow later. They are not awefully important or urgent. I am sure the PM team have much better perspective of all things, priorities and constraints in front of their eyes. A lot of times the smallest changes take longest time in Aerospace due to lower priorities and much headache even if its of just drawing changes. For better or for worse, Aerospace has too much bureaucracy these days.

Oh I'm sure it will require testing, both on the ground and in flight.

But like you said, it's a question of priorities as this stage. There are more important items that need to be brought into the wider fleet from the FOC standard plus avionics changes on Mk1A, which will take precedence over aerodynamic changes. Given that the FOC variant is one heck of a fighter, it can be hopefully be addressed in the future.

Ideally, these changes should be implemented while the fleet size is still small and changes can be introduced onto the assembly line for the fighters yet to be built. But there's so much going on, that these will probably not be addressed at all, before MWF is rolled out.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 15 May 2020 15:46

Karan M wrote:The HVT thing is shocking. I hope he's back.

And he is back. Phew! Thank Goodness ---> https://twitter.com/hvtiaf

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 15 May 2020 15:59

And let me start off by posting what the good Group Captain is best known for.

I am "high" on and for Tejas because of him

https://twitter.com/SoumyaR57322232/sta ... 98112?s=20 ---> You are defending Tejas here. From all critics.

https://twitter.com/hvtiaf/status/12586 ... 62464?s=20 ---> Tejas doesn't have critics. Just under-informed. I share what I know.

VickyAvinash · Post by **VickyAvinash** » 15 May 2020 17:20

Rakesh wrote:And let me start off by posting what the good Group Captain is best known for.

I am "high" on and for Tejas because of him

https://twitter.com/SoumyaR57322232/sta ... 98112?s=20 ---> You are defending Tejas here. From all critics.

https://twitter.com/hvtiaf/status/12586 ... 62464?s=20 ---> Tejas doesn't have critics. Just under-informed. I share what I know.

Can we request Harsh sir to join BRF?

ArjunPandit · Post by **ArjunPandit** » 15 May 2020 17:44

rakesh ji...its so great to see the enthusiasm back on this thread i seriously hope that there's no dampener
as it was said "How's the josh, High Sir"
regarding Tejas critics..there are foreign peddlers too who get lifafas and cuts..hope there is a movie made on the lives of likes of dr kota harinarayana

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 15 May 2020 19:53

No contracts for MK1A yet.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 15 May 2020 20:28

HUMBLE REQUEST: PLEASE DO NOT POST ARTICLES OF MMRCA IN THIS THREAD. THANK YOU.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 15 May 2020 20:36

Aditya_V wrote:No contracts for MK1A yet.

As per HVT's tweet, it is due for signing this summer. And that is as per procedure. There were no delays, until COVID came along.

But the order will get signed soon.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 15 May 2020 20:39

VickyAvinash wrote:Can we request Harsh sir to join BRF?

It is best not to Saar. He is already putting his neck on the line by being on twitter. If he lands up here, it could cause some Babu to raise a stink. Why sink his career? Let him stay there onlee. If he comes on his own accord, that is a different story. Many BRFites follow him (me included) on twitter. Someone will definitely reproduce his tweets here. And if you really want to interact with him, you can on twitter. I have and he always responds. He is a distinguished retired air force officer. As jingos, let us work to keep it that way.

ArjunPandit · Post by **ArjunPandit** » 15 May 2020 20:54

Rakesh wrote:
VickyAvinash wrote:Can we request Harsh sir to join BRF?
It is best not to Saar. He is already putting his neck on the line by being on twitter. If he lands up here, it could cause some Babu to raise a stink. Why sink his career? Let him stay there onlee. If he comes on his own accord, that is a different story. Many BRFites follow him (me included) on twitter. Someone will definitely reproduce his tweets here. And if you really want to interact with him, you can on twitter. I have and he always responds. He is a distinguished retired air force officer. As jingos, let us work to keep it that way.

how can mod baby know he's him..he can be ghengis khan or vaimaniki on BRF or some other nondescript name garud or jatayu

VickyAvinash · Post by **VickyAvinash** » 16 May 2020 00:21

Rakesh wrote:
VickyAvinash wrote:Can we request Harsh sir to join BRF?
It is best not to Saar. He is already putting his neck on the line by being on twitter. If he lands up here, it could cause some Babu to raise a stink. Why sink his career? Let him stay there onlee. If he comes on his own accord, that is a different story. Many BRFites follow him (me included) on twitter. Someone will definitely reproduce his tweets here. And if you really want to interact with him, you can on twitter. I have and he always responds. He is a distinguished retired air force officer. As jingos, let us work to keep it that way.

I did request him. However, in the light of ur post, totally aligned sir

Khalsa · Post by **Khalsa** » 16 May 2020 17:13

Do not bring the good Grp Captain here.
Especially under another name.... his knowledge he will shine and his Tejas will be visible from beneath the fake name.

+ Since when did we start asking Indian Officers to start hiding

Leave him on twitter, he slays millions over there.
I thank god that he is back.

fanne · Post by **fanne** » 16 May 2020 18:08

He is doing fabulous job on twitter. Here, however good we are, will be like wrestling with P****, we will bring him down to our level. The few retired officers who are here anyway post way less (and that is how it should be), twitter with it limited character is perfect.

Imagine the group captain saying 5 AAM is sufficient or 50, then all 50 AAM pasand junta falling on him with all kind of great logic....which will quickly degenerate into God know what....

ashishvikas · Post by **ashishvikas** » 17 May 2020 20:28

Removing Some Media Fallacies About The Capabilities of The LCA Tejas Fighter

By Indranil Roy

http://delhidefencereview.com/2020/05/1 ... s-fighter/

fanne · Post by **fanne** » 17 May 2020 20:52

Good job Indranil!!

Remember you can only wake up a sleeping person, not the one pretending to be sleeping (with the enemy that is).
At least the aam junta who get their knowledge from TOI will benefit. Have you tried as a letter or as an article there? Will they allow it?