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

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Khalsa
BRFite
Posts: 1302
Joined: 12 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: NZL

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

Postby Khalsa » 24 May 2018 02:44

Singha wrote:Hence its all tejas fault and it must turn into a dpsa system overnight
The moving map generator and radio altimeter is the clue


OMG !!
(if true)

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50205
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

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

Postby ramana » 24 May 2018 03:43

Karan M wrote:.....
Guys,

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

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

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

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


How many of these can be fitted without/minimal changes to mission computer?

The MFD with its GFx processor and the Map generators look like need computer changes and altimeter look like work together.

Maybe only transponder would not require any changes.
Does this take up a pod position? Or just a black-box with idiot light on the display?

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50205
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

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

Postby ramana » 24 May 2018 03:44

Tejas Mk1A with all these changes is son of Rafale or Jaguar ka baap?

Dileep
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5218
Joined: 04 Apr 2005 08:17
Location: Dera Mahab Ali धरा महाबलिस्याः درا مهاب الي

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

Postby Dileep » 24 May 2018 07:00

The new "mission and display system" with SMFD and SHUD was being planned from 2016 by ADA for MK1A. At that time, HAL was not in a mood to take it. The project did not progress beyond a formal bid.

Yesterday I got ishara that it is getting hot again. Got excited about the scoop on Uttam, so lost the connection to this news. Looks like the news is true.

However..... The production is not going to stop.

Dileep wrote:Planes will get built and stuff will get phased in as they mature, and get retro-fitted into existing airframes. Orders will happen as the existing orders gets executed.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5577
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

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

Postby Rakesh » 24 May 2018 07:01

https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/997783613138784258 ---> India must think strategically about the Tejas programme. Instead of trying to forever 'soup it up' and delay mass production, the focus should be on scaling up numbers to help allied air forces replace Mig-21s, Mig-27s and Su-22s, F-4s and even F-16s with a good 4th Gen jet.

https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/997783972561281024 ---> The focus must be on producing the Tejas in numbers. Capability accretion can come later. Don't miss the bus again.

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

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

Postby sahay » 24 May 2018 07:37

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

He attributes news reports whenever he reports from them. Considering that he has attributed this to sources from HAL, it is independent verification.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5577
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

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

Postby Rakesh » 24 May 2018 07:48

Dileep wrote:However..... The production is not going to stop.

Can you elaborate more on this? After the 40 Mk1s, are they going to produce more Mk1s?

Dileep
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5218
Joined: 04 Apr 2005 08:17
Location: Dera Mahab Ali धरा महाबलिस्याः درا مهاب الي

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

Postby Dileep » 24 May 2018 09:12

Rakesh wrote:
Dileep wrote:However..... The production is not going to stop.

Can you elaborate more on this? After the 40 Mk1s, are they going to produce more Mk1s?


No. They will be Mk1As, with whatever inner changes planned, and whatever LRUs that are ready to go. The new ones will be phased in as and when they materialize.

Yes, there will be some amount of "bolt it on where space is available" kind of integration for the new things, but that is OK. We are flying much worse arrangements now, aren't we?

It is an impossibility that HAL will sit idle.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 62928
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

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

Postby Singha » 24 May 2018 09:30

on the positiv neuj side it could be the Tejas is no longer seen as a 3-legged Mig21ski , but a "true" multirole fighter.

HAL-ADA need to up the powerpoint team and come up with colourful graphics and "blocks" with "incremental capability insertions" taking a leaf from the JSF and SM2 book :D

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3397
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby JayS » 24 May 2018 11:03

Dileep wrote:
Rakesh wrote:Can you elaborate more on this? After the 40 Mk1s, are they going to produce more Mk1s?


No. They will be Mk1As, with whatever inner changes planned, and whatever LRUs that are ready to go. The new ones will be phased in as and when they materialize.

Yes, there will be some amount of "bolt it on where space is available" kind of integration for the new things, but that is OK. We are flying much worse arrangements now, aren't we?

It is an impossibility that HAL will sit idle.


That's the way it should be.

Even for LCA MK2 after say 4-5 flight test prototypes are produced, we should straightaway move to Serial production. No need to wait for IOC or FOC or any such milestone. The configuration management and program management should be done in such a way that all the airframe related changes done and tested very early in the program so that the production would go on uninterrupted. After the airframe SOP freeze, no change which demand airframe changes should be taken up in given mark/tranche. All the Avionics/SW related updated should be applied as and when available. We also need to keep IOC more focused on basic aircraft dynamics testing and validation, enough to push the fighter in service with proper/safe operations by line pilots. Things like weapons integrations and additional avionics updates can keep coming as and when they can and be added to existing fighters and FOC be achieved eventually. Without highly disciplined and hard-lined program management we will always get into scope creep.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3397
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby JayS » 24 May 2018 11:11

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

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


Prototype in build..? I thought they are going to change one of the LSPs to MK1A prototype. In that case, first all stakeholders need to agree on what needs to go in the prototype. Because, now things are avionics related for MK1A. And looks like they have some issues in getting the consensus.

It may as well that HAL Chairman is trying to pass the buck. But we have to give as much credibility to statements coming from him as we give to the ACM. If he is trying to wash the dirty linen in public against the obvious error/issue of his own, I am sure, we will see statements from IAF countering that.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3397
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby JayS » 24 May 2018 11:21

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


I suppose Karan or Dileep saar are better ones to answer that. As far as my understanding goes, the changes being asked should not make any impact on the airframe and hence it should not have any bearing on production go ahead. There may be an issue of consensus in IAF, HAL and ADA on who, how and when the changes should be done. Biggest change of all is the AESA radar. These changes being asked for look to me as if they can easily be applied post production. Will be a bit costly, but we cant have the cake and eat it too always.

I think the changes should be aligned to LCA Mk2, which is going to receive full HW upgrade of entire avionics suite, right down to the FCS. Either they pull some of the changes ahead of time on priority and implement in MK1A or let MK1A received the updated systems on a later date. In no situation HAL should be allowed to procure COTS systems and come up with slapdash stand-alone solution just for Mk1A when we are anyway going to have homegrown efforts (perhaps with much improved desi content) for full overhaul and upgrade of avionics for MK2, for the sake of cost and uniformity. HAL has decent experience in integrating things and we have availability from other programs too as Karan pointed out, but when our orgs like DARE are going to come up with shuddh desi solution anyway, its better to go for the later. I agree with Karan that HAL is simply likely to procure everything off the shelf and create a working contraption for time being. We will be better off with organic desi solution form ground up.

For me the bone of contention is, why production go ahead is being stopped for such changes..? And not with the changes being asked per se. I don't know why HAL Chairman would publically blame IAF for holding the go ahead for Trainers and now MK1A, if IAF if not at fault. True we do not have all the picture. May be there is much more than what meets the eye. We may never know. And that I may be hyperventilating for no goddamn reason. But it pains me to see things not going smoothly even now. What have we learned exactly in past 30yrs, I wonder.

No more on this from me. I'll wait and watch.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3397
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby JayS » 24 May 2018 11:39

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

He attributes news reports whenever he reports from them. Considering that he has attributed this to sources from HAL, it is independent verification.

Its your prerogative to consider unnamed source as good enough verification or not. If I was a journo with half-decent IQ, plagiarizing or passing off paid remarks (I am not saying RB does that), I can always write them as being coming from some unnamed source from IAF or HAL or South Block or the God himself. Who is gonna verify wherther I did indeed got any input or I just made it up..? Sorry I have stopped trusting unnamed sources prima-facie.

Frankly Ajai Shukla's article do not need independent verification for me. He openly attributes the statement in double quote to HAL Chairman. And this is the second time such thing being said by TSR. Someone can always ask question directly to TSR if he indeed said that. It can get only so good in print media. Only better thing than that is video footage.

Haridas
BRFite
Posts: 296
Joined: 26 Dec 2017 07:53

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

Postby Haridas » 24 May 2018 12:00

Singha wrote:on the positiv neuj side it could be the Tejas is no longer seen as a 3-legged Mig21ski , but a "true" multirole fighter.

The affsar who coined the term: three legged Cheetah for Tejas must be retired by now and licking his wounded pride and third limb. :)

Gullible | impressionable | buyable Or some combination of all; the variety is quite common.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50205
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

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

Postby ramana » 24 May 2018 21:33

JayS, Thanks,.

I think of all those changes 'demanded' the IFF transponder is crucial and should not affect the current Mk1A avionics fit too much.
And it's a good thing to have that.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35824
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

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

Postby SaiK » 24 May 2018 23:01

Haridas, that afsar only talked about the non-upgraded TDs and PVs and perhaps first of the LSPs. He is right in calling it having 3 legs. Even the 'Raptors' have 3 legs.

Trikaal
BRFite
Posts: 399
Joined: 19 Jul 2017 08:01

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

Postby Trikaal » 25 May 2018 00:40

IFF is necessary for better battlefield communication. Rest can wait till MLU or Mk2.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2629
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

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

Postby chola » 25 May 2018 00:47

SaiK wrote:Haridas, that afsar only talked about the non-upgraded TDs and PVs and perhaps first of the LSPs. He is right in calling it having 3 legs. Even the 'Raptors' have 3 legs.


You know, “having three legs” is an euphemism for someone with an extremely impressive body part that grows out between the normal two legs.

The Raptor has “three legs” in an metaphorical sense that it is an Alpha Male with a giant rod of power that could form a tripod.

The LCA having three legs in such a manner would be a compliment of the highest order.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15472
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 25 May 2018 13:53

ramana wrote:
Karan M wrote:.....
Guys,

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

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

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

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


How many of these can be fitted without/minimal changes to mission computer?

The MFD with its GFx processor and the Map generators look like need computer changes and altimeter look like work together.

Maybe only transponder would not require any changes.
Does this take up a pod position? Or just a black-box with idiot light on the display?



As I had surmised.
http://ajaishukla.blogspot.in/

Now DARIN 3 introduces a full-glass cockpit with “smart MFDs”. For the first time, the Jaguar will have radar and an electronic warfare suite – including jammers to divert hostile weapons and sensors. An advanced Radalt (radio altimeter) tells the pilot precisely how much above the ground he is flying – crucial for low-flying fighters like the Jaguar.


So my surmise was correct,

Now, all these will require changes to the MC. From what I understand, the IAF is asking for a standardized capability across all its aircraft.

So expect
Su-30 MKI Upg, DARIN-3 and LCA all to have similar capabilities added.

Transponder will be a box in the fuselage, its a LRU (mini-radar basically which sends out a pulse, receives a reply, interprets the answer and assigns a value to the target - friendly, unidentified, opponent. The MC will process the information + radar info (classification) and assign a value which then goes to the displays. This def. requires s/w work.
But, why is it being reported now?

HAL AESA RFP itself mentions CIT.

Dileep
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5218
Joined: 04 Apr 2005 08:17
Location: Dera Mahab Ali धरा महाबलिस्याः درا مهاب الي

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

Postby Dileep » 25 May 2018 13:55

I can confirm that the Mission and Display system as proposed by ADA had no impact on the airframe. The mission computer was of the same form factor. The display panel and the HUD were designed to fit the existing structure. The cable harness would have been much smaller and lighter, freeing up space.

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2478
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

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

Postby tsarkar » 25 May 2018 18:20

Dileep wrote:No. They will be Mk1As, with whatever inner changes planned, and whatever LRUs that are ready to go. The new ones will be phased in as and when they materialize. Yes, there will be some amount of "bolt it on where space is available" kind of integration for the new things, but that is OK. We are flying much worse arrangements now, aren't we? It is an impossibility that HAL will sit idle.

If this understanding is true, then it reflects a rare yet wonderful maturity from IAF & HAL.

Dileep
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5218
Joined: 04 Apr 2005 08:17
Location: Dera Mahab Ali धरा महाबलिस्याः درا مهاب الي

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

Postby Dileep » 26 May 2018 07:40

No.. it was and is always the case between them, for PRODUCTION phase. The problems we saw were for DEVELOPMENT phase.

jaysimha
BRFite
Posts: 639
Joined: 20 Dec 2017 14:30

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

Postby jaysimha » 27 May 2018 17:45

Air Chief Marshal Arup
Raha said , “To attain
true strategic autonomy, the IAF is
focussing on indigenous acquisition
of aircraft, radars, missiles and other
aviation equipment, in consonance
with the ‘Make in India’ initiative.
The induction of the indigenous
Light Combat Aircraft ‘Tejas’ into
the IAF, and placement of orders
for 120 Tejas aircraft, :D is a testimony
to IAF’s commitment to furthering
indigenous capabilities.”

http://www.sainiksamachar.nic.in/englisharchives/2016/oct16-16/Sainik%2016-31%20October%20English.pdf

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19534
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

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

Postby Philip » 27 May 2018 21:43

I entirely agree."Souping up" the LCA has been one major reason why the programme and production is at least a decade late! Russia won the war against Germany by mass producing the T-34, while the Germans wee constantly trying to improve their tanks suffering reduced production.Numbers have a quality of their own and outnumbering the enemy essential!

We've been constantly trying to turn the LCA into an M2K, a stupid idea.It was always meant to be the MIG-21 replacement and that type was produced in large numbers of each incremental variant.The LCA should've been developed primarily as a v.good air combat fighter with both BVR and WVR missiles 2+2/4 along with an integral gun/cannon and a centre line drop tank for extended range.AESA radar and refuelling probe in later versions coming into production around now.We would've had around 80+ MK-1s flying by now had we adopted the simpler roadmap.

Haridas
BRFite
Posts: 296
Joined: 26 Dec 2017 07:53

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

Postby Haridas » 27 May 2018 22:16

jaysimha wrote:Air Chief Marshal Arup
Raha said , “To attain
true strategic autonomy, the IAF is
focussing on indigenous acquisition
of aircraft, radars, missiles and other
aviation equipment, in consonance
with the ‘Make in India’ initiative.
The induction of the indigenous
Light Combat Aircraft ‘Tejas’ into
the IAF, and placement of orders
for 120 Tejas aircraft, :D is a testimony
to IAF’s commitment to furthering
indigenous capabilities.”

http://www.sainiksamachar.nic.in/englisharchives/2016/oct16-16/Sainik%2016-31%20October%20English.pdf


Is that due to change heart in IAF leadership? Or false pretense because their bluff was called by Defense Minister? Only gullible fall for slick sentences. Words are cheap.

Haridas
BRFite
Posts: 296
Joined: 26 Dec 2017 07:53

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

Postby Haridas » 27 May 2018 22:22

Haridas wrote:The affsar who coined the term: three legged Cheetah for Tejas must be retired by now and licking his wounded pride and third limb. :)

Gullible | impressionable | buyable Or some combination of all; the variety is quite common.


SaiK wrote:Haridas, that afsar only talked about the non-upgraded TDs and PVs and perhaps first of the LSPs. He is right in calling it having 3 legs. Even the 'Raptors' have 3 legs.

@SaiK @Chola ji, it was but an intentional mischivious play of word onleee...

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50205
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

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

Postby ramana » 28 May 2018 00:09

Best is enemy of good.

Hence USAF adopted block change concept.
Tsarkar has also said same.
However IAF decision makers want the best or nothing.
In.a world of limited budgets it will be the latter.

suryag
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3112
Joined: 11 Jan 2009 00:14

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

Postby suryag » 28 May 2018 21:58

KaranM sir never heard of this dual band IRST design and development that has been sanctioned by the RM, posting in Tejas thread as am not sure if it is related to MK1A(never heard of IRST request of Tejas) eventhough the link says it is for MKI but it already had IRST so not sure if it is DDM or something else

https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/ne ... 357050.cms

BTW IR sir end of May is approaching and any chaiwala news on A2A refuelling status of the bird ?

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50205
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

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

Postby ramana » 28 May 2018 22:08

Suryag, The report clearly says it's go SU-30MKI. They want to replace the imported one.

suryag
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3112
Joined: 11 Jan 2009 00:14

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

Postby suryag » 28 May 2018 22:10

Ramana Garu not sure if it makes sense for MKI, if this is import substitution is it marked for Su-30 upgrade package ? all this while havent heard anything negative about the IRST package on the Rambhas

JTull
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2296
Joined: 18 Jul 2001 11:31

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

Postby JTull » 29 May 2018 20:11

suryag wrote:KaranM sir never heard of this dual band IRST design and development that has been sanctioned by the RM, posting in Tejas thread as am not sure if it is related to MK1A(never heard of IRST request of Tejas) eventhough the link says it is for MKI but it already had IRST so not sure if it is DDM or something else

https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/ne ... 357050.cms

BTW IR sir end of May is approaching and any chaiwala news on A2A refuelling status of the bird ?


I doubt we'll reach OLS-30 standard in one go. Maybe we've a better sensor but integrating it into an aircraft will need some work. Seems like they want to extend the recent work on Nag and Akash 1S. A podded version will be a good start to upgrade our fleet.

mody
BRFite
Posts: 385
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Mumbai, India

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

Postby mody » 30 May 2018 16:23

If the IRST is meant for Su-30MKI, it would have to replace the OLS-30. As I had said before, when I asked about IRST for Tejas a couple of pages back,
IAF has always been happy about IRST on MiG-29s and Su30MKI. The fact that they have authorized a development of new IRST for Su-30MKI, would mean it would have to be better then the existing one. A unit better then the OLS-30, would surely be great.

Don't know what they mean by dual band? Any gurus have some idea. The news also states 'Long Range'. Maybe if we develop an IR-Astra like the MICA or ASRAAM, with our own IIR seeker, and thrust vector controls on the Astra, then a long range IRST would really come in handy.

If we develop our own IRST pod, surely we can use it for the Tejas MK2 and also retrofit the MK1A planes with the same.

nam
BRFite
Posts: 1213
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

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

Postby nam » 30 May 2018 16:31

The IRST on SU-30 is almost 2 decade old ! I am sure we can better it.

Regarding the development, I hope DRDO delegates this to Tonbo. DRDO can do the material R&D and Tonbo the product development.

It is so painful to read that IA came to know about Tonbo's product during an exercise with US forces!

durairaaj
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 72
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby durairaaj » 30 May 2018 17:53

mody wrote:...

Don't know what they mean by dual band? ...


i.e. Two different IR signatures.

Jet fuel combustion and Solid rocket fuel combustion, each show distinct IR signatures.
Hence sensors are expected to sense both of the IR signatures.

Dileep
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5218
Joined: 04 Apr 2005 08:17
Location: Dera Mahab Ali धरा महाबलिस्याः درا مهاب الي

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

Postby Dileep » 30 May 2018 18:42

Tonbo will help, but DRDO will have to stand in queue for that, and be a decent customer. Those guys are doing good business, and are not really interested to go through the hassle of selling to govt.

nam
BRFite
Posts: 1213
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

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

Postby nam » 30 May 2018 19:14

I am sure Tonbo would be very interested to add IRST to their product portfolio. DRDO could make some deal, in return gets a bit of royalty for it's part and Tonbo get to sell it world over.

It is pointless DRDO investing time and effort in to creating the detection algo, which I am sure Tonbo has in some version. Tonbo equipment have been filtering in to IA units and artillery. So they do know their way around MoD.

edit: Just remembered Tonbo sights are present on Arjun MK2.

pravula
BRFite
Posts: 220
Joined: 07 Aug 2009 05:01

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

Postby pravula » 30 May 2018 21:01

mody wrote:
Don't know what they mean by dual band? Any gurus have some idea. The news also states 'Long Range'. Maybe if we develop an IR-Astra like the MICA or ASRAAM, with our own IIR seeker, and thrust vector controls on the Astra, then a long range IRST would really come in handy.


I think something which uses both Medium and Long wave infrared bands.

from http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/bad-news-russia-china-could-soon-shoot-down-stealth-f-22s-f-25996

Most military airborne infrared sensors tend to use middle wavelengths because of the good compromise between range and resolution capability. Long wave infrared was typically less common because while that part of the spectrum offers excellent range capability—and the ability to pick up extremely cool objects—those sensors were traditionally limited by poor resolution and clutter. However, the advantage is that a good long wave infrared sensor will be sensitive enough to pick up the heat generated by the disturbance of the airflow and skin friction of an aircraft travelling through the atmosphere.

Long wave infrared (LWIR) has long been a holy grail of sorts for the Defense Department. “Sensitivity could most directly be provided by developing detectors that responded in the 8–12-µm-long wavelength IR (LWIR) band. The LWIR band is a highly desired operating band because it provides the most signal for a given difference in temperature between an object and its background (e.g., when imaging terrestrial objects),” David Schmieder and James Teague wrote at the Defense Systems Information Analysis Center. “Unfortunately, that band is also one of the most difficult for detectors to work in because long-wavelength photons have lower energy than short-wavelength photons. So detecting LWIR photons also means detecting other low-energy products, such as latent heat-generated dark current and its associated noise.”

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50205
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

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

Postby ramana » 30 May 2018 21:41

So most likely the break through in the Nag sensor was the LWIR detection capability.

Thanks pravula for posting the article about different IR sensors.

What I know is LWIR also can penetrate the atmosphere and can be detected by satellites. Especially Missile launches.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50205
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

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

Postby ramana » 30 May 2018 21:42

nam, Tonbo discussion is fruitless. Lets not add to the noise.

sankum
BRFite
Posts: 538
Joined: 20 Dec 2004 21:45

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

Postby sankum » 01 Jun 2018 05:56

Tejas Facebook updates

Tejas - LCA Any news on SP-10?
Tejas - LCA It should come out soon Appx in a month’s time


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ashokk, Kakarat, nam, prat.patel and 64 guests