Tejas Mk.2: News & Discussions - 25 February 2018

Trikaal · Post by **Trikaal** » 02 Jun 2018 14:33

chola wrote: I hope the Mk2 is not used as some pie-in-the-sky end goal that cuts into the sales of the Mk1A. (“Let’s cap our Mk1A buy at 84 and wait for the super Mini-Rafale coming down the pike.”)

Sorry to say, but that is exactly what will happen. IAF had to be arm twisted to order these 84 Mk1A. I can't envision a follow up order for Mk1A. After this, IAF will accept nothing short of Mk2.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 02 Jun 2018 14:39

A note in a report on AMCA being farmed out to the pvt. sector and assembled at the Sulur IAF base , says that 3-4 years is being given for the roll-out of the first prototype ( after official kick-off) and 6 years for flight testing before it enters production.The report hoped that the mistakes made with the LCA would be lessons well learnt , not to suffer the same fate.

From this timeframe, and one would require at least 8 to 10 prototypes before the final config. of an AMCA Mk-1 is determined, It is around 2030 only that we can expect the AMCA in series production.This leaves an entire decade in which the IAF will have no stealth bird ( if we don't acquire the SU-57) while the PLAAF and PAF will definitely field a Chin S-bird.

As I've said before, leveraging as much stealth features into the Mk-2 which requires a fair amount of redesign shoiuld be endeavoured. It could serve as our interim light stealth bird- a niche that faces no global competition and could have excellent export potential .In 5 to 6 yrs. time, annual LCA production from at least 2 lines would be between 24 to 32 annually.Tata's have started delivering Apache fuselages.They or another entity could be tasked with LCA production just as HAL has offered ALH Dhruv to ghe pvt. sector too.

A third line in the pvt. sector could give us enough annual production to start exporting both LCA Mk-1 as as well as LCA-S if need be.By 2030 we would've replaced all legacy Bisons plus have at least 15 sqds. in service.

Trikaal · Post by **Trikaal** » 03 Jun 2018 10:24

Prioroty for Mk2 is to get in the sky. Stealth features is mission creep which will delay the aircraft long enough for F-16,etc to make a sale. We will be alright without a stealth plane. Self reliance is more important.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 03 Jun 2018 18:03

That's a good point but from regular info being divulged, we've developed a range of composite materials, etc. which could be used extensively on the MK-2.With fuselage tweaking reqd. for accommodating a larger engine, the shaping of the nose could perhaps be altered as in the AMCA models. The Russians are supposed to be using some 5th-gen tech on their SU-35s too.There was also earlier reports about LCA intakes requiring redesigning.There is enough time to undertake some work on the same and make use of the opportunity.In any case, Mk-1A production is goinv to be with us for at least 5 years before MK-2 is fit for production.

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 03 Jun 2018 19:03

Trikaal wrote:
chola wrote: I hope the Mk2 is not used as some pie-in-the-sky end goal that cuts into the sales of the Mk1A. (“Let’s cap our Mk1A buy at 84 and wait for the super Mini-Rafale coming down the pike.”)
Sorry to say, but that is exactly what will happen. IAF had to be arm twisted to order these 84 Mk1A. I can't envision a follow up order for Mk1A. After this, IAF will accept nothing short of Mk2.

You have evidence of this?

Haridas · Post by **Haridas** » 03 Jun 2018 23:26

Philip wrote:That's a good point but from regular info being divulged, we've developed a range of composite materials, etc. which could be used extensively on the MK-2.With fuselage tweaking reqd. for accommodating a larger engine, the shaping of the nose could perhaps be altered as in the AMCA models. The Russians are supposed to be using some 5th-gen tech on their SU-35s too.There was also earlier reports about LCA intakes requiring redesigning.There is enough time to undertake some work on the same and make use of the opportunity.In any case, Mk-1A production is goinv to be with us for at least 5 years before MK-2 is fit for production.

Philip saar, what you propose should be called Tejas MK-2A. It would be a good idea to run the mk2A program parallel to Tejas Mk2, if India can afford talent and money to ramp up its MIComplex. Heck let Pvt sector take it up on cost plus basis; can you find any Pvt sector takers?

Leave Mk2 on its tight leash schedule.

Trikaal · Post by **Trikaal** » 04 Jun 2018 08:00

deejay wrote: You have evidence of this?

No, it's what I think will happen. Just a prediction based on prior experience.

Trikaal · Post by **Trikaal** » 04 Jun 2018 08:11

Philip wrote:That's a good point but from regular info being divulged, we've developed a range of composite materials, etc. which could be used extensively on the MK-2.With fuselage tweaking reqd. for accommodating a larger engine, the shaping of the nose could perhaps be altered as in the AMCA models. The Russians are supposed to be using some 5th-gen tech on their SU-35s too.There was also earlier reports about LCA intakes requiring redesigning.There is enough time to undertake some work on the same and make use of the opportunity.In any case, Mk-1A production is goinv to be with us for at least 5 years before MK-2 is fit for production.

What you propose is possible if IAF takes full control of project and gets involved deeply in its development, like US, Russia, China, or even Pakistan. Unfortunately, that is not the case in India. IAF acts more like a customer than a developer(it's not entirely their fault. Their mandate is defined in such a way and the govt needs to take steps to change this.) If ADA decides to include some stealth features, then there will always be the question of 'not enough stealth'. Costs will rise because of stealth features. People will start comparing it with F-35 and find out all the ways it falls short. Then someone will say, 'it's a three legged cheetah. Range isn't enough, power is low, Even the stealth doesn't work. '

Incremental development is good but Indian military industrial complex doesn't seem to have reached a point where it would be successful. What we need right now is small, achievable goals which are attained in a reasonable timeline to establish credibility, capacity and improve confidence in home grown systems. Moonshots can wait.

kit · Post by **kit** » 05 Jun 2018 12:34

Trikaal wrote:Prioroty for Mk2 is to get in the sky. Stealth features is mission creep which will delay the aircraft long enough for F-16,etc to make a sale. We will be alright without a stealth plane. Self reliance is more important.

Quite agree .. just like a silent eagle .. there could be a " silent Tejas" in the future

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 07 Jun 2018 20:01

MOD NOTE: I cleaned up the thread. Any more posts on Tejas Re-engining will earn warning. Please go to "Design your own aircraft" thread. All available engines have been tried to be mated with LCA by now. One only has to look past pages for all possible angles. No point in increasing post count unnecessarily.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 11 Jun 2018 23:59

First, I thought this was a fanboy art, Then I saw the DRDO logo at the top right corner. I still do not know what to make of it.

https://twitter.com/IndianDefenceRA/sta ... 5255657472 --> LCA Navy Mk 2 new design? Just look at the canopy.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 12 Jun 2018 00:24

No. This has been the design for the past two years, Admiral

. IT is called V0.06L. It was created with consultancy from Cassidian. Wind tunnel tests done.

The actual one will have slight modifications than the one you see here. LCA Navy is getting back on track. Pressure from upstairs. Thorns removed.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 12 Jun 2018 00:28

Wow! That is a cool design. My bad

IR, will it have a frameless canopy as in the picture above? I know that has no bearing on anything, but it just looks nice.

This is the last picture I saw of the Navy Mk2....so when I saw the above, I was surprised.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 12 Jun 2018 01:10

Will have frame.

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 12 Jun 2018 03:43

I hope it has 1200 kg more internal fuel. It will replace everything in inventory at that point barring the MKI.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 12 Jun 2018 04:57

WE have to wait for the 16.5 Ton specs to come out. Otherwise, we would be discussing an older spec.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 12 Jun 2018 07:45

change over to wingtip rails and that pic looks very much like a rafale.

the F18 E/F was a big leap over the F18 A/B/C/D - a much bigger plane, retaining just the basic shapes .... hope we can do it fast.

Trikaal · Post by **Trikaal** » 12 Jun 2018 09:28

NICE!!!! If we can get LCA Navy Mk2 into production by 2025, then it is possible to build INS Vishal as a carrier specifically for it.

hanumadu · Post by **hanumadu** » 12 Jun 2018 16:56

Generally, it is hard to scale down or miniaturize things. But scaling up from Tejas Mk1 to Tejas Mk2 should be easier than building Mk1. Also more weight and volume means more margins for trade offs like less weapons for more fuel or bigger or over weight engine.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 12 Jun 2018 17:29

Rakesh wrote:First, I thought this was a fanboy art, Then I saw the DRDO logo at the top right corner. I still do not know what to make of it.

https://twitter.com/IndianDefenceRA/sta ... 5255657472 --> LCA Navy Mk 2 new design? Just look at the canopy.

The Navy Prefers Twin Engine Fighter on Deck , So even though this bird looks good on specs it wont fly much in front of our Admiral , Unless ofcourse we have Adm Koshy leading us.

dinesha · Post by **dinesha** » 12 Jun 2018 19:43

X-post..

https://www.theweek.in/theweek/current/ ... -2019.html

Rafale delivery will commence in September 2019 Air Chief Marshal B.S. Dhanoa

In April, the Indian Air Force carried out the largest war games in the last three decades by bringing together more than 1,100 aircraft. The exercise, named Gagan Shakti, was used to test the IAF’s combat readiness for a short and intense war. It boosted the confidence of the Air Force, especially with regard to fighting a two-front war. At the biannual meeting of top IAF commanders held on May 31, Defence Minister Nirmala Sitharaman praised the force for carrying out such a major exercise without any glitches. She said the focus of the exercise was to draw lessons for evolving the doctrinal loop of the IAF.

If all the inductions take place as planned, the IAF is expected to achieve its authorised strength of fighter squadrons by the end of the 15th Plan (2032).
The man who was in charge of the exercise was Air Chief Marshal B.S. Dhanoa. In an exclusive interview with THE WEEK, he said the exercise demonstrated the IAF’s capability to achieve and sustain a very high serviceability of aircraft and systems. Dhanoa, however, expressed concern about the depleting combat strength of the IAF, and said the force would reach its desired strength only by 2032. At present, the IAF has 31 fighter squadrons, but it needs at least 42 to fight a two-front war. In comparison, Pakistan has 25 combat squadrons, while China has 60.

Dhanoa defended the Rafale deal by saying that there was “no overpricing” and that the government negotiated a very good deal. He said the delivery of the Rafale jets was progressing as planned and they were expected to be inducted into the IAF between 2019 and 2022.

Excerpts:

How was the IAF’s experience with Gagan Shakti?

It was one of the largest exercises conducted by the IAF, considering the scale of asset utilisation and manpower participation. The IAF has achieved more than its laid-down objectives for the exercise. The aim was to test our real time coordination, deployment and employment of air power in a short and intense battle scenario. The logistic stamina, operational logistics, supply chain management, op readiness and prolonged sustenance of high tempo operations were put to test.

What are the lessons learnt from the exercise?

The IAF demonstrated its capability to achieve and sustain a very high serviceability of aircraft and systems. During the exercise, the IAF carried out missions across all spectrums of flying operations. We carried out the exercise in close coordination with the Army and the Navy. The capability to conduct special operations by transport and helicopter fleets like large-scale para drop, inter-valley troop transfer, and the utilisation of advanced landing grounds were practiced towards the delivery of combat power, in the shortest possible time. The IAF also demonstrated the enhanced reach of combat platforms in the maritime domain, while operating from bases in southern India. We have learnt valuable lessons in these spheres and there have been many takeaways from this exercise that will be incorporated on priority.

Has the report of the umpires nominated to judge the exercise been finalised?

Critical analysis of the exercise is underway to highlight the areas of concern and to suggest measures to improve our combat potential. The improvement of operational efficiency is an ongoing process. This exercise has brought out many important aspects of operations, which would help hone the combat potential of the IAF further.

How do you react to the dwindling combat squadrons of the IAF?

The IAF is the guardian of the Indian skies. We are ready 24x7 to respond to any hostile situation, with our available resources. As far as the drawdown in the strength of the fighter squadrons is concerned, it is being given due emphasis. We are upgrading MiG-29, Jaguar and Mirage-2000 aircraft in a phased manner, as part of obsolescence management. The induction of 36 Rafale aircraft will commence by September 2019, and will significantly enhance our operational capability. The induction of the remaining Su-30 MKI aircraft [of the total 272] from Hindustan Aeronautics Limited will be completed by 2020. The induction of the 40 indigenous light combat aircraft (LCA) Tejas is also ongoing. Additionally, the RFP (Request for Proposal) for the procurement of 83 LCA Mk1A was issued last December.

When is the IAF expected to achieve its required combat strength?

The next step would be the design and development of the LCA Mk2 which has been renamed as medium weight fighter (MWF). Further, RFI (Request for Information) for 110 new fighters has been issued on April 6, 2018. If all the inductions take place as planned, the IAF is expected to achieve its authorised strength of fighter squadrons by the end of the 15th Plan (2032).

Do you expect timely delivery of the Rafale jets?

All activities related to the induction of the 36 Rafale aircraft are progressing as planned. The delivery will commence in September 2019, and will be complete by April 2022.

Is the IAF prepared for a two-front war?

The IAF is capable of meeting every challenge that our country is likely to face.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 12 Jun 2018 21:27

>> LCA Mk2 which has been renamed as medium weight fighter (MWF)

(trying to digest this while worrying about engine power but tentatively dancing inside)

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 12 Jun 2018 21:49

IF that saves buying another 125 Medium Weight Fighter then Tejas Mk2 is most welcome , If IAF says its medium weight then likely it would replace M2K , Mig-29 and Jags in the future.

High time we have a 90 kn Kaveri-Snecma ready for this program so that it flies with indiginous engine.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 12 Jun 2018 22:03

Rahul M wrote:>> LCA Mk2 which has been renamed as medium weight fighter (MWF)

(trying to digest this while worrying about engine power but tentatively dancing inside)

I don't like it. We are trying to match brochures.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 12 Jun 2018 23:27

let's forget the f414EPE, the engine we can be relatively sure of getting is the f414 (58/98). what is the MTOW this can support without making the a/c a flying pig ? can we have an estimate of that ?
the Mk1 is MTOW:13.5t, powered by F404(54/90)

if Mk2 becomes something like the M2000, MTOW:17t, powered by M53(64/95) i.e Mk2, MTOW:17t, powered by F414(58/98) it won't be so bad I guess.
for comparison, the J-10 early variants : MTOW:19t, powered by AL31(80/125)

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 12 Jun 2018 23:54

The Mirage 2000 is a not a good benchmark to start off with in 2019. Even in it's day the Mirage was not exactly energetic.

With an MTOW of 17.5 Tons, we are speaking of an empty weight of 8 tons (at least). This means that with just 2 tons of fuel and no payload, it would go below the coveted 1.0 TWR. The expected clean TOW would be close to 12 Tons. Add a ton of A2A missiles and you are speaking of a TWR of 0.77.

Everything, that is criticized of the Gripen E for trying to be what it is not supposed to be (a medium weight fighter) is now true of LCA Mk2 (even more).

Yes, we gain the flexibility of being the bomb truck.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 12 Jun 2018 23:58

*We need the bomb truck*

That's what I can definitely say. We need a decently manouverable platform with state of the art avionics, a very wide range of weapons and sensors, a large payload and a large mission radius which can do a range of missions and have a high serviceability.

More than that is icing on the cake.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 13 Jun 2018 00:02

We need the desi F-16 - a fighter which can be produced in the hundreds & continue to evolve (say lowered RCS tweaks, plus more advanced EW suites) and give the IAF the 300 platform bulk around which the IAF can build its combat edge around, with the same squadron capable of doing SEAD, datalinked BVR, long range Recce, EW (escort jamming), ESM (snoop around), IFR (fuel other fighters), act as CAP (with state of the art 5G CCM HMS), PGM strike, anti-ship missions... the list goes on and on and on.. imagine some 300 aircraft of this sort in the IAF, affordable, high-uptimes & the huge boost in IAF combat power as a result.

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 13 Jun 2018 00:06

Most sorties will not be fully loaded with munitions. Most will have 1000-15000 pounds of A-G with wing tip missiles and lots of fuel. So it doesn't need to have TW ratio of 1 in every situation. It is okay to be laden down when delivering munitions in a sanitized air space. Plus there is a uprated EJ200 in the works for the Turkish TF-X contract. The wet thrust is closer to 111KN. Dry thrust unknown.

So I think that if LCA mk-2 become MCA, the orders for LCA Mk1A will have to increase. What do you all think?

Kakarat · Post by **Kakarat** » 13 Jun 2018 02:20

+1
If Tejas MK-II becomes MCA then LCA Tejas MK-IA orders have to increase and both MK-I & MK-II should be built simultaneously and the 110 fighter import should be abandoned

Trikaal · Post by **Trikaal** » 13 Jun 2018 07:09

The only solution for TWR problem that I see is just make it twin-engined. Navy will also be happy. There will be power to spare if tomorrow IAF wants something new on the aircraft. No one will have problems regarding range, payload, etc.Either that or follow the chinese example and use the AL-31 engine.

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 13 Jun 2018 07:38

I think just adding another engine will require another 10-15 years, the timeline for AMCA.. Again, best is the enemy of good enough. Let these puppies slide and let IN live with single engine for now. It will probably be better than some other two engines.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 13 Jun 2018 08:18

They should have
1. Tejas MK 1A
2. Tejas MK2 or MWF with GE F 414
3. MCA (Twin engined cousin of Rafale - Navalized as NMCA) 2x GE F414, single or twin tail config
4. AMCA - 4.75+++ (Can't call it 5th gen without supercruise)

No more imports across the board needed after this. The heavy end - there are already enough MKIs

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 13 Jun 2018 08:50

as per a article in ET today the PAKFA deal is cancelled, with the $250 mil paid forfeited and a vague statement that we will buy it as is, later, if there is a need for it and its techs are proven.

IAF expressed reservations in a PMO level meeting about the plane, despite its list of some 40 improvements
Dr Christopher said DRDO was in process of developing all 5th gen technologies needed for amca and beyond

might mean some more rafale over next decade.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 13 Jun 2018 09:20

https://m.economictimes.com/news/defenc ... 214939.cms

MWF.. sounds more DDM-ish than what ADA would have called it.

Suddenly it is all about boxing class convention.

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 13 Jun 2018 11:05

Rahul M wrote:let's forget the f414EPE, the engine we can be relatively sure of getting is the f414 (58/98). what is the MTOW this can support without making the a/c a flying pig ? can we have an estimate of that ?
the Mk1 is MTOW:13.5t, powered by F404(54/90)

if Mk2 becomes something like the M2000, MTOW:17t, powered by M53(64/95) i.e Mk2, MTOW:17t, powered by F414(58/98) it won't be so bad I guess.
for comparison, the J-10 early variants : MTOW:19t, powered by AL31(80/125)

Lets wait for empty weight number. MTOW is not a good criteria for comparison. If the empty weight is 7.5T or thereabout we do not have to worry about T:W ratio at MTOW because it will rarely fly at MTOW in warlike situation and even if it takes off at MTOW by the time it reaches contested airspace it would have spent quite a bit of fuel already. With 7.5T empty weight it doesn't have to worry about agility in A2A mode (lets not forget there is going to be significant aero efficiency improvement so even without commensurate hike in thrust, it will be more agile than MK1). And preferred A2G load out while flying in contested airspace is most likely 2-4x1000lbs+2BVR+2CCM. That's way below MTOW. And if it flies in uncontested airspace it doesn't really matter it its flying brick or most agile fighter in bomb truck mode. 17T would be a brochure figure like what Gripen or F16 publicize. So we need not be bothered about it much. It will remain in brochures for all practical purposes. But what if offers is all the flexibility to IAF wants and kills Gripen NG/F16 acquisition. In fact I hope they inflate all the spec figures to match or even exceed all comparable jets. It would be a good psy ops tool.

Let me reiterate, I trust IAF that it will not accept any less agile fighter than MK1 when they have had whole lot of complaints with MK1 itself.

Trikaal · Post by **Trikaal** » 13 Jun 2018 18:47

Singha wrote:as per a article in ET today the PAKFA deal is cancelled, with the $250 mil paid forfeited and a vague statement that we will buy it as is, later, if there is a need for it and its techs are proven.

Good! Fat needed to be trimmed. We are cash strapped as is. We can't support 4 aircraft development at the same time. Not even the richest countries can. Even now, we have at least 3 aircrafts being developed- Mk1A, Mk2 and AMCA. At least now all the money will go in local development. As I said before, it doesn't matter if Pakfa is better than AMCA, we need to develop local products. China made their first fifth gen aircraft. Now one can argue about how good it is, but no one can deny that the next one they make will be much better because of the development of technologies and their MIC. We have to catch up, and AMCA, not Pakfa is the answer.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 26 Jun 2018 00:21

Pl ignore if already posted
X posting from mk1 dhaaga/

LCA Tejas Gears up for Aerial Refuelling
http://www.aeromag.in/aerospacesingle.php?aero=271

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 08 Jul 2018 07:29

http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-mu ... nt-2634297
The newer one is designed for lighter platforms like Mig 29 or even India's indigenous Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) - Tejas. Efforts are being made to increase the range of missile from 290 kilometre to 415 km and even beyond, he said.

obviously, we are not talking the lighter version for that kind of a range.. but why not? in a buddy mode, we are talking eh!

So, LCA Mk2 better buck up for longer ranged radar systems onboard.

Eric Leiderman · Post by **Eric Leiderman** » 31 Aug 2018 02:00

The M2K should have a higher thrust engine than the f414 reasons below. we need a power plant with 130 kn of thrust
In an ideal senario it should be reaching FOC in 10 years
In that timeframe the MMRCA II aircraft will be well into the induction phase with the airforce.
Hence in many respects it must be superior to what the firangs offer, Or else the same rona dhona of the import lobby, three legged cheetha etc.

First and foremost it should be inducted in 10 years
It should have range and payload comparable to the f16.
It should have supercruise.
Its radar cross section has to be lower.
Its price should be comparable
I am quite sure in that time frame our domestic aveonic accessories will be comparable to what is being inducted with firang maal.
It should be cross pollinated with the accesories that the french damsel has up her skirt. This will bring to bring commonality and radar suppression techniques to our forces and will reduce rejection/lower nos being inducted.