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

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 29 Nov 2018 01:22

SaiK wrote:better to return for reload.., and of course dogfight only to get a laser boresighter to go gatling !

If your opponent is kind enough to agree.

Katare · Post by **Katare** » 29 Nov 2018 03:44

This is what I know. It is called normal stall speed which is the low end of the low speed regime. At this speed (around 100KNT for most fighters) aircraft is permited +1 G maneuver. Cornor speed is the upper end of the low speed regime and defined by lowest speed (usually between 300-400kt) at which highest allowable G for the aircraft ( hence highest instantaneous turn rates) is allowed by the FCS.

Beyond these boundaries of G forces and respective speeds lies an aircrafts dreaded stall zone.

souravB · Post by **souravB** » 29 Nov 2018 04:27

Karan M wrote:The price will also obviously include the cost put in by HAL to the production lines. Don't just jump to conclusions based on one item. HAL is a commercial entity.

Karan Sir, I did not understand what do you mean by production lines. Can you please elaborate on that a little further.
Maybe my lack of knowledge is betraying me but AFAIK GoI is already paying HAL to setup production lines for Mk1 and being of same physical structure to Mk1 is it necessary to employ newer jigs or tooling to add to separate production cost? Newer LRUs might add to cost but outsourcing of structural and LRU components is ever going with Mk1 too and lower ordering of components jack up the price but by this much?
Newer tech and integration R&D takes money, but is it so that it balloons to double the initial cost?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 29 Nov 2018 07:19

souravB, Take a look at how much the engines and the radar will cost?
And yes govt gave Rs 1350 crores for the line in Nekkonda.
Its possible they might have to pay for the supply chain expansion.
Anyway we will find out more.

Also if you recall, HAl had submitted a simialr price early in the year and many experts said it was too high.

Eg.

https://bharatkarnad.com/2018/06/29/why ... t-is-high/

Then a committee was setup to go into the price structure and looks like it agreed.

nits · Post by **nits** » 29 Nov 2018 21:59

Process on induction of 231 Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) is in pipeline - Air Chief Marshal Dhanoa

Process on induction of 231 Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) is in pipeline. We are supposed to induct a number of fighters .We have floated request for information (RFI) for 114 fighter aircraft. There was a proposal to induct LCA in big numbers and with this total number of LCA squadron will go up to 12.”

LCA mark 1 in IOC configuration of one squadron of 20 aircrafts , LCA mark 1 in FOC configuration one squadron 20 aircrafts , LCA mark 1A four squadron 83 aircraft , LCA mark 2 six squadron 108 aircrafts. So total of 12 squadron and 231 aircraft , this will be the largest induction of indigenous aircraft ever in the country

nits · Post by **nits** » 29 Nov 2018 22:08

How Flying Daggers squadron of IAF is soaring with the Tejas

Today, the Flying Daggers squadron proudly stands as a hallmark of indigenisation, scripting new lessons in raising, maintaining and operating the Tejas, a desi flying machine that has caught the imagination of the nation.

The team is now focusing on training more Tejas pilots in both air combat and air-to-ground roles.

The Flying Daggers squadron is hopeful that the increase in number of pilots and Tejas aircraft will enhance the operational capabilities of the squadron.

The Flying Daggers now enjoy an envious operating environment and a modern squadron complex at AFS Sulur. Their move to the new base, with the Tejas, is a giant leap towards their re-establishment within the IAF as a formidable squadron.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 30 Nov 2018 00:45

FOC seems very likely by Dec-end. Software upgrades will continue to flow into flightline aircrafts periodically even after FOC.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 30 Nov 2018 00:47

Yes!!!! Thank you IR!

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 30 Nov 2018 00:49

souravB wrote:
Karan M wrote:The price will also obviously include the cost put in by HAL to the production lines. Don't just jump to conclusions based on one item. HAL is a commercial entity.
Karan Sir, I did not understand what do you mean by production lines. Can you please elaborate on that a little further.
Maybe my lack of knowledge is betraying me but AFAIK GoI is already paying HAL to setup production lines for Mk1 and being of same physical structure to Mk1 is it necessary to employ newer jigs or tooling to add to separate production cost? Newer LRUs might add to cost but outsourcing of structural and LRU components is ever going with Mk1 too and lower ordering of components jack up the price but by this much?
Newer tech and integration R&D takes money, but is it so that it balloons to double the initial cost?

How does GOI pay? It allows HAL to spend its own corpus developed via sales to GOI, on itself. It also injects additional funds via MOD. Wont HAL have to return its funds to its corporate account and to MOD?
Point is without knowing the exact specifics of how much HAL is spending, speculating on its amortization is pointless.
How HAL is distributing Mk1 and Mk1A costs, how much the line expansion costs, how much line change from Mk1 to Mk1A will cost.. all these matter.

nam · Post by **nam** » 30 Nov 2018 00:51

It shall be the culmination of a phenomenal journey.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 30 Nov 2018 00:55

ashishvikas wrote:Sp12 made its first flight today.

suryag wrote:SP12 completes first flight

From IDRW....so for what it is worth (FWIW), after all it is IDRW!!!!

LCA Tejas SP-12 successfully completes first flight
http://idrw.org/lca-tejas-sp-12-success ... st-flight/

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 30 Nov 2018 01:00

^^^ Page 1 of this dhaaga updated based on above. Please check. Take special note of sub-heading titled, Future Milestones Planned in 2018, 2019 and 2020.

Six Mk1s delivered to date (as of 29 Nov 2018), compared to 3 deliveries in 2017, two deliveries in 2016 and one delivery in 2014.

Keep it up!

Vips · Post by **Vips** » 30 Nov 2018 03:06

We have another 32 days to go before the calendar year is over. Would be super if we see one more Tejas roll off and take to the sky. Has any chaiwala delivered chai lately at the assembly line?

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 01 Dec 2018 17:26

From Writetake's tweet.

Here's #Tejas SP-12 during its maiden flight at OLD Airport in Bangalore on Nov 28. A rejuvenated #HAL is readying last 4 fighters from IOC basket now. SP-14 & 16 from LCA Div and SP-13 & SP-15 from Aircraft Divi next. SP-12 flight lasted for 33 min. #FlyingDaggers #IAF #AviGeeks https://t.co/QODnACp2qi

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 02 Dec 2018 00:20

Just to clarify... Even if these SPs are still not foc standard, they are still bvr capable, right?

Khalsa · Post by **Khalsa** » 02 Dec 2018 02:31

Rakesh wrote:^^^ Page 1 of this dhaaga updated based on above. Please check. Take special note of sub-heading titled, Future Milestones Planned in 2018, 2019 and 2020.

Six Mk1s delivered to date (as of 29 Nov 2018), compared to 3 deliveries in 2017, two deliveries in 2016 and one delivery in 2014.

Keep it up!

Noted and God Speed to them !!

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 02 Dec 2018 05:31

Cain Marko wrote:Just to clarify... Even if these SPs are still not foc standard, they are still bvr capable, right?

What range and target RCS?

We are still with 2032 and 50km capable derby.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 02 Dec 2018 06:07

Cain Marko wrote:Just to clarify... Even if these SPs are still not foc standard, they are still bvr capable, right?

Yes sir. Tejas engaged in BVR exercises in Gaganshakti.

lakshmanM · Post by **lakshmanM** » 02 Dec 2018 09:27

Saars, a question- Peak power for LCA's radar is 6.5kw (antenna could handle 10kw), antenna diameter is 650mm (larger than that of baander and MiG-29UPG/k/KUB's radar. Uttam with GaAs based SSPA (whose efficiency is significantly less than that of TWTA) and a smaller antenna was stated to be capable of tracking 2m2 target at 92km. Shouldn't existing radar on LCA be able to track a 2m2 target at 125-130km? What went wrong?

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 02 Dec 2018 11:48

As Ramana saar says: ask no unanswerable questions, and get no lies.

You guys should know this: nobody is going to tell you the actual range of the radar. I have requested people from ADA to monitor this thread (in an unofficial capacity). If anything critical gets leaked out into the public from here, it will be immediately deleted.

Actual range of radar against targets a strictly confidential secret.

This is all I know. And this is all I want to know. Before the quartz radome was inducted the range was around the range that Saik sahab wrote. After the quartz radome, the range is more than doubled. Every DRDO A2A missile will be integrated on the LCA: Astra Mk1, Mk2 and SFDR. So don't worry about range.

That will be all on this here.

nam · Post by **nam** » 02 Dec 2018 14:37

lakshmanM wrote:Saars, a question- Peak power for LCA's radar is 6.5kw (antenna could handle 10kw), antenna diameter is 650mm (larger than that of baander and MiG-29UPG/k/KUB's radar. Uttam with GaAs based SSPA (whose efficiency is significantly less than that of TWTA) and a smaller antenna was stated to be capable of tracking 2m2 target at 92km. Shouldn't existing radar on LCA be able to track a 2m2 target at 125-130km? What went wrong?

I have no idea about range in number, as I believe there are many factors.

However in general aesa radars have multi beam capability and as they are software driven, you could technically give more power to a specific beam.

Of course within the limit of each trm or pa.

So on paper the search or tracking range could be more or less if many beams are used at the same team.

Jf17 current radar search range is 80km, the proposed aesa is been advertised as 170km

nam · Post by **nam** » 02 Dec 2018 14:46

Indranil wrote: You guys should know this: nobody is going to tell you the actual range of the radar. I have requested people from ADA to monitor this thread (in an unofficial capacity).
.

You have opened a way to pass on our wishlist to ADA.

ADA, if you are reading this please request lrde to work on a GaN based radar for LCA #wetdreams

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 02 Dec 2018 17:10

lakshmanM wrote:Saars, a question- Peak power for LCA's radar is 6.5kw (antenna could handle 10kw), antenna diameter is 650mm (larger than that of baander and MiG-29UPG/k/KUB's radar. Uttam with GaAs based SSPA (whose efficiency is significantly less than that of TWTA) and a smaller antenna was stated to be capable of tracking 2m2 target at 92km. Shouldn't existing radar on LCA be able to track a 2m2 target at 125-130km? What went wrong?

I think you are confusing a bunch of things. The 92km is probably based on the AI seminar where the program director appears to state 115km for 5 sq mtr RCS.. we could be mishearing that, it could as well be 150km because that's what all the public literature states. Next, about GaAs SSPA having lower efficiency.. as versus a TWT is misleading, because it completely misses the point that the effective power available via the antenna should be considered.. not just at the source, because in conventional radars, lot of feed losses, and even on the receive side. The solid state AESAs avoid that and hence manage to be more efficient overall.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 02 Dec 2018 17:11

Indranil wrote:As Ramana saar says: ask no unanswerable questions, and get no lies.

You guys should know this: nobody is going to tell you the actual range of the radar. I have requested people from ADA to monitor this thread (in an unofficial capacity). If anything critical gets leaked out into the public from here, it will be immediately deleted.

Actual range of radar against targets a strictly confidential secret.

This is all I know. And this is all I want to know. Before the quartz radome was inducted the range was around the range that Saik sahab wrote. After the quartz radome, the range is more than doubled. Every DRDO A2A missile will be integrated on the LCA: Astra Mk1, Mk2 and SFDR. So don't worry about range.

That will be all on this here.

Well said.

ks_sachin · Post by **ks_sachin** » 02 Dec 2018 17:14

That said,

Are there efforts ongoing to fix the desi radome?
Or are we forever dependant on Chobham

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 02 Dec 2018 18:24

NAL is making ceramic radomes for Astra. They can be asked to take up a quartz radome too if GOI funds it.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 02 Dec 2018 19:34

nam wrote:.

ADA, if you are reading this please request lrde to work on a GaN based radar for LCA #wetdreams

nam, GaN it is... Chandrayan mission is already on it.

https://t.co/ZtiL8YswKl

ArjunPandit · Post by **ArjunPandit** » 02 Dec 2018 19:43

I wonder if those know stuff pity of smile at those who don't, esp such classified info.
ADA guys if you're reading this we're proud of you. Keep up the good work

nam · Post by **nam** » 02 Dec 2018 22:11

SaiK wrote:
nam wrote:.

ADA, if you are reading this please request lrde to work on a GaN based radar for LCA #wetdreams
nam, GaN it is... Chandrayan mission is already on it.

https://t.co/ZtiL8YswKl

Oh yeah, Gaetec has been given the tech for 10W X band GaN SSPA. What I don't know is if the TR module has been certified. 10W should be enough for jet radar, however SSPL has been working on improving the power rating.

Having a GaN would probably provide advantages in the power efficiency arena, however we need to sort out the software & algo part of things. It is fine to have GaAs for the time being. The A300 AWACS program is where it will be really useful. I believe DRDO has 40W S band TRM. It's chief said they were working on 110W. So we may have to wait.

Even then, putting in Uttam means we may have to change the BVR or work on integrating Derby with Uttam. It makes sense to go for 2052 to prevent delaying MK1A.

However having a GaN Uttam gives TFTA level bragging rights

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 02 Dec 2018 22:29

There are multiple elements out to make a full blown GaN radar and DRDO has it on its roadmap. Right now they are in development phase and proliferating GaAs radars.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 02 Dec 2018 22:50

GaN needs more power too. Auxiliary power needed

nam · Post by **nam** » 02 Dec 2018 23:03

SaiK wrote:GaN needs more power too. Auxiliary power needed

My impression is GaN is more power( hence thermal) efficient for a given power rating. Heat generated by GaN is less, so longer signal range. Receivers are more sensitive, as it has better thermal properties. This allows for more power to be pumped through the devices. DRDO built a 400W capable L band GaN device. It does not have anything close to that in GaAs.

So I am not sure why GaN would need more power compared to GaAs. It would make no sense to go for GaN, if it requires more power.

If you are saying TRMs of higher power rating can be created, then it is correct. If you mean for the same range, the amount of power required for GaN is more, then I believe it is not the case.

Haridas · Post by **Haridas** » 02 Dec 2018 23:20

Karan M wrote:I think you are confusing a bunch of things. The 92km is probably based on the AI seminar where the program director appears to state 115km for 5 sq mtr RCS.. we could be mishearing that, it could as well be 150km because that's what all the public literature states. Next, about GaAs SSPA having lower efficiency.. as versus a TWT is misleading, because it completely misses the point that the effective power available via the antenna should be considered.. not just at the source, because in conventional radars, lot of feed losses, and even on the receive side. The solid state AESAs avoid that and hence manage to be more efficient overall.

So true, people who work in this field know this uncomfortable level of loss that never goes away

.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 02 Dec 2018 23:38

nam wrote:
SaiK wrote:GaN needs more power too. Auxiliary power needed
My impression is GaN is more power( hence thermal) efficient for a given power rating. Heat generated by GaN is less, so longer signal range. Receivers are more sensitive, as it has better thermal properties. This allows for more power to be pumped through the devices. DRDO built a 400W capable L band GaN device. It does not have anything close to that in GaAs.

So I am not sure why GaN would need more power compared to GaAs. It would make no sense to go for GaN, if it requires more power.

If you are saying TRMs of higher power rating can be created, then it is correct. If you mean for the same range, the amount of power required for GaN is more, then I believe it is not the case.

You are right as long as you don't run into thermal limitations. One use case for GaN is that it is preffered when you are required to meet performance requirements where GaAs based solutions are unable to meet the needs due to power and size of the systems. USN's SPY-6 is a great example of this application as the performance requirement on the upgraded DDG-51 could not have been met with a 14 foot AESA built using GaA modules and there was no more space and power margin to accommodate a larger GaAs antenna.

However, there is usually a lack of application in cases where you want to match GaAs performance of an existing radar, where you are simply switching to something that is more expensive for no other reason (performance setting aside the higher bandwidth) besides regaining some power margins fore other sub-systems. I guess Space based applications are a good use case for such a move or perhaps comms and Jammers (US Army bought hundreds of GaN equipped jammers in the 2000s during OIF likely for this reason). Generally, for 99% of Military application GaN is the path chosen for higher performance or when you cannot meet performance requirements with GaAs given other constraints. It will be very rare to swap out GaAs systems with a matched performance GaN system while eating up the higher cost (I assume here that the end-user is satisfied with the projected MTBF and reliability of the GaAs devices but in cases where you are running into some thermal issues it may be better from a reliability perspective to use GaN but this will depend upon what the application is).

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 02 Dec 2018 23:59

Indranil wrote:
Cain Marko wrote:Just to clarify... Even if these SPs are still not foc standard, they are still bvr capable, right?
Yes sir. Tejas engaged in BVR exercises in Gaganshakti.

Thank you Indranil, that is good news.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 03 Dec 2018 00:00

SaiK wrote:
Cain Marko wrote:Just to clarify... Even if these SPs are still not foc standard, they are still bvr capable, right?
What range and target RCS?

We are still with 2032 and 50km capable derby.

All in time Saar but much better than original spec IOC if no bvr capability at all.

nam · Post by **nam** » 03 Dec 2018 00:49

There is the option of dual pulse Derby-ER, which according to a news reports is been planned on LCA. This one is a longer ranged version.

Regarding GaN radar on LCA, if we want better range with the existing power or want to reduce the antenna size to save weight by using higher powered(15 or 20W) TRM, then GaN radar might be an option.

The longer range might be requirement when SFDR comes along. If the existing GaAs Uttam meets the requirement, we many not see a GaN for a while.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 03 Dec 2018 01:04

^^ Better to first fully develop, test and integrate Uttam and put it into mass production and through iterative processes make it better. Choosing a more expensive, and technically challenging path will just mean more reliance on a foreign system which sort of defeats the purpose. A GaN based fighter radar is likely a decade away from being operational anywhere in the world and for good reasons - there are industrial costs to mass production and performance barriers when it comes to realizing maximum potential on a fighter. If Uttam can be mass produced, and a squadron of MK1s can be operationalized with it by mid 2020s then that will be a much bigger achievement then chasing bragging rights elsewhere but not reaping the operational advantages of the same until years later (The Eurofighter partners find themselves in that situation).BTW, 15-20W GaAs PAs have been available for a number of years so I highly doubt you would need to develop GaN in this range for the higher end requirements. On the GaN PA side 25 W X-band PAs have been the standard for a number of years with the cutting edge likely much higher than that since it is made by OEMs who do not sell B2B so no need to market.

nam · Post by **nam** » 03 Dec 2018 02:22

Yeah, that's true. Japanese have made available a 100W X band GaN for a while now!

Given the power restriction on LCA , there isn't much point reducing the number of TRM/antenna weight by using higher powered and expensive modules.

Other than bragging rights.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 03 Dec 2018 07:32

But dont succumb to Mk1a specs. Think Mk2/ of course OT here.