Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
@8:25, Chief is not very enthusiastic about Mk2. Says there may be a place for Mk2 depending on AMCA availability and we will take a call in due course. First IAF said 200+ Mk2 before MRCA 3 yrs ago, then went down to 6 sq/108 Mk2 ~1.5yrs yrs ago after MRCA, now they are doubtful even if there is a need. I hope MRCA goes down in flames with endless RFP/chai biscuit.
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
If 114 foreign fighters are imported MK2 is dead, better for 18+18 Rafales, attrition replacement of Mig29 + Su 30 if the Russians are reasonable.
-
- BRFite -Trainee
- Posts: 40
- Joined: 16 Sep 2018 14:55
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
It seems that order for 83 mk1a is given to convince Govt to buy more rafales. Hamne tumhari suni ab tum hamari suno.sivab wrote:@8:25, Chief is not very enthusiastic about Mk2. Says there may be a place for Mk2 depending on AMCA availability and we will take a call in due course. First IAF said 200+ Mk2 before MRCA 3 yrs ago, then went down to 6 sq/108 Mk2 ~1.5yrs yrs ago after MRCA, now they are doubtful even if there is a need. I hope MRCA goes down in flames with endless RFP/chai biscuit.
Last edited by Rakesh on 07 Feb 2021 20:12, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Please do not requote pictures or videos when replying. Post Edited.
Reason: Please do not requote pictures or videos when replying. Post Edited.
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
That is a bit surprising and then again maybe not.... Perhaps the resources at ADA/HALwould be better being pooled into AMCA rather than being spread thin. HAL was talking about rolling out mk2 in 18 months.
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 5393
- Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
Which is why I said many moons ago that the mk2 should have been amca lite....aka tedbf. But alas...sivab wrote:@8:25, Chief is not very enthusiastic about Mk2. Says there may be a place for Mk2 depending on AMCA availability and we will take a call in due course. First IAF said 200+ Mk2 before MRCA 3 yrs ago, then went down to 6 sq/108 Mk2 ~1.5yrs yrs ago after MRCA, now they are doubtful even if there is a need. I hope MRCA goes down in flames with endless RFP/chai biscuit.
Last edited by Rakesh on 07 Feb 2021 20:12, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Please do not requote pictures or videos when replying. Post Edited.
Reason: Please do not requote pictures or videos when replying. Post Edited.
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
Yep. There seems to be a place for 6 squadrons of 4th Gen medium combat aircraft as a gap filler. Not more. AMCA 5th Gen is what is sought after.Aditya_V wrote:If 114 foreign fighters are imported MK2 is dead, better for 18+18 Rafales, attrition replacement of Mig29 + Su 30 if the Russians are reasonable.
The question now is will the MWF project deliver in time? The timelines overlap, with AMCA following a few years after. The IAF hint is that they would wait for AMCA if they are going to get it by 2030/32.
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
Ok this is how hard to die down speculations get started.
His says clearly his future focal point is AMCA and to reach there, he might need the Mk2 to fill gaps. He did not drop any numbers of Mk2 he would need. Of course. He is not going to say “I am going to order 200 mk2 right now” of a design that has not yet flown. He says clearly the Mk2 will fill the gap between the time of AMCA’s arrival and now. Nowhere he says he is not happy with design or timelines or competencies or cheetah-on-wheelchair type comments. So why this sort of extrapolation?
Let us wait for this terrific looking craft to take to the skies
The bolded part is sheer speculation. Nothing that the chief said in the video conveys that, unless we expect a busy Air Chief Marshall of one of the world’s most powerful airforce be chirpy after a long day with a mask on.sivab wrote:@8:25, Chief is not very enthusiastic about Mk2. Says there may be a place for Mk2 depending on AMCA availability and we will take a call in due course. First IAF said 200+ Mk2 before MRCA 3 yrs ago, then went down to 6 sq/108 Mk2 ~1.5yrs yrs ago after MRCA, now they are doubtful even if there is a need. I hope MRCA goes down in flames with endless RFP/chai biscuit.
His says clearly his future focal point is AMCA and to reach there, he might need the Mk2 to fill gaps. He did not drop any numbers of Mk2 he would need. Of course. He is not going to say “I am going to order 200 mk2 right now” of a design that has not yet flown. He says clearly the Mk2 will fill the gap between the time of AMCA’s arrival and now. Nowhere he says he is not happy with design or timelines or competencies or cheetah-on-wheelchair type comments. So why this sort of extrapolation?
Let us wait for this terrific looking craft to take to the skies
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
Seen that video. Very pragmatic view of the chief as regarding future acquisitions. If the AMCA comes earlier and this being the most desirable option, there will be more numbers. The Mk2 also has its place in the filling number but not to the exclusion of it.sivab wrote:@8:25, Chief is not very enthusiastic about Mk2. Says there may be a place for Mk2 depending on AMCA availability and we will take a call in due course. First IAF said 200+ Mk2 before MRCA 3 yrs ago, then went down to 6 sq/108 Mk2 ~1.5yrs yrs ago after MRCA, now they are doubtful even if there is a need. I hope MRCA goes down in flames with endless RFP/chai biscuit.
Last edited by Rakesh on 07 Feb 2021 20:13, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Please do not requote pictures or videos when replying. Post Edited.
Reason: Please do not requote pictures or videos when replying. Post Edited.
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
The chief is implying the numbers will depend on the state of AMCA project. IAF is not going to replace mig29, m2k, jag with AMCA.
He has also committed to 126 AMCA. But then we have a habit of creating outrage, where none exists.
For me the most interesting part was where he mentions, amca is already delayed. I can now sense urgency about amca. A realisation that AMCA should have been approved much earlier. We don't want Su57 and F35 has lot of strings around S400. With Chinis on the border with J20 and potentially J31 with PAF, I sense urgency..
This is required to get ccs approval.without money, it is all hot air.
He has also committed to 126 AMCA. But then we have a habit of creating outrage, where none exists.
For me the most interesting part was where he mentions, amca is already delayed. I can now sense urgency about amca. A realisation that AMCA should have been approved much earlier. We don't want Su57 and F35 has lot of strings around S400. With Chinis on the border with J20 and potentially J31 with PAF, I sense urgency..
This is required to get ccs approval.without money, it is all hot air.
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
The elephant in the room is the mess with the FGFA which cost precious time. The AMCA push from the AF is understandable but the MK2 is a easy follow on to the 1A. I think the Chief was only talking in terms of numbers and not the program itself.
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
Thank you. Great post.hnair wrote:Ok this is how hard to die down speculations get started.
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
This quote from the Chief will end the speculation.
https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/135 ... 23169?s=20 ---> So, the Air Chief - ACM Bhadauria - said this the other day: "Then we will also have the LCA Mk-2 that will be a further development of Mk-1A. It will fill the gap between Mk-1A and AMCA."
And I would say: Exactly.
https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/135 ... 23169?s=20 ---> So, the Air Chief - ACM Bhadauria - said this the other day: "Then we will also have the LCA Mk-2 that will be a further development of Mk-1A. It will fill the gap between Mk-1A and AMCA."
And I would say: Exactly.
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
Thank you for cutting this down.Rakesh wrote:This quote from the Chief will end the speculation.
https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/135 ... 23169?s=20 ---> So, the Air Chief - ACM Bhadauria - said this the other day: "Then we will also have the LCA Mk-2 that will be a further development of Mk-1A. It will fill the gap between Mk-1A and AMCA."
And I would say: Exactly.
We should be celebrating that the chief has thrown everything including the kitchen sink to make this happen (as per protocols and time).
Now the onus is on HAL & ADA to make a fruitful flight happen on 4th of January 2023 for the Tejas Mk2
This aero India was one of the best.
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
Some interesting information about the radar in it
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
We were standing in the middle with people walking into the frame. Questions were on the phone. And i'm not used to being on camera
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
Can’t complain about the good content though
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
Points from interview
-Radome is 27cm smaller than Tejs mk1/a but carries higher 992 TRM as compared to 780 in mk1a
-3 weapon stations rated for 1800kg payload
-low frequency jammer pod will be carried on centreline weapon station.
- fuselage 1300 litre external fuel tank supersonic.
-Radome is 27cm smaller than Tejs mk1/a but carries higher 992 TRM as compared to 780 in mk1a
-3 weapon stations rated for 1800kg payload
-low frequency jammer pod will be carried on centreline weapon station.
- fuselage 1300 litre external fuel tank supersonic.
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
Thanks Prasad for a informative interview with new information.
You have pictures of infoboard specifying empty weigtht, clean take off weight of Tejas mk2 then please post it. No one has taken photos of infoboards.
Srai you ended up shooting the messenger.
You have pictures of infoboard specifying empty weigtht, clean take off weight of Tejas mk2 then please post it. No one has taken photos of infoboards.
Srai you ended up shooting the messenger.
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
For comparison
the prototype KF-X AESA radar had around 1,088 Transmitter-Receiver Module (TRM). By 2023, the number is expected to increase by 20% to have around 1,200-1,300 modules. (F-22's radar has 2,000 and F-35's radar has 1,200).The KF-X AESA radar can detect and track hundreds of ground targets, and this capability can be applied to hunting down North Korea's transporter erector launchers (TEL). The radar has air-to-air, air-to-ground, and air-to-sea modes, which can be used simultaneously with maximum detection range of around 200 km.
https://www.defenseworld.net/news/27586#.YCJm-ZNzbG8
the prototype KF-X AESA radar had around 1,088 Transmitter-Receiver Module (TRM). By 2023, the number is expected to increase by 20% to have around 1,200-1,300 modules. (F-22's radar has 2,000 and F-35's radar has 1,200).The KF-X AESA radar can detect and track hundreds of ground targets, and this capability can be applied to hunting down North Korea's transporter erector launchers (TEL). The radar has air-to-air, air-to-ground, and air-to-sea modes, which can be used simultaneously with maximum detection range of around 200 km.
https://www.defenseworld.net/news/27586#.YCJm-ZNzbG8
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
Great work, Thank YouPrasad wrote:
Some interesting information about the radar in it
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
Prasad very great work. This video deserves to be in the first page. Request to Admin, please do the needful.Prasad wrote:Some interesting information about the radar in it
From the video you can tell that the interviewer is not the usual media wallah (and not because he is fidgeting or there should have been more slick post edit of the video etc), but because of the quality of question. I doubt any rndtv or coupta or anyone would have even 100th of brain to ask 1/10th of the questions that were asked.
I am little disappointed on decrease in radar size, but I guess we have kept MK2 very close to MK1 where possible (main wing design, radome etc.) to reduce risk and time over run. (Another way to think is that MK1 has a kicka$$ radar aperture) With tech development, perhaps a smaller radar aperture will give the same or better performance. It will still not be our premium plane when it enters service (Rafale and upgraded SU30MKI will have that honor), and should be sufficient in that role. But it will certainly raise the bar in medium category, with weapon system etc on par with Rafale/SU30MKI.
The game changer is the AMCA - When introduced it will be our best fighter (unless in the meantime we end up buying SU-57 or F-35s). With LCA mk1a we are taking care of light fighter within IAF, and with LCA mk2 we are taking care of the medium category. AMCA will close the loop with heavy/most advanced segment of IAF.
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
Prasad, Thanks for the very good and more importantly, informative, interview.
The questions asked were quite specific and detailed as well, and it's quite evident that a good amount of preparation has gone behind them - class apart from what we generally see/get from other interviewers.
Of course being part of BRF helps, but still preparation is vital as time available (and also the interviewee attention span) is not unlimited and quality of questions are vital in maintaining it.
Thanks again, and please keep it up!!
*Note - Though I's expecting some more questions on UREP based "Aesa"-RWJ (like what's the plan of locating them - like at the base of the rudder, any plans of having digital RWRs to supplement them, any plans of "integrating" (like in one unit) the RWJ and MAWS sensors etc etc etc)
Maybe next time.
The questions asked were quite specific and detailed as well, and it's quite evident that a good amount of preparation has gone behind them - class apart from what we generally see/get from other interviewers.
Of course being part of BRF helps, but still preparation is vital as time available (and also the interviewee attention span) is not unlimited and quality of questions are vital in maintaining it.
Thanks again, and please keep it up!!
*Note - Though I's expecting some more questions on UREP based "Aesa"-RWJ (like what's the plan of locating them - like at the base of the rudder, any plans of having digital RWRs to supplement them, any plans of "integrating" (like in one unit) the RWJ and MAWS sensors etc etc etc)
Maybe next time.
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
Check this out you noobs !
Put her in charge of PR d Media releases please
Put her in charge of PR d Media releases please
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
Thanks for the kind words guys.
From the Mig 27 & Mig 29 upgrades, we can safely guess that we should see two forward facing APAs and one rear facing array for jamming & fine direction finding with the rwrs doing the bulk of detection. In the video, he makes mention of maws locations too i think. Some of these will be co-located like on the raffy on the tail.maitya wrote:Prasad, Thanks for the very good and more importantly, informative, interview.
The questions asked were quite specific and detailed as well, and it's quite evident that a good amount of preparation has gone behind them - class apart from what we generally see/get from other interviewers.
Of course being part of BRF helps, but still preparation is vital as time available (and also the interviewee attention span) is not unlimited and quality of questions are vital in maintaining it.
Thanks again, and please keep it up!!
*Note - Though I's expecting some more questions on UREP based "Aesa"-RWJ (like what's the plan of locating them - like at the base of the rudder, any plans of having digital RWRs to supplement them, any plans of "integrating" (like in one unit) the RWJ and MAWS sensors etc etc etc)
Maybe next time.
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
The F-35's AN/APG-81 radar has 1,676 T/R modules according to the F-35 Joint Program Office. The AN/APG-77 on the F-22 has also been upgraded along the way and it is possible that the most latest variant has fewer T/R modules than what the initial versions may have had though the program never officially provided a number for the APG-77 unlike on the F-35 where its development authority did.kit wrote:For comparison
the prototype KF-X AESA radar had around 1,088 Transmitter-Receiver Module (TRM). By 2023, the number is expected to increase by 20% to have around 1,200-1,300 modules. (F-22's radar has 2,000 and F-35's radar has 1,200).The KF-X AESA radar can detect and track hundreds of ground targets, and this capability can be applied to hunting down North Korea's transporter erector launchers (TEL). The radar has air-to-air, air-to-ground, and air-to-sea modes, which can be used simultaneously with maximum detection range of around 200 km.
https://www.defenseworld.net/news/27586#.YCJm-ZNzbG8
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
Prasad,
The best interview by far. thanks for the work you put in.
The best interview by far. thanks for the work you put in.
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
Added on Page 1 of this thread. Please check.fanne wrote:This video deserves to be in the first page. Request to Admin, please do the needful.
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
Fantastic work. Thank You. I have given you credit on page 1 of this thread.Prasad wrote:Thanks for the kind words guys.
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 4292
- Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
What's the TRM count of the EL/M-2052 AESA radars for Tejas-MK1A first squadron? I saw numbers like 1500 in Quora but not sure.
Another interesting thing: per Indranil & Nilesh Rane's excellent article on DDR, we can see that Tejas-MK2 compares quite favorably to the Mirage-2000 and Gripen-E. However, we need to add 1 more aircraft to the mix: the F-16 latest blocks, equipped with the APG-83 AESA radar.
If we compare the specs, the Tejas comes out ahead in Ferry & combat ranges, but the F-16 can pull a higher mach and has whopping 1.1 ton additional payload carrying capacity. Not sure what the aperture size for the APG-83 is, but given F-16s larger overall size, it might be able to accommodate a similar or larger AESA than Uttam on MK2. What seems to give the F-16 its higher mach and payload capacity is its more powerful engines. Range was perhaps sacrificed for speed & payload.
P.S. people are cagey about sharing the TRM count of various aircraft. Unlike us, who share Uttam's specs freely, I couldn't find the TRM count on F-16's APG-83 or F22's or the Gripen-E's Vixen radar
Another interesting thing: per Indranil & Nilesh Rane's excellent article on DDR, we can see that Tejas-MK2 compares quite favorably to the Mirage-2000 and Gripen-E. However, we need to add 1 more aircraft to the mix: the F-16 latest blocks, equipped with the APG-83 AESA radar.
If we compare the specs, the Tejas comes out ahead in Ferry & combat ranges, but the F-16 can pull a higher mach and has whopping 1.1 ton additional payload carrying capacity. Not sure what the aperture size for the APG-83 is, but given F-16s larger overall size, it might be able to accommodate a similar or larger AESA than Uttam on MK2. What seems to give the F-16 its higher mach and payload capacity is its more powerful engines. Range was perhaps sacrificed for speed & payload.
P.S. people are cagey about sharing the TRM count of various aircraft. Unlike us, who share Uttam's specs freely, I couldn't find the TRM count on F-16's APG-83 or F22's or the Gripen-E's Vixen radar
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
Prem Kumar wrote: P.S. people are cagey about sharing the TRM count of various aircraft. Unlike us, who share Uttam's specs freely, I couldn't find the TRM count on F-16's APG-83 or F22's or the Gripen-E's Vixen radar
I was surprised at the sharing of this information in this video. Equally surprised about the sharing of location of MAWS. It may not matter but prefer interested parties being put to hoops to collect even the basic information
NoobPooch: what is the difference between SPJ and low frequency Jammer. Why is LFJ not integrated into the plane and is being planned as a Pod on the center line.?
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
It really depends. Northrop used to openly describe (at trade shows) that the AN/APG-83 has about 5% fewer T/R modules than the APG-80 radar on the F-16 Blk. 60's which would put it in the 950 or so T/R module range. Though back then since the program was pre-decisional they were more protective about what they shared as specifics were not fully fleshed out. The Gripen folks likewise have referenced to their AESA being "approximately 1,000 T/R modules" at their trade show briefings. The F-35 program office publicly puts out the exact AN/APG-81 (the most advanced multi-role AESA the US has ever put on a fighter) module count on its website and there is a full scale reference cutaway of it at the National Electronics museum where folks can themselves have a look. It is often a case of the information never been explicitly provided and not the information being classified. It is a bit specific question though and not often directly asked. Most can infer radar requirements based on design decisions, what sized radar can be accommodate and other performance parameters. The actual classified part is the design, efficiency, performance, power and cooling architecture and margins and what and how it operates amongst various modes. The secret sauce that comes from having efficient materials, manufactering techniques, design processes, and improving in design through iteration. That is much harder and the qualitative nature and thus much harder to approximate.Prem Kumar wrote:
P.S. people are cagey about sharing the TRM count of various aircraft. Unlike us, who share Uttam's specs freely, I couldn't find the TRM count on F-16's APG-83 or F22's or the Gripen-E's Vixen radar
Module count, in and of itself, doesn't really reveal much operational capability that cannot be gleaned by simply putting a range around it using other parameters and assumptions by looking at other design features of an aircraft (one can start with mission, look at how big a radar it can physically accommodate etc). So lack of specifics may not be because specifics are classified. Often it is a case of the presenter just not wanting to go through a lengthy approval process and thus just putting a range around it to avoid it. Focusing very heavily on just one parameter turns the discussion into the Chinese social media where they simply assume performance parity as long as modules are the same (other technology, capability, experience be damned).
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
Prasad
Excellent interview.
I saw this and was sure that this was a BRF Jingo!
Super high quality and packed with info.
I'm sure the scientists at DRDO will feel proud that their work is analyzed and deeply appreciated
DRDO guys will have to be careful, BRF Jingos are lurking around. They have to be careful what info they let out inadvertently
Excellent interview.
I saw this and was sure that this was a BRF Jingo!
Super high quality and packed with info.
I'm sure the scientists at DRDO will feel proud that their work is analyzed and deeply appreciated
DRDO guys will have to be careful, BRF Jingos are lurking around. They have to be careful what info they let out inadvertently
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
Rare to see such a serious discussion on technical matters on any US channel program featuring women.Gagan wrote:Check this out...!
Put her in charge of PR d Media releases please
Excellent
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
Very informative interview Prasad. One thing everyone is missing is first few prototypes of mk2 will be for baseline which can then be improved by induction of newer technology. This is to buy time for under development technologies like irst retractable probe etc and qualify the basic airframe simultaneously.
Prasad the limelight will be regularly on you. Good luck
Prasad the limelight will be regularly on you. Good luck
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
Plenty of things to do in the meantime. Priority would be to re-qualify CLAWS with change in CG, canard, more fuel tanks, hardpoints etc.K Mehta wrote:Very informative interview Prasad. One thing everyone is missing is first few prototypes of mk2 will be for baseline which can then be improved by induction of newer technology. This is to buy time for under development technologies like irst retractable probe etc and qualify the basic airframe simultaneously.
Prasad the limelight will be regularly on you. Good luck
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
Yes, so it is a very sensible approach. Worst case scenario if the technology is not brought to fruition, it would not hold up the fighter development.JTull wrote: Plenty of things to do in the meantime. Priority would be to re-qualify CLAWS with change in CG, canard, more fuel tanks, hardpoints etc.
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
Noob pooch
Question 1:
For braking, both the Canards and the current Air-brakes (carried over from LCA Tejas Mk1 & Mk1A) be deployed ?
Question 2:
The air vents (apologies forgot the technical name) above wings present in Mk1 and Mk1A are gone now, would not it be much better to retain them to have that added air flow over the wings ?
Question 1:
For braking, both the Canards and the current Air-brakes (carried over from LCA Tejas Mk1 & Mk1A) be deployed ?
Question 2:
The air vents (apologies forgot the technical name) above wings present in Mk1 and Mk1A are gone now, would not it be much better to retain them to have that added air flow over the wings ?
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
1. Air brakes will be carried forward.
2. The spill duct over the wing will also be retained. But it is not for added airflow over the wing (that's a very small amount of lethargic boundary layer. The major gain is that it energizes the airflow over the wing and keeps it attached for longer. The original F18 used a very similar system.
2. The spill duct over the wing will also be retained. But it is not for added airflow over the wing (that's a very small amount of lethargic boundary layer. The major gain is that it energizes the airflow over the wing and keeps it attached for longer. The original F18 used a very similar system.
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
The Chief again says they need to take a call on mk2. The AMCA is a sure thing based on what he says.
Re: Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019
deleted
Last edited by bharathp on 14 Feb 2021 14:57, edited 1 time in total.