LCA News and Discussions

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 08 Jul 2011 11:09

Karan M wrote:More thrust, more fuel consumption, redesign for more fuel, recalculate Cg, modify FBW, add time to development effort

If I recall the brochure I saw right, its got the lower specific fuel consumption as the variant it evolved from.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 08 Jul 2011 11:16

^ the f414 certainly has a lower sfc than the F404, between the IN20 and IN56 - I have no idea, but I'd imagine the IN56 has better economy and more thrust at least on milpower.

Any news on the specs for the Mk2? IIRC, they intended to keep it at 6500kg empty, and even lower it if possible. But this will be a difficult task. I'd like to see the TEjas have at least a TWR of 1.0 with 4-6 AAMs + full internal fuel.

CM

Parakram · Post by **Parakram** » 08 Jul 2011 12:37

Marten wrote: Thanks for the suggestion. Tried submitting my well thought out designs via email but they responded with a polite email saying they had an aero engg background and were happy with what they had, and that perhaps Mattel might want my paper planes' designs.

Somewhere somehow I think one thing. It seems like Tejas is deliberately delayed or pushed into problems, so that foreign vendors can be invited. Seems like HAL do not want to participate with private partners. They do not want to face competition.

Indian navy always praise inhomogeneous efforts, why not army and IAF ?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 08 Jul 2011 12:56

Mk2 being 1m longer in fuselage (addl fuel in spine, more avionics bay area) , bigger air intake to feed the new engine and perhaps a slightly bigger wing would certainly be heavier than 6.5t empty. maybe 7.2t ? and all that extra fuel will need more engine power to keep same takeoff T:W as IN20 in mk1.

its a complicated multi dimensional equation

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 08 Jul 2011 13:27

Good point Singha , a 1 meter longer fuselage would mean additional fuel and avionics bay the IN20 engine is 90 kn and new 414 is 98 kn , we wont see any substantial change in T/W ratio between IN20Mk1 and Mk2 , but lets hope they can alleviate IAF concerns on turn rate and one or two other parameter that IAF was no too happy about with a rise ~ 10 % rise in thrust.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 08 Jul 2011 13:32

we should not stop with Mk2, but like the F-16 run on to Mk3 and Mk4 also. the AMCA/PAKFA/MRCA will all be expensive vs the Tejas....we can keep tinkering and scaling it up, replacing the engine, better avionics and weapons and run this program in production mode upto 2030 probably with service EOL in 2050...a decent lifetime of 40 yrs in service.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 08 Jul 2011 15:04

1) F-16 run ...............

To mimic that kind of an effort one needs a solid R&D based set of local vendors. Based on current conditions I am not too sure that is possible. At a minimum the Kaveri has to come home. Perhaps an immediate goal should be "Keep the Panda Out" or "No Panda".

2) On Mk1 vs, Mk2. I recall talks of the space within the Mk1 being rather poorly managed (more due to time constraints than anything else). IF that is true I would expect the Mk2 (onwards) to have even more room - if we were to take the Mk1 components/"stuff" and just migrate it to the Mk2. That alone should provide a good amount of space to add whatever they need to add.

I would also expect newer components to be much, much smaller and even perhaps lighter.

Mk2 should have pronounced improvements over Mk1.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 09 Jul 2011 00:02

Singha wrote:Mk2 being 1m longer in fuselage (addl fuel in spine, more avionics bay area) , bigger air intake to feed the new engine and perhaps a slightly bigger wing would certainly be heavier than 6.5t empty. maybe 7.2t ? and all that extra fuel will need more engine power to keep same takeoff T:W as IN20 in mk1.

its a complicated multi dimensional equation

not 1m longer- just 0.5m longer.

suryag · Post by **suryag** » 09 Jul 2011 00:14

A super-TFTA pic of tejas in Leh from tejas.gov.in

http://gallery.tejas.gov.in/Tejas/Tejas ... 43WMv-A-LB

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 09 Jul 2011 00:21

^^^
no need to call that TFTA. it is SDRE quality, which can compete with TFTA. eventually, SDRE >> TFTA.

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 09 Jul 2011 00:47

Marten wrote: .....
Tried submitting my well thought out designs via email but they responded with a polite email saying they had an aero engg background and were happy with what they had, and that perhaps Mattel might want my paper planes' designs.

Did they actually suggest that you go to a toy manufacturer?! That's very harsh.

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 09 Jul 2011 02:26

Ah, that's fair enough. I suspect the designs for Mk. 2 have already progressed to a stage where there is no turning back.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 09 Jul 2011 02:36

I am waiting for the MkII-B, the one that has VTOL.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 09 Jul 2011 04:37

NRao wrote:I am waiting for the MkII-B, the one that has VTOL.

There is no such aircraft. Nor will there be.

vina · Post by **vina** » 09 Jul 2011 04:50

Cain Marko wrote:Any news on the specs for the Mk2? IIRC, they intended to keep it at 6500kg empty, and even lower it if possible. But this will be a difficult task. I'd like to see the TEjas have at least a TWR of 1.0 with 4-6 AAMs + full internal fuel.

That it already does! The clean take off weight is exactly that (with 2 AAMs though,but even if all the other five pylons have A2A weapons, it wont change much), with the IN20 engine rated at 20K lb /90KN

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 09 Jul 2011 07:02

Parakram wrote: Somewhere somehow I think one thing. It seems like Tejas is deliberately delayed or pushed into problems, so that foreign vendors can be invited. Seems like HAL do not want to participate with private partners. They do not want to face competition.

Indian navy always praise inhomogeneous efforts, why not army and IAF ?

Maybe a little delay would be good for Tejas Mk II in case Rafale is chosen which can carry double its own weight. All those Rafale composites and manufacturing techs can go in Mark II, who knows Mk. II may carry much more than double its own weight.

Kakkaji · Post by **Kakkaji** » 09 Jul 2011 08:08

Manish_Sharma wrote: Maybe a little delay would be good for Tejas Mk II in case Rafale is chosen which can carry double its own weight. All those Rafale composites and manufacturing techs can go in Mark II, who knows Mk. II may carry much more than double its own weight.

Let that be MK III.

Do not delay Mk II.

chiragAS · Post by **chiragAS** » 09 Jul 2011 13:28

abhijitm wrote:Thanks Chirag!
After seeing these photos now I want to name her Mallika-e-hindustan

+1

chiragAS · Post by **chiragAS** » 09 Jul 2011 13:36

Shrinivasan wrote:
chiragAS wrote:don't you think too many pics of ada folks that too in so high reso might not be a good idea ... spooks issue... ( just for the safety of our people why make it easier)
Good point chirag... i thought so too... if there is a comment section we can place a comment for this removal.. Remember the unfortunate event in Hyderabad involving a small boy, it was really sad... we don't want such misfortunes to happen to anyone...

I guess we should send them a mail !

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 09 Jul 2011 19:54

Shrinivasan wrote:
SaiK wrote:[quote="Singha"....in due course we will develop our own growler based around the Astra and new scanning hw.
Tejas Mk2-Garj it shall be then./quote] Won't LCA MK2 be a small platform with limited power for a Growler type package?

so.. what are we talking here now.. let us see these:-

2-seater
Electronic attack - AESA NG based jamming. [internal?]
Extra stores and additional weapons or jamming pods [internal?]
wide band all aspect 360*, all band type tactical jamming pods [internal?].
Audio and Video and communication jamming pods [internal?]
Astra++
HARM++

miniaturization of electronics and materials, can bring about LCA-M2-Garj lite.

VishalJ · Post by **VishalJ** » 10 Jul 2011 04:11

There seem to be some new shots put-up on Tejas' website¿ http://gallery.tejas.gov.in/

suryag · Post by **suryag** » 10 Jul 2011 09:14

Eagerly waiting for August for LSP7 to fly,hope they dont miss this deadline

neerajb · Post by **neerajb** » 10 Jul 2011 09:54

Guys what are we waiting for, let's flood youtube with Tejas's HD videos

(if not done already).

Cheers....

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 10 Jul 2011 11:39

SaiK wrote:so.. what are we talking here now.. let us see these:-
2-seater
Electronic attack - AESA NG based jamming. [internal?]
Extra stores and additional weapons or jamming pods [internal?]
...
miniaturization of electronics and materials, can bring about LCA-M2-Garj lite.

Sai, Ameer-Khan Wild Weasels are based on fairly larger platform...F-100s, F-105s, F4s, F16 Block50 and eventually F-35. LCA in its current avatar (or even MkII) does not have enough power / size to perform the task... We can probably use some of our older SU30 frames (intitial 18 ones) for this purpose as they'll have the needed power.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 10 Jul 2011 12:12

vina wrote:That it already does! The clean take off weight is exactly that (with 2 AAMs though,but even if all the other five pylons have A2A weapons, it wont change much), with the IN20 engine rated at 20K lb /90KN

How so Vinaji? What does "clean" takeoff weight constitute? From available specs, it weighs 6500kg empty, with a 2500kg full internal fuel payload,plus fluids, gun rounds, pilot, you should have upwards of 9000kg (9500kg+ would be my guess). Add to that a couple of missiles - r73 (125kg w pylons) and you have another 250kg. In fact iirc, the AI 11 poster showed clean take off weight as well over 9500kg. This latest 9ton figure probly is achieved by reducing internal fuel by a good margin.

My guess is with 2 SRAAMs and full internal fuel Tejas Mk1 will weigh around 10 tons. More importantly, even saying that the clean take off weight allows for full internal fuel and fluids plus pilot at 9000kg, when did the Ge 404 in20 start producing 9tons of thrust? From all I gathered, including the older ADA website, it was ~ 8500kN at max AB.

YOu tack on 6 AAMs - say 4 R77s + 2 R73s and you have about 1 ton more to deal with. So clean (full int fuel) plus 1 ton = 10.5-11 ton at a minimum. And the F414-IN56 puts out about 10 tons too so it seems tight especially if the internal fuel load increases. As I said before, for the mk2, they'll do well to keep her at 6.5 tons, they better get the bird to shed some weight and it is probly going to be a challenge. JMT pence but I would be glad to be corrected.

CM.

vina · Post by **vina** » 11 Jul 2011 13:32

Cain Marko wrote:How so Vinaji? What does "clean" takeoff weight constitute?.

Per what Ajai Shukla wrote as the definition per the ADA/HAL folks , it is plane, full internal fuel, all fluids,all pylons fitted, gun ammo + 2 close combat missiles loaded . That is what they refer to as "clean" take off weight. So lets stick with that. If that is 9000 kg , pretty good. All the rest is just arithmetic which is of no use.

venku_Raj · Post by **venku_Raj** » 11 Jul 2011 15:32

Bhavnagar industry produces important part of India’s first locally made Multi-Mode Radar

IAF begins establishing first LCA squadron

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 11 Jul 2011 17:15

since kevlar permeates the radiations, internal RAM coating on castings would be something important to have, and assuming the castings are visible beyond radar panels from the frontal RCS perspective.

Shape of the castings could also add to internal reflection and redirection. I hope they are composites.

devaraj_d · Post by **devaraj_d** » 11 Jul 2011 18:36

SaiK wrote: I hope they are composites.

Saik ji,

I am assuming that most probably this casting is a magnesium high pressure die casting.

suryag · Post by **suryag** » 11 Jul 2011 20:42

From the IDRW article,

Aircraft Systems Testing Establishment (ASTE) Chief Test Pilot, Group Captain B R Krishan had told Deccan Herald in February that the aircraft would be put through rigorous Testing and the limits would be pushed before handing it over to the squadron. “…The ASTE intends to push the G-force of the plane from six to eight,” he had said.

So it is Gp.Capt BR Krishnan replacing Cmde. Verma ?

Chacko ji, any word on how the trainer is progressing, it is due for IOC in about 3-4 months now? Would be great to know if the controls overriding part between the instructor and the trainee are all up and working.

LSP-6 is not making any news, on these threads it was reported that it was ready to fly in June/July.

karan_mc · Post by **karan_mc** » 11 Jul 2011 20:59

LSP-6 will not take off before LSP-7 (Due on August) and LSP-8 (Due on oct) and , SP-1 and SP-2 by Jan -March 2012 period

merlin · Post by **merlin** » 11 Jul 2011 21:05

suryag wrote:From the IDRW article,

Aircraft Systems Testing Establishment (ASTE) Chief Test Pilot, Group Captain B R Krishan had told Deccan Herald in February that the aircraft would be put through rigorous Testing and the limits would be pushed before handing it over to the squadron. “…The ASTE intends to push the G-force of the plane from six to eight,” he had said.
So it is Gp.Capt BR Krishnan replacing Cmde. Verma ?

ASTE and NFTC are two different entities.

suryag · Post by **suryag** » 11 Jul 2011 21:41

Thanks Merlin ji that was a blooper, for a moment i missed the ASTE part after I say the Chief test pilot thing

karan_mc · Post by **karan_mc** » 11 Jul 2011 21:58

Exactly what has been locally manufactured by private firm for MMR ?

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 11 Jul 2011 22:03

karan_mc wrote:Exactly what has been locally manufactured by private firm for MMR ?

They have manufactured certain casing for the MMR.

neerajb · Post by **neerajb** » 11 Jul 2011 23:23

I remember a news post on BR which said that LCA doesn't carry a cannon as yet. I was watching LSP4 first flight video on http://www.tejas.gov.in and here is what I found, a cannon under starboard side air intake. Has it been test fired yet from Tejas?

Cheers....

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 12 Jul 2011 10:04

neerajb wrote:I remember a news post on BR which said that LCA doesn't carry a cannon as yet. I was watching LSP4 first flight video on http://www.tejas.gov.in and here is what I found, a cannon under starboard side air intake. Has it been test fired yet from Tejas?

IMHO it was fired during trials in Goa or Chitradurga after the missile test but before the Bomb drop tests, couple of weeks before IOC.

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 12 Jul 2011 10:29

karan_mc wrote:LSP-6 will not take off before LSP-7 (Due on August) and LSP-8 (Due on oct) and , SP-1 and SP-2 by Jan -March 2012 period

Why is that?

rajanb · Post by **rajanb** » 12 Jul 2011 13:04

LCA very busy today. 12:30PM
The deep throated roar of its engine.

Suresh_Shyam · Post by **Suresh_Shyam** » 12 Jul 2011 14:16

Any update about RAM Coating Testing for LCA?