LCA AF Mk2 (Medium Weight Fighter) - News and discussions

[Rajput Lion]

It's 9.64+0.27 on MKK. Someone's added to that once again to go above 10T.

It's near 10tonnes. Just leave it at that

MKK has nothing to do with T-10M. It came out of the T-10U family.

Just look at the tail of MKK. It's directly derived from T-10M program. Even the airframe was strengthened on line of Su-35 program. It was KNAAPO's counter to Irkut's MKI program.

All single-seat versions that came out of T-10S had fuel loads above 10T. All T-10U family with 2 seats have fuel loads below 10T. It's because the fuel tank behind the single-seat cockpit was removed to fit a second cockpit.



What I've learned is if weight savings have been achieved below a baseline, they will add sufficient number of upgrades to bring it back to the baseline. Even if it means adding ballast. In some cases, depending on the age of the jet, just the process of improving service life comes at the cost of new attachments that increase weight. So weight only increases from its original production standard. Empty weight won't go down, only go up. They compensate with increased thrust and fuel efficiency, sometimes they give up on the latter if it's due to a SLEP.

Actually, as big as MKI/Flanker is, its internal space isn't much(that's why internal jammers couldn't be added). So not too many new things can be added internally(except MAWS) to offset the weight-savings done by new Radar, IRST, new avionics etc. Thus a new FBW is required to balance shift in CoP and CoG.

 

[Hydra]

It's near 10tonnes. Just leave it at that

Just look at the tail of MKK. It's directly derived from T-10M program. Even the airframe was strengthened on line of Su-35 program. It was KNAAPO's counter to Irkut's MKI program.

Actually, as big as MKI/Flanker is, its internal space isn't much(that's why internal jammers couldn't be added). So not too many new things can be added internally(except MAWS) to offset the weight-savings done by new Radar, IRST, new avionics etc. Thus a new FBW is required to balance shift in CoP and CoG.

What's the constraints of adding MAWS?

 

[babablacksheep]

What's the constraints of adding MAWS?

AFAIK from this forum, Russians unwilling to give flight certification to an su30mki modified with internal MAWS, unless they get the contract to modify the airframe or put their MAWS or both.

 

[Hydra]

AFAIK from this forum, Russians unwilling to give flight certification to an su30mki modified with internal MAWS, unless they get the contract to modify the airframe or put their MAWS or both.

That restrictions are for anything which making hole in fuselage.

 

[Rajput Lion]

What's the constraints of adding MAWS?

Multiple, from domestic to Russian side. But things are on right track and looks like finally MKI UPG. should have airframe mounted MAWS. If not so, then pod based MAWS is a given.

 

[Choice_of _inevitability]

Multiple, from domestic to Russian side. But things are on right track and looks like finally MKI UPG. should have airframe mounted MAWS. If not so, then pod based MAWS is a given.

As per various report, the primary constraint behind an integrated MAWS was reduction in the flight envelope with the airframe being cut open to fit DCMAWS.
UV-based are more compact but they are near useless.

These conditions likely still hold.

 

[Rajput Lion]

As per various report, the primary constraint behind an integrated MAWS was reduction in the flight envelope with the airframe being cut open to fit DCMAWS.
UV-based are more compact but they are near useless.

These conditions likely still hold.

It was a fiasco between DRDO, Israelis & the Russians. Let's not go there. All constraints have been resolved and hopefuly MKI UPG. will have airframe mounted MAWS. If not then even pod mounted shall suffice.

 

[Hydra]

As per various report, the primary constraint behind an integrated MAWS was reduction in the flight envelope with the airframe being cut open to fit DCMAWS.
UV-based are more compact but they are near useless.

These conditions likely still hold.

DC MAWS will be available only in mki upg? Or do we have any plan to use it on LCA mk1a & MK2?
@Rajput Lion @randomradio

 

[Rajput Lion]

DC MAWS will be available only in mki upg? Or do we have any plan to use it on LCA mk1a & MK2?
@Rajput Lion @randomradio

Both MK2 & AMCA will have airframe integrated MAWS. MK1A will have pod mounted ones.

 

[randomradio]

Yeas, that's the point. Nukes & Ballistic missile won't make you to peer nation to EU or P5. Your conventional weapon manufacturing & R&D ecosystem makes.

We really lacks in that. I will rate Soko & Japan above India.

Turkey is catching up and they are ahead of us in many areas too, they fielded a naval indigenous multifunction radar on ship before even we think about doing the same.

If you are looking at conventional capabilities and the near-future, then even Europe will be hard-pressed to match India due to the lack of a plan for a massive space-based surveillance and comm system.

You may put a radar here or a weapon system there, but without satellites, everything you have is just target practice. In that sense, only US, China, Russia, and India (upcoming) are peers.

Everywhere else we are behind we can very easily catch up, so that makes it irrelevant in the long run.

 

[randomradio]

If it is seven stage with 4000 hrs life, then I think we are betting the chance of 120 Kn JV engine to be swapped in at MLU.

It's 4000 hours hot-core life, not engine life, which is likely to be 6000-8000 hours.

Original F414 came with 2000 hours hot core and 4000 hours for non-rotating parts. With EDE parts, hot core could be 4000 hours or even as high as 6000 hours if all the upgrades are introduced without the core change, it just depends on what we negotiate for, with definite improvements for the non-rotating parts too. Of course, the goal may be to not get everything from EDE because 4000 hours is enough.

It means LCA Mk2 could start and end its life with the F414 without any engine change. For 8000 hours life, all it will need is an overhaul, so the 7 stage or 6 stage won't matter. Comparatively, MKI needs 9 engines and 9 overhauls with non-upgraded AL-31FP within the same time.

Where it matters is increasing thrust, if they plan to do it, will be more limited in terms of saving engine life. At that point, replacement with a new engine at MLU will become feasible. If they stick to 98 kN, then nothing changes for LCA Mk2.

 

[randomradio]

• GE may have led India to believe in a more ambitious engine development path;
• this ambition was also commercially useful for making the Super Hornet more competitive, particularly against the Rafale M;
• with the Indian naval competition lost, U.S. interest in pushing for a more advanced version may have waned;
• and India is thus left with a more conservative solution, centered on an F414 engine that is closer to the proven standard than to the most promising next-generation version.

The more ambitious engine may have served primarily as a showcase at a time when Boeing needed to beat the Rafale for the Indian Navy; once that battle was lost, GE was able to revert to a more conservative approach, without worrying much about Indian expectations for the Mk2.

There was no trickery or deceit in GE's offer. The point made was the more advanced version was never on offer initially, we were tricked by internet speculations. INS6 was developed as an upgrade of the original F414.

ADA chose the proven version in 2010, and they have continued with the same engine for LCA Mk2.

Advanced version was likely offered for MRCBF, more power for STOBAR launch, but it's not part of the ToT deal for LCA.

It's unclear if production will switch to the advanced version when AMCA and TEDBF operational deliveries begin. We know the TE configuration is different, there's a possibility for the switch mid-way during production. Since the current negotiation is for 99 engines, up to 200, which is only sufficient for LCA, the AMCA/TEDBF engine deal could be the next step. But it's unclear if this is how it will happen, in case the TE configuration decision is made during the prototyping stage itself. Or the US could deliver prototype engines and deliver advanced engines for the final prototype before production begins, like what we did for LCA Mk1. I hope media asks the right questions when the deal is announced.

What's interesting is no one has chosen the advanced version. Even Swedes and Koreans chose the 7 stage. And USN decided to upgrade their own 7 stage with 6 stage's materials, with all others getting the same option. So it appears EDE/EPE and the CMC versions were developed as upgrades rather than for introduction. I guess no one wants an unproven core design.

 

[Choice_of _inevitability]

If you are looking at conventional capabilities and the near-future, then even Europe will be hard-pressed to match India due to the lack of a plan for a massive space-based surveillance and comm system.

You may put a radar here or a weapon system there, but without satellites, everything you have is just target practice. In that sense, only US, China, Russia, and India (upcoming) are peers.

Everywhere else we are behind we can very easily catch up, so that makes it irrelevant in the long run.

Europe has Airbus and they've built hundreds of LEO satellites (communication) recently and they also have an extensive Earth observation satellite program.

Until SBS-3 is implemented (those 5 lost satellites excluded), Europe makes Indian satellite manufacturing look like "Kutir Udyog"

 

[randomradio]

China can somehow use the al-31 to power the j-10's but we can't use it for some reason. The rd-33 and ge-404 have similar specs.

The Chinese chose the light-heavy development path to develop bigger jets, like the US, we chose the light-medium path around F404/F414 class engines, like Europe.

The Chinese are developing their air force with the single-minded goal of competing with the US by playing their game. Their simple idea is to build everything the US builds, but slightly better and in more numbers, and they think that will give them the advantage. So J-10/J-11/16 are slightly better than F-15/16/18, and J-20/J-35 are slightly better than F-22/F-35, at least in areas other than stealth, and so on. Primarily using heavy engines.

India's goal is to take more time but create superior analogues versus Chinese jets with a mix of imports and domestic capabilities. Our LCA Mk2/Rafale will be far superior to J-10/11/16. AMCA will be far superior to J-20/35. And we will import SCAF/GCAP to compete with J-XX. All using medium-class engines.

 

[randomradio]

It's near 10tonnes. Just leave it at that

That's fake. It's been around since the early 2000s. MKI has standard 9.64T fuel, it's confirmed by both HAL and Irkut.

Both MKI and MKK literally have the same fuel tanks, only the MKK comes with fuel in the fins.

Just look at the tail of MKK. It's directly derived from T-10M program. Even the airframe was strengthened on line of Su-35 program. It was KNAAPO's counter to Irkut's MKI program.

The only thing shared is the fin that KNAAPO took from Sukhoi 'cause the Chinese wanted more fuel. But Su-27M had nothing to do with Su-30MKK, which was derived from Su-30M and MK. KNAAPO's Su-27M was the Su-35UB, which was derived from the MKK. So you got it the other way round. The Su-35UB was used as a testbed for the development of Su-35S.

The Chinese fin is composites whereas the MKI's fin is titanium.

Actually, as big as MKI/Flanker is, its internal space isn't much(that's why internal jammers couldn't be added). So not too many new things can be added internally(except MAWS) to offset the weight-savings done by new Radar, IRST, new avionics etc. Thus a new FBW is required to balance shift in CoP and CoG.

MKI has plenty of internal space, the space just isn't conveniently located for EW antennas, which required airframe modifications that the Russians threatened to revoke certification for.

In fact, MKI MLU will see weight increase because it is combined with a SLEP that will include structural strengthening.

A more responsive FBW is normal part of any MLU.

 

[randomradio]

Europe has Airbus and they've built hundreds of LEO satellites (communication) recently and they also have an extensive Earth observation satellite program.

Until SBS-3 is implemented (those 5 lost satellites excluded), Europe makes Indian satellite manufacturing look like "Kutir Udyog"

Hence "upcoming" in brackets.

But ours is upcoming, while a European system is barely even in the planning stages.

And it's not merely about number of satellites, it's about how those satellites integrate and communicate with each other as a single network. And how well they are electronically and physically protected from harm.

For now they are using fragmented systems, and they have 1 upcoming comm network called IRIS^2.

Of course, I'm sure they will catch up with their rising security budget.

European Union exploring spy satellites to replace its reliance on US network

THE EUROPEAN UNION IS considering building its own military satellite network in an effort to reduce or eliminate its reliance on American satellite capabilities, according to reports.

intelnews.org

The commissioner admitted that such a project would be costly—perhaps in excess of $540 billion—as well as time-consuming. But there was much desire to proceed, he said.

Warfare will soon belong to the rich.

Picdel made a recommendation sharing such assets with India, but these are national assets that will come under attack, so it's something they have to do independently, at least in terms of ownership while there's possibility for joint development.

 

[Rajput Lion]

That's fake. It's been around since the early 2000s. MKI has standard 9.64T fuel, it's confirmed by both HAL and Irkut.

It's has been there "in the brochure" just like MKI's 3000kms range. But that's ONLY in the brochure as real fuel-load is near 10tonnes and ferry-range 3400kms. As I said, just leave it at that

Both MKI and MKK literally have the same fuel tanks, only the MKK comes with fuel in the fins.



The only thing shared is the fin that KNAAPO took from Sukhoi 'cause the Chinese wanted more fuel. But Su-27M had nothing to do with Su-30MKK, which was derived from Su-30M and MK. KNAAPO's Su-27M was the Su-35UB, which was derived from the MKK. So you got it the other way round. The Su-35UB was used as a testbed for the development of Su-35S.

The Chinese fin is composites whereas the MKI's fin is titanium.



MKI has plenty of internal space, the space just isn't conveniently located for EW antennas, which required airframe modifications that the Russians threatened to revoke certification for.

In fact, MKI MLU will see weight increase because it is combined with a SLEP that will include structural strengthening.

A more responsive FBW is normal part of any MLU.

Lolz. MKI has so much internal space that they couldn't add an internal jammer despite being humongous. MKI UPG. won't put on more weight. At worst it will have same 18.4 tonnes of OEW and at best 17.4 tonnes. In fact, thanks to much lighter AESA radar(versus 650kgs BARS) and IRST, its nose would become much lighter changing its CoP and CoG, resulting in better nose-pointing and ITR. Thus it will need much more advance(yet lighter), FBW.

 

[randomradio]

It's has been there "in the brochure" just like MKI's 3000kms range. But that's ONLY in the brochure as real fuel-load is near 10tonnes and ferry-range 3400kms. As I said, just leave it at that

The MKI's fuel tank figures are publicly known. You should try and find it.

Lolz. MKI has so much internal space that they couldn't add an internal jammer despite being humongous. MKI UPG. won't put on more weight. At worst it will have same 18.4 tonnes of OEW and at best 17.4 tonnes. In fact, thanks to much lighter AESA radar(versus 650kgs BARS) and IRST, its nose would become much lighter changing its CoP and CoG, resulting in better nose-pointing and ITR. Thus it will need much more advance(yet lighter), FBW.

It has space below the cockpit for avionics enhancements, not in the wingtips and tail-fin for EA antennas, which requires internal redesigns and rebuilds.

The aircraft will either retain its 18.4T weight or it will be higher. The potential thrust increase to 132 kN indicates it will be higher. Retaining it would be great. But there's not going to be a decrease, is the point.

You don't need to replace the FBW if there are weight changes, it's all software. The main goal is indigenization.

You are overestimating the MLU P1 way too much. It's nothing more than a simple configuration change using indigenous tech. New electronics, basic frontal RCS management, uprated engine, and structural enhancement to boost life. The goal is to deliver an upgrade at the fastest possible speed with the least amount of risk. You can make speculations for Phase 2, when we will have enough advanced jets for the IAF to take risk on the next batch.

 

[Rajput Lion]

The MKI's fuel tank figures are publicly known. You should try and find it.

Most of the brochures mention Su-30MK's fuel-load and not Su-30MKIs. The best source regarding Su-30MKI's fuel load was Andrei Fomin, 'cause he had direct access to Irkut factory when writing about MKI. Here is what he wrote in his book regarding Flankers/put it in a spec-sheet:

It has space below the cockpit for avionics enhancements, not in the wingtips and tail-fin for EA antennas, which requires internal redesigns and rebuilds.

Yes and heavier analogue avionics shall be replaced with newer generation digital/lighter ones.

The aircraft will either retain its 18.4T weight or it will be higher. The potential thrust increase to 132 kN indicates it will be higher. Retaining it would be great. But there's not going to be a decrease, is the point.

The nose is ceratainly getting lighter with Virupaksha weighing less than half of 650kgs BARS and even the BEL IRST which would weigh half of OLS-30M.

You don't need to replace the FBW if there are weight changes, it's all software. The main goal is indigenization.

It is coming.

You are overestimating the MLU P1 way too much. It's nothing more than a simple configuration change using indigenous tech. New electronics, basic frontal RCS management, uprated engine, and structural enhancement to boost life. The goal is to deliver an upgrade at the fastest possible speed with the least amount of risk. You can make speculations for Phase 2, when we will have enough advanced jets for the IAF to take risk on the next batch.

Time shall tell

 

[randomradio]

Most of the brochures mention Su-30MK's fuel-load and not Su-30MKIs. The best source regarding Su-30MKI's fuel load was Andrei Fomin, 'cause he had direct access to Irkut factory when writing about MKI. Here is what he wrote in his book regarding Flankers/put it in a spec-sheet:

View attachment 51458

Yeah, that's where people got it from. He was wrong about it. He ended up switching the MKK and MKI figures.

You can see the loaded weight and MTOW are wrong too.

Yes and heavier analogue avionics shall be replaced with newer generation digital/lighter ones.

The nose is ceratainly getting lighter with Virupaksha weighing less than half of 650kgs BARS and even the BEL IRST which would weigh half of OLS-30M.

It is coming.

Time shall tell

Lighter avionics, but also more avionics and more supporting infrastructure for new avionics, like cooling systems.

You are obviously underestimating structural strengthening too. Look up reinforcing plates, strengthening straps, splice plates etc. All these are added to the airframe that makes the jet heavier.





These are from the F-16's SLEP. The MKI will go through the same process.

That's why I said MKI's gonna get heavier, and AL-31FP will be enhanced to 132 kN to make up for the increase in weight.

Right now, the oldest MKIs are at their end of life, ie, 25 years. They are being extended by 20 years. That's why they will exit by 2045. Which means, the youngest MKI today will be at end of life in 2046, which would theoretically push it to 2066-70 with SLEP and MLU. And it requires F-16 type modifications to ensure it survives that long.

Some weight can be saved via partial upgrades, like replacing Bars with Virupaksha on SLEP MKIs, compensating for the weight somewhat, without a full MLU or a new FBW. But that's about it.