ADA MCA medium weight class (LCA Mk II)

[Himanshu]

• The Mk II project is in the detail design stage, it will be easier for HAL to manufacture it as ADA is making a production-friendly design for the aircraft.
• belong to the Medium weight class. It will be a bigger aircraft with a higher capacity engine, higher range and payload capacity, improved aerodynamics etc.
• ability to carry missiles like Astra and BrahMos, will have Software Defined Radios (SDR) and all equipment to wage electronic warfare.
• completely upgraded Flight Control Systems, avionics, sensors etc. of which the indigenous development has already started.
• to replace Mirage 2000, Jaguar and MiG-29 aircraft in the future
• IAF has committed itself to 201 Mk2
• NGTD will leverage the existing technology of the LCA to achieve the target of first flight within five years

http://www.aeromag.in/Magazines/4220205605.pdf
@Ashwin

 

[Angel Eyes]

Is this ADA MCA the Tejas mk 2 we've been talking about??

 

[Himanshu]

Is this ADA MCA the Tejas mk 2 we've been talking about??

Yes, its now confirmed by ADA director though i don't think it will be called "Tejas" anymore just look Rustom programme for example.

 

[Ashwin]

• The Mk II project is in the detail design stage, it will be easier for HAL to manufacture it as ADA is making a production-friendly design for the aircraft.
• belong to the Medium weight class. It will be a bigger aircraft with a higher capacity engine, higher range and payload capacity, improved aerodynamics etc.
• ability to carry missiles like Astra and BrahMos, will have Software Defined Radios (SDR) and all equipment to wage electronic warfare.
• completely upgraded Flight Control Systems, avionics, sensors etc. of which the indigenous development has already started.
• to replace Mirage 2000, Jaguar and MiG-29 aircraft in the future
• IAF has committed itself to 201 Mk2
• NGTD will leverage the existing technology of the LCA to achieve the target of first flight within five years

http://www.aeromag.in/Magazines/4220205605.pdf
@Ashwin

Calling LCA mk2 medium class won't change anything. Its still be lighter than Mirage 2000, Mig 29 and may match Jaguar's weight. And It can't do every job these do better either. AMCA is the actual replacement for all three.

 

[randomradio]

Calling LCA mk2 medium class won't change anything. Its still be lighter than Mirage 2000, Mig 29 and may match Jaguar's weight. And It can't do every job these do better either. AMCA is the actual replacement for all three.

This new aircraft will comfortably outmatch the M-2000, Mig-29 and Jaguar.

It's more in the Gripen E class. The older version of Mk2 wouldn't have matched M-2000I.

 

[randomradio]

This is the aircraft @Hellfire was hinting about.

 

[Ashwin]

This new aircraft will comfortably outmatch the M-2000, Mig-29 and Jaguar.

How will a 15-16 ton fighter magically match every parameter of these three and exceed it?

Range and maneuverability of Mig-19UPG, low flying of Jaguar and ITR of Mirage.

It's more in the Gripen E class. The older version of Mk2 wouldn't have matched M-2000I.

There are no two different designs for AF-LCA mk2. You are misinformed and stop posting it everywhere. The preliminary design review was over 2 years ago now it's in the detailed design stage. Meaning basic parameters were frozen long ago.

 

[randomradio]

How will a 15-16 ton fighter magically match every parameter of these three and exceed it?

Range and maneuverability of Mig-19UPG, low flying of Jaguar and ITR of Mirage.

A combination of clever hardpoint design and flight controls, like the Gripen E.

Obviously this new design will be inferior to Rafale and AMCA, but it will easily surpass the other three you mentioned. The LCA and M-2000 have the same ITR. And with enough thrust, the LCA will have better STR also and also more range than the M-2000.

It's no longer LCA, it's MCA. Of course, we are yet to see the basic design, but it will be much better than the earlier Mk2 design.

The Gripen E comfortably surpasses the other three even though it's so light.

There are no two different designs for AF-LCA mk2. You are misinformed and stop posting it everywhere. The preliminary design review was over 2 years ago now it's in the detailed design stage. Meaning basic parameters were frozen long ago.

No, they were deciding whether to put canards or not even last week. I think long coupled canards.

Haven't you already seen the first design of the first Mk2 many times in air shows? That was the 13.7m version. There is a new 14.2m version now.

 

[Ashwin]

The Gripen E comfortably surpasses the other three even though it's so light.

Yup, why bother building heavier planes.

No, they were deciding whether to put canards or not even last week. I think long coupled canards.

After all these years, when will you start differentiating official documents and journalistic rumors?

Stick with official interviews and documents like ADA year book. During a similar debate months ago, You were making all kind of claims without reading Yearbook until I pointed it out.

Haven't you already seen the first design of the first Mk2 many times in air shows? That was the 13.7m version. There is a new 14.2m version now.

Its IN and IAF version and indian airshows display all kind of things. In defexpo they showed five-year-old model side by side to new.

 

[randomradio]

After all these years, when will you start differentiating official documents and journalistic rumors?

It's not journalist rumours, it was confirmed through ADA's Facebook page.

Its IN and IAF version and indian airshows display all kind of things. In defexpo they showed five-year-old model side by side to new.

Since then Mk2 has become 1m longer instead of 0.5m.

 

[Ashwin]

It's not journalist rumours, it was confirmed through ADA's Facebook page.

Does it procedes official docs or this ADA chief interview where he says its in detailed design stage?

Since then Mk2 has become 1m longer instead of 0.5m.

Its always been that way. I tried to correct you during Older Forum days.

 

[randomradio]

Does it procedes official docs or this ADA chief interview where he says its in detailed design stage?

So? Do you know how much the YF-22 changed into the F-22 during the detailed design stage?

Its always been that way. I tried to correct you during Older Forum days.

Dude, you can simply ignore me and move on. There is no need to reply to me if you don't agree with me.

 

[Ashwin]

Dude, you can simply ignore me and move on. There is no need to reply to me if you don't agree with me.

I do. Here you replied to me with your usual 'assumptions'.

 

[randomradio]

I do. Here you replied to me with your usual 'assumptions'.

Ah, my bad then.

Anyway, it wasn't an assumption.

Stuff going around.
From ADA:
=========
Oscar Zulu: Is it true that Tejas mk2 for AF will be having close coupled canards?
Tejas - LCA: Being considered.
=========

From Delhi Defence Review:
=========
Cmd Balaji (ADA) says LCA Mark 2 prototype expected by 2020.
Cmd Balaji says 1 metre length extension for Mk-2 likely. MTOW target is in the 16-16.5 ton range.
=========

LCA Mk1A's MTOW is 13.5T. So the extra 3T increase will increase the capabilities of the Mk2 drastically.

Just because stuff's in the air doesn't mean these are "assumptions". This information is important for people who actually know what ADA is trying to achieve.

 

[Ashwin]

From Delhi Defence Review:
=========
Cmd Balaji (ADA) says LCA Mark 2 prototype expected by 2020.
Cmd Balaji says 1 metre length extension for Mk-2 likely. MTOW target is in the 16-16.5 ton range.
=========

This is exactly what ADA year report said 1 year ago. Tender docs for the nose wheel put MTOW close this.

From ADA:
=========
Oscar Zulu: Is it true that Tejas mk2 for AF will be having close coupled canards?
Tejas - LCA: Being considered.
=========

As i said, at this stage its highly unlikely because the project is in the detailed design stage.

 

[randomradio]

This is exactly what ADA year report said 1 year ago. Tender docs for the nose wheel put MTOW close this.

Yes. So you should be specifically looking at the part where it says there may be a 1m extension instead of 0.5m.

A 0.5m extension to the LCA can add as much as 500Kg to the aircraft's MTOW without any major changes, that's why Balaji left us clueless with either 16T or 16.5T and "1m may be likely" comment.

All the clues are there when you look into it deeper.

As i said, at this stage its highly unlikely because the project is in the detailed design stage.

That's not how it works. It depends on the final design that was chosen for fabrication. In the PDP, you don't make just one design, you make multiple, that's why even AMCA's stand in the expo came with two different models, with two different wing designs.

LCA Mk1 also had multiple designs, you may have already seen the canard version.

This is LCA, with cropped cranked arrow with close-coupled canards.

And so is this.

The point is we do not know which design has been chosen for the final prototype construction.

The F-22 boys also made 10 different designs before zeroing in on what we see today.

Here's Turkey's TFX.

All three are different designs that have come up through the PDP in fact.

Here's Korean KFX. Two different designs.

So which design did the ADA-LCA team chose? That's the question you should be asking right now.

Remember that this new LCA can carry Brahmos-M. It's impossible on the old one.

You really need to focus a lot harder to interpret the clues that the designers give us. Ultimately, they will tell us why they chose a particular design.

 

[Ashwin]

Yes. So you should be specifically looking at the part where it says there may be a 1m extension instead of 0.5m.

A 0.5m extension to the LCA can add as much as 500Kg to the aircraft's MTOW without any major changes, that's why Balaji left us clueless with either 16T or 16.5T and "1m may be likely" comment.

All the clues are there when you look into it deeper.



That's not how it works. It depends on the final design that was chosen for fabrication. In the PDP, you don't make just one design, you make multiple, that's why even AMCA's stand in the expo came with two different models, with two different wing designs.

LCA Mk1 also had multiple designs, you may have already seen the canard version.

This is LCA, with cropped cranked arrow with close-coupled canards.

And so is this.

The point is we do not know which design has been chosen for the final prototype construction.

The F-22 boys also made 10 different designs before zeroing in on what we see today.

Here's Turkey's TFX.

All three are different designs that have come up through the PDP in fact.

Here's Korean KFX. Two different designs.

So which design did the ADA-LCA team chose? That's the question you should be asking right now.

Remember that this new LCA can carry Brahmos-M. It's impossible on the old one.

You really need to focus a lot harder to interpret the clues that the designers give us. Ultimately, they will tell us why they chose a particular design.

These are all true when the design is in primary stage (Like what AMCA is now). First Mk2 prototype rollout was scheduled for next year (Might be delayed a year). And you think the length of the fuselage and basic design are still not ready? LCA mk2 was sanctioned in 2009 for god sake.

 

[Sathya]

Ok any change in number of pylons ?

 

[randomradio]

These are all true when the design is in primary stage (Like what AMCA is now). First Mk2 prototype rollout was scheduled for next year (Might be delayed a year). And you think the length of the fuselage and basic design are still not ready? LCA mk2 was sanctioned in 2009 for god sake.

View attachment 2470

You are now making an irrelevant post.

I never said the design is not ready. I said there is a more capable design than the one they released earlier.

That 2015 article was obsolete in 2014 itself.

 

[randomradio]

Ok any change in number of pylons ?

No clue. We need official confirmation first.

Hopefully they make the fuselage wide enough to carry a twin arm for BVR missiles.

If that happens, then the Mk2 will be able to carry 2 500Kg bombs, 2 WVR, 2 BVR and 2 external tanks, completing the payload requirement for a MMRCA class aircraft. Similarly, the Mk2 will also be able to carry 4 BVR, 2 WVR and 2 tanks for air defence.