LCA Tejas Mk1 & Mk1A - News and discussions

Design of LCA Tejas’ next version almost done, AESA Radar next month
March 26, 2018
By: Tribune News Service

Talking about the next version of the Tejas, called ‘Mark1-A’, Dr Christopher said: “The design other than the AESA radar and the jammer pod is complete.” Hindustan Aeronautics Limited is looking to import the AESA radar even as DRDO made a radar that will be tested next month.

The IAF is looking at 83 ‘Mark1-A’, with 59 improvements over the existing Tejas.

The Indian Air Force has projected a need for 324 fighter jets over 15 years and has officially indicated that it needs the ‘Tejas Mark 2’ (medium combat aircraft). It will carry a more powerful engine and weigh almost 20 per cent heavier than Tejas.
http://www.defencenews.in/article/D...ion-almost-done,-AESA-Radar-next-month-547209
 
vstol Jockey said:
This is what I have been saying all this while. Mk2 will be a bigger disaster than Mk1. The increased weight and comparatively lesser increase in thrust will ruin its performance. Mk2 needs at least a 72/108 KN engine to be able to copy the performance of MK1A.
Click to expand...
What about the Safran aided Kaveri project ? Won't it deliver the required thrust ?
 
_Anonymous_ said:
What about the Safran aided Kaveri project ? Won't it deliver the required thrust ?
Click to expand...
Let it happen first. I have always supported MK1A as the real fighter which will meet our needs. MK2 is a waste of time and money. Increasing the wing span, length and adding canards will not help. We need to just add 0.5m to MK1A and add a more powerful engine.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Reactions: Volcano, suryakiran and _Anonymous_
vstol Jockey said:
Let it happen first. I have always supported MK1A as the real fighter which will meet our needs. MK2 is a waste of time and money. Increasing the wing span, length and adding canards will not help. We need to just add 0.5m to MK1A and add a more powerful engine.
Click to expand...
But we need a fighter with longer legs, would just 0.5m be sufficient.
 
vstol Jockey said:
That will help take the internal fuel to 3 tons. and that will be a very good figure for LCA.
Click to expand...

The AF Mk2 with only a 0.5m increase in length will have a fuel increase of only 20Kg. Repeat, 20Kg. It's not a typo.

The N-Mk2 with a 1m increase in length and a much bigger fuselage will have its fuel load increased by 700Kg.
 
randomradio said:
The AF Mk2 with only a 0.5m increase in length will have a fuel increase of only 20Kg. Repeat, 20Kg. It's not a typo.

The N-Mk2 with a 1m increase in length and a much bigger fuselage will have its fuel load increased by 700Kg.
Click to expand...
The fuselage ht of LCA is about 1.6m and it is 1m wide. A 0.5m plug ahead of the intakes should provide volume of 1.6x1x0.5=0.8cbm or 800 ltrs of fuel. This translates to 625kgs of fuel and total internal fuel will become 2.45+0.625=3075kgs. Reduce some volume for internal structure members and we will have about 3tons.
 
vstol Jockey said:
The fuselage ht of LCA is about 1.6m and it is 1m wide. A 0.5m plug ahead of the intakes should provide volume of 1.6x1x0.5=0.8cbm or 800 ltrs of fuel. This translates to 625kgs of fuel and total internal fuel will become 2.45+0.625=3075kgs. Reduce some volume for internal structure members and we will have about 3tons.
Click to expand...

The number I gave for AF-Mk2 is the official figure published by ADA. Most of the fuselage extension will go into a new avionics bay.
 
1522183701076.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: Himanshu
Navy MK2.jpg

Has anyone got images from different angles of Navy MK2, it was displayed in Aero India ? I am slowly falling in love with Navy MK2.:love::love:

This design just looks perfect!!:cool::cool:
 
  • Like
Reactions: ni8mare and Sathya
Israeli or French Aesa Radar set to Power LCA-Tejas MK-1A : A Report – Indian Defence Research Wing

This article , apart from discussing the contenders for the AESA & EW suite also states that HAL is aiming that the 21st FA would be a LCA Mk1a.Now , we're aware that the FOC for the LCA Mk1 is due in Dec 2018.
Will someone in the know kindly explain how's it that HAL aims to turn out an Mk1a without an FOC ?
 
_Anonymous_ said:
Israeli or French Aesa Radar set to Power LCA-Tejas MK-1A : A Report – Indian Defence Research Wing

This article , apart from discussing the contenders for the AESA & EW suite also states that HAL is aiming that the 21st FA would be a LCA Mk1a.Now , we're aware that the FOC for the LCA Mk1 is due in Dec 2018.
Will someone in the know kindly explain how's it that HAL aims to turn out an Mk1a without an FOC ?
Click to expand...

According to IAF, the LCA Mk1A is basically the Mk1 with AESA radar, IFR etc.

According to HAL, the LCA Mk1A will be lighter and a better design overall than the Mk1A.

FOC is an IAF certification which clears the aircraft for operational roles. And they said that they don't need to provide FOC to the Mk1A since, as far as they are concerned, the Mk1A is basically the Mk1 with some new stuff. So the aircraft does not require further clearances.

It will take as long as 2022 to deliver the remaining 20.
 
  • Like
Reactions: _Anonymous_
_Anonymous_ said:
Israeli or French Aesa Radar set to Power LCA-Tejas MK-1A : A Report – Indian Defence Research Wing

This article , apart from discussing the contenders for the AESA & EW suite also states that HAL is aiming that the 21st FA would be a LCA Mk1a.Now , we're aware that the FOC for the LCA Mk1 is due in Dec 2018.
Will someone in the know kindly explain how's it that HAL aims to turn out an Mk1a without an FOC ?
Click to expand...
Ignore ****. Its admin open forums like these and social media then writes a scoop based on latest rumors.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Aditya and TARGET
RedCannon said:
But we need a fighter with longer legs, would just 0.5m be sufficient.
Click to expand...
No. And it won't be sufficient to overcome it's poor 'area ruling'. Now I don't know much about the area rule and I couldn't be arsed to spend my time reading about it, but what I did read is that it dynamically increases transonic drag if not done right and the Tejas is about 1m shy from right. Which among other things help explain it's poor range vis a vis the Gripen. The Navy was getting the 1m plug but also widening the plane at the same time. What happens with it remains to be seen.

A 1.5m plug to the current version seems about right to bring it to Gripen E level. Gripen E will have an MTOW of 17.2 tons with the same engine and so should we.
 
The enlightened said:
No. And it won't be sufficient to overcome it's poor 'area ruling'. Now I don't know much about the area rule and I couldn't be arsed to spend my time reading about it, but what I did read is that it dynamically increases transonic drag if not done right and the Tejas is about 1m shy from right. Which among other things help explain it's poor range vis a vis the Gripen. The Navy was getting the 1m plug but also widening the plane at the same time. What happens with it remains to be seen.

A 1.5m plug to the current version seems about right to bring it to Gripen E level. Gripen E will have an MTOW of 17.2 tons with the same engine and so should we.
Click to expand...
Where do you apply area ruling and do LCA need area ruling? Area ruling was applied to tube designs of early generation fighters with low wing designs. aircraft with mid wing design or with blended wing-body or blended fuselage-wing design do not need area ruling. LCA is a mid wing design which has a slight amount of wing-fuselage blending and so it does not need area ruling. you seem to be confusing with Fineness Ratio.
Fineness ratio - Wikipedia
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom