RD-33 is a decent engine, just not suitable for LCA. There was enough time to reengine the Mk1A with F414 instead.
What's the IAF got to do with this?
LCA Tejas Mk1 & Mk1A - News and discussions
- Thread starter Ashwin
- Start date
-
- Tags
- indian defence forum
RD-33 is a decent engine, just not suitable for LCA. There was enough time to reengine the Mk1A with F414 instead.
What's the IAF got to do with this?
Engines are no longer a problem but the Israeli components, right?
Because I remember the no45 was raised with just 2 airframes. So with 6 engines, we can easily set up a full fledged training and operational conversion unit for Mk1A.
Because I remember the no45 was raised with just 2 airframes. So with 6 engines, we can easily set up a full fledged training and operational conversion unit for Mk1A.
Going for the ge-404 instead of the rd-33
How is it not? It has the same wet thrust as the ge-404-in20 (88kN-90kN)
Approx the same size is produced in India and we have the MRO facilities for it in India.
Why aren't we building tedbf based on it is equally ironic. We already have a engine we can use that fulfills the same role as the Kaveri.
If there was Ever a Himalayan Blunder , related to Tejas , it was NOT selecting the AL 31 engine from Russia on which J 10 is
Powered
A small engine like 404 means an overall small airframe and then we WANT TO FIT in everything
The lack of internal space to work around has caused all the problems , from Radar ,Radome , IFR probe , EW suite , weapon stations , limited internal fuel etc etc
Either AL 31 or M53 ie Mirage 2000 engine should have been chosen
By the way GE 414 was offered to India in 2003
But ADA didn't want to redesign the LCA ,.so they persisted with 404
The whole LSP.series ie LSP 1 to LSP 8 happened because they were not sure how far they can " expand the envelope " with respect to the airframe
And then Mr Parrikar forced MK1A on IAF in 2016
Where as IAF wanted ADA to focus on a larger MK 2 with more load carrying capacity
AL 31 could have been used
F 16 also has ONE big Engine generating 130 KN
That is why F 16 is so successful,.more fuel ,.more weapons , EW pods , AESA radar
Even J 10 earlier versions were powered by AL 31
It is only now that WS 10 has been installed on J 10
The F404 was a far superior engine in the 80s. I'm talking about 10 years ago.
The IAF doesn't want Mk1A deliveries without achieving FOC.
Very low service life. No FADEC. Dependency on Russians. Back then we should have chosen the Mirage 2000's M53.
F414 is better than RD-33.
Mig-21 was the reference design for LCA in terms of weight and dimensions.
Tejas could have been the f-16 XL but I understand the su-30 had not joined the service when the Tejas program began.
But we had the mig 29 since the 80's someone should have talked with the Russians for the rd-33 uprating.
Trusting western (I'm no one to say this considering I shill for American hardware) supply has been hugely disappointing. Considering Kinematics is no more a serious deal in this era of bvr combat. It would make sense for taking the rd-33.
What's the point of having a better engine when you can't produce it. Plus present rd-33 mk has fadec and gives the same performance as the ge-404 in20
F-16 & J-10 are supposed to be Medium-Weight Single-Engined fighter. Tejas was supposed to be Mig-21 replacent so there was absolutely no question of putting AL-31F into it. For Tejas MK1/A GE404 was the best choice.
However, going for GE414 when we could have chosen a derivative of M-88 from France or EJ-200 from UK would have been the far smarter option. Anyways, don't think GOI anticipated such level of hostility and backstabbing by the Americans post skirmish with Pak.
Anyways, both engines are locked now for Tejas MK1A & MK2 and for now there is no plan B. However, once we develop AMCA's final engine with French collaboration, that engine will go into MK2 MLU.
For now though, we are stuck with Uncle Sam's whims and mercy
Any particular reason for elta rada selection over uttam ,why has been uttam pushed further down the order on mk1a ,was it not certified,every now and then we hear how it's superior to elta then what's stopping the certification?
What will happen if we are unable to solve interference issues ,using israeli radar i think one of the major blunder apart from usa's engine .
@randomradio@rajputlion etc
What will happen if we are unable to solve interference issues ,using israeli radar i think one of the major blunder apart from usa's engine .
@randomradio@rajputlion etc
After F404 was chosen in the 80s, they was no going back. RD-33 back then wasn't a good engine, it was extremely basic. We got the Americans to develop our own version.
Things could have changed after IOC had they replaced it directly with F414. But LCA Mk1 was always just around the corner. Had they known back then they would take 10 years to deliver Mk1A, it would have given them enough time to reengine it. It would have taken the same amount of time. HAL was capable of doing it on their own too.
GE 414 was offered to India in 2003
ADA rejected it
They were busy with their LSP Science project series
And even when LSP 4 was flying in 2010, ADA had selected 414 for MK 2
So they were aware of the problems ,limitations and complications arising out of a SMALL AIRFRAME powered by 404
GRIPEN had selected 414 in 2005 for NG variant
May be that is the time ADA realised the Limitations of 404
Last edited: