Why didn't you pitch the MSA to the MoD as Mk-2? Parrikar gave you a hearing as per your posts in the previous forum. Why didn't things progress after that? How about pitching it once more to the present RM?
Tejas Mk2 (Medium Weight Fighter) - News and discussions
- Thread starter Schwifty
- Start date
Parrikar could not go against what the DRDO advised him. DRDO did not want MK2 program to be shelved at any cost so they refused to support my program and I did not have money to take it forward. I need a total of USD400M to complete the program.
So where does your program stand now? Is it officially scrapped or in the cold storage?
we are working to bring to the level of 75% scale model flight testing. We have money for that. We are also talking to some people for finance. I am sure that once we demonstrate the safe flying of 75% scale model, we will get support of GOI.
And who'll fly this 75% scaled model? Pilots with less than 5ft height or will it be remote controlled?
Logically speaking TEDBF program is poor investment of money and resources, but MK2 &AMCA is a genuine requirement.
Some programmes launched by HAL only aim at thwarting the arrival of the Rafale, they do not aim at achieving a result. I don't think the operation will succeed.
There is No Substitute for Rafale
TEDBF is for replacing MiG 29 K -- Naval carrier based fighter
AMCA is for the Future 5 th Generation
Both are for 2030 and beyond
LCA MK 2 will replace 3 planes
Jaguar , Mirage 2000 and MiG 29
MK1 A and the MK 1 are for replacing MIG 21 Bison
MIG 29 K are all going to crash till 2030
Already 3 have crashed
It is either TEDBF Or Rafale M or F 18
The question is how many new TEDBF will manufactured,36 or 54? Do we really need to put our efforts on such a small numbers?
Its better to purchase off the shelf f18 or Rfale for our two ACs as a stop gap measurements and make spinoff of AMCA for naval platforms.
May be they have a plan.
Problem with LCA was that one was designed everything from scratch and dont know whether that wouldbe successful or not .
In time it turned out to be a succesful one.
Now they have an established successful operational design.
AFAIK , these MK 2 is just an iteration of already established LCA.Wont take much effort for that .
Up to that its safe.
But TEBDF seems an unnecessary one .AMCA will take at least 2030s .
If they want to realise TEBDF for further advantage in AMCA.
Then its a shot that we can take
Rafale already have a role.
The one that HAL proposes is in totally different role.Rafale is a stop gap measure until we materalise AMCA.
From 2035 onwards , the earliest Su 30s , which were inducted till 2005 , that is 30 year old Sukhois will also have to be replaced
So.TEDBF will also have a Twin engined version for IAF
AMCA being 5 th Gen will obviously be more expensive -- if at all we succeed or else we will have to buy Su 57
By 2035 AMCA will be a matured platform, probably MK2 version too will be ready. Now tell me which platform IAF will choose? A fifth generation stealth fighter designed and developed based on IAF's flight characteristics or a land varient of 4th generation naval fighter?
More over MKI is a heavy platform,the logical replacement of MKI is su57.
Remember vstol jockey was saying canard placement in mk2 is suboptimal.
Recent news info that TEDBF will have better placement of canards + tech Amca.
I am eagerly looking for TEDBF & ORCA to succeed early so that mk2 orders can be reduced .
Mk1 order is so small will be over in 2 years +1 year trainer.
Mk1A 73 samples @ rate of 12 / year average - looking at 2029 .
If ORCA gets ready by 2035 , we can finish the mk2 program earlier and switch over.
---------
If we make 16 planes per year, we ll have 640 fighter entirely indigenous by 40 years.
Recent news info that TEDBF will have better placement of canards + tech Amca.
I am eagerly looking for TEDBF & ORCA to succeed early so that mk2 orders can be reduced .
Mk1 order is so small will be over in 2 years +1 year trainer.
Mk1A 73 samples @ rate of 12 / year average - looking at 2029 .
If ORCA gets ready by 2035 , we can finish the mk2 program earlier and switch over.
---------
If we make 16 planes per year, we ll have 640 fighter entirely indigenous by 40 years.
Last edited:
The weight gain on Mk2 due to larger size is being offset by an engine which delivers just extra 8KN of thrust. We will end up with even poor TWR for MK2 than what we have for MK1A.
TEDBF is LCA MK2 with twin engines and same configuration which has 50*/62.5* swept compound delta. No deck based fighter has ever been made with such high sweepback angles. Now what we will have is that we will get an aircraft with oversized engines which will result in suboptimal performance of the engines resulting in poor range. The aircraft size/weight has to be optimised for the engine used as a jet engine has best SFC at about 87% thrust. If the engine is operating most of the time below this thrust rating, it will have poor SFC which will result in poor range. Its like putting a truck engine in Maruti Alto.
