Tejas Mk2 (Medium Weight Fighter) - News and discussions

[Sathya]

Deodhare conceded that there have been delays in the Tejas programme due to optimistic projections of time by its designers, developers and producers, and added that Tejas Mark II will be a twin-engine advanced medium combat aircraft (AMCA) with a heavier GE-414 engine as compared to the GE 404 engine of the Mark I.

**** .Read more at India No 1 Defence News Website 35 years after inception, Tejas Mark I design frozen – Indian Defence Research Wing .


What the hell is this ?

 

[randomradio]

Probably misquoted.

 

[sid4587]

People are saying that wings are shifted back, i feel air intake has been just extended to bent it down. anyone here to guide?

 

[R!cK]

People are saying that wings are shifted back, i feel air intake has been just extended to bent it down. anyone here to guide?

The air inlets seem a lot more slanted than the Mk-1's? Aerodynamic improvements are to be expected, so no surprise though -

View attachment 4322
View attachment 4323

The air intake is made wider at the inlet section to cater for higher mass flow for the new engine. This gives the impression of the air intakes being more slanted when viewed from this angle.

The current GE F404 engines have an air mass flow of about 153 lb/sec as against the figure of 170 lb/sec for the GE 414. The higher mass flow requirement results in a wider inlet section for the Mk2.

Good Day!

 

[LoneWolfSandeep]

No, the canards will not cover the intakes.

View attachment 4298

looks gripen E-ish to me

 

[randomradio]

looks gripen E-ish to me

Both are delta canard designs.

ADA should have designed the LCA with canards right from the beginning though.

Gripen E entered the assembly process this month. We could have been doing the same had we planned LCA with canards right from the start. Too late for that.

 

[R!cK]

looks gripen E-ish to me

Actually besides having a canard, its nothing like Gripen - E. Gripen honestly has a better aerodynamic design with good performance improvement with their Canard-Wing arrangement, and they have made real improvements with regard to mid fuselage arrangement and landing gear compartment. I'm with @Vstoljockey on this one, it's really difficult to make out how useful this canard arrangement will be on Tejas. All they have done is lower the leading edge of the wing at the root and make space to attach a canard there. The leading edge of both the canard and the wing root is surprisingly close and with very minimal clearance, this will also result in limitation of canard deflection angles. For some serious performance improvement, the only choice was to redesign intake/wing/canard arrangement which is not an option right now due to the amount of time required to design and test all that. What were they seriously doing for the last few years apart from bringing different scale models to every AeroIndia shows?

 

[LoneWolfSandeep]

Actually besides having a canard, its nothing like Gripen - E. Gripen honestly has a better aerodynamic design with good performance improvement with their Canard-Wing arrangement, and they have made real improvements with regard to mid fuselage arrangement and landing gear compartment. I'm with @Vstoljockey on this one, it's really difficult to make out how useful this canard arrangement will be on Tejas. All they have done is lower the leading edge of the wing at the root and make space to attach a canard there. The leading edge of both the canard and the wing root is surprisingly close and with very minimal clearance, this will also result in limitation of canard deflection angles. For some serious performance improvement, the only choice was to redesign intake/wing/canard arrangement which is not an option right now due to the amount of time required to design and test all that. What were they seriously doing for the last few years apart from bringing different scale models to every AeroIndia shows?

You are taking it too literally, comparing nuts & bolts - i explicitly mentioned "ish" at the end for a reason. Center fuselage tender hasnt released wings design detail yet, so a lot is left to imagination of how it would be, Canards are defiantly there.
Never said its a Gripen E & cant deny whats released in tender has some similarity to Gripen E - Hence my stress on "Looks"

 

[hellbent]

Actually besides having a canard, its nothing like Gripen - E. Gripen honestly has a better aerodynamic design with good performance improvement with their Canard-Wing arrangement, and they have made real improvements with regard to mid fuselage arrangement and landing gear compartment. I'm with @Vstoljockey on this one, it's really difficult to make out how useful this canard arrangement will be on Tejas. All they have done is lower the leading edge of the wing at the root and make space to attach a canard there. The leading edge of both the canard and the wing root is surprisingly close and with very minimal clearance, this will also result in limitation of canard deflection angles. For some serious performance improvement, the only choice was to redesign intake/wing/canard arrangement which is not an option right now due to the amount of time required to design and test all that. What were they seriously doing for the last few years apart from bringing different scale models to every AeroIndia shows?

Read this to understand why they included carnards

@vstol Jockey

 

[Sancho]

Like I said, we're being extremely optimistic with regard to Mk-2 timelines. And @randomradio was expecting us to start building Mk2 prototypes this year itself.

Well, even if randomly made claims often turn out to be wrong, I wouldn't take PSK as the best source either. Lot of his conclusions turn out to be wrong as well.

 

[_Anonymous_]

Well, even randomly made claims often turn out to be wrong, I wouldn't take PSK as the best source either. Lot of his conclusions turn out to be wrong as well.

Welcome back. A contrarian view is always appreciated. Especially, in the face of unabashed optimism.

 

[Sancho]

Definitely not .

Sancho is full time critic.

Always trying to find out the drawbacks / wrong doing in deal.

Not at all, I give credit AND criticism when it's due. But if you prefer factually wrong, pride driven and over optimistic views, I am certainly the wrong one for you.

PKS provides interesting official info's and if I were him and had the access to such informations, you would have seen them before.

 

[Sancho]

Empty structural weight - 1800 Kg (approx. excluding Wings/Tail/Canards)

The most important question is, what will this MK2 weigh at the end and how will the design changes effect the drag?
MK1 airframes already suffered from overweight and drag, which resulted in limited flight performance. The engine tender and the required thrust was aimed on an MK2 with much less design changes and still in the light class. So will all these changes make it any better, or end up in making things worse?

Would be interesting to know the weight of the carnards or even better, the emptyweight of MK2.

 

[Sancho]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1097882082410487809

 

[R!cK]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1098049259868430338

https://twitter.com/x/status/1098049714828861440

 

[Ankit Kumar]

LCA MK2 or MCA

 

[TARGET]

LCA MK2 or MCA

Include a inbuilt IRST in MK2

The canard position are just placed between existing Space (no change in width between wing and cockpit ) but yes due to longer fuselage the glass cockpit moved little bit forward...that’s my observation.

 

[R!cK]

LCA MK2 or MCA

11 Hardpoints which includes 2 wingtip rails, 6 wing pylons, 2 intake pylons and 1 centerline pylon. Inbuilt IRST and EW suite. Really hope this works out, atleast on paper this is a good aircraft to replace Jaguars and M2000.

 

[Sathya]

Good Day![/QUOTE]

11 Hardpoints which includes 2 wingtip rails, 6 wing pylons, 2 intake pylons and 1 centerline pylon. Inbuilt IRST and EW suite. Really hope this works out, atleast on paper this is a good aircraft to replace Jaguars and M2000.

any pic of side mounted gun ?

 

[Maximus]

LCA Tejas Mk 2 : Medium Weight Fighter