Tejas Mk2 (Medium Weight Fighter) - News and discussions

_Anonymous_ said:
If we are going to use the LCA for it, assuming it proves adequate for the job, can't it power the MCA then? Or will we require better iterations of it, another round of testings to go with it and the same old problem of not mating a new engine with a new plane?

What's the future of the Kaveri program then? What about all that talk of designing K 10, K 11, etc? What happens to them? Will they be using better iterations of the M88 core? What happens to the Kabini core then? How will using the M88 core to power the K9 help us in gaining technological know-how of designing optimal cores? What about IPR, ToT, etc for such cores as SAFRAN supplies? Will GTRE be co owners of the IPR in case better iterations of the M88 go into the K10, K11 etc?

In earnest anticipation of a response.
Click to expand...
As of now Kaveri is in same league as RD33. It needs to be proven first in air and than we can upgrade it either on our own or with help from others. The same engine has potential to go up to 110KN but for that we will need a core which can withstand higher compression ratio of about 27 from present 21 and also a turbine which can withstand much higher tempratures. Right now even the fan pressure ratio is well below the optimum.
SAFRAN can help in two manners. It can either give us a new core derived from M88 or help augument the present Kabini core with tech transfer. In either case the IPR will be with India only.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
  • Agree
Reactions: Techy, randomradio and _Anonymous_
_Anonymous_ said:
It then begs the question, what is the K10 going to power? MCA? Mk1a?
Click to expand...

It won't come in time for Mk1A anyway. And it won't power MCA either since ADA has already made the decision to stick with something proven. Maybe during MLUs.

Perhaps a Kaveri powered Mk1A and MCA can be made for export, but this requires certification all over again, whereas it's easier for us to sell the LCA/MCA with American support that comes with an American engine, especially considering after 2025, they won't have an equivalent platform to export after the F-16 production winds down.

K10 can be used to power a whole host of UAVs and UCAVs that will eventually be designed after 2025. These aircraft will be the future, not manned jets.

Also K10 derivatives can be used to power civilian aircraft like transport aircraft, jetliners, luxury jets etc, both subsonic and supersonic.

It can even run ships, locomotives etc. For example, the Marine Kaveri delivers a power output of 12MW, which is enough to run navy ships. So a K10 derived marine engine will be able to deliver even more power. The Delhi class uses 4 such engines that deliver 15MW each. This will allow us to make corvettes and frigates with the superior COGAG configuration instead of the currently used CODAD and CODOG configurations which involves the use of diesel engines.

Plenty of uses. Mk1A and MCA are just blips in the whole scheme of things.
 
  • Like
Reactions: _Anonymous_
vstol Jockey said:
As of now Kaveri is in same league as RD33. It needs to be proven first in air and than we can upgrade it either on our own or with help from others. The same engine has potential to go up to 110KN but for that we will need a core which can withstand higher compression ratio of about 27 from present 21 and also a turbine which can withstand much higher tempratures. Right now even the fan pressure ratio is well below the optimum.
SAFRAN can help in two manners. It can either give us a new core derived from M88 or help augument the present Kabini core with tech transfer. In either case the IPR will be with India only.
Click to expand...

Kabini should be developed using our own technologies. Otherwise our R&D will atrophy.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: _Anonymous_
_Anonymous_ said:
So the entire project ends in failure. What were the last mile glitches that were to be sorted out by Safran all about? Last heard they have certified the Kaveri to be good enough to undergo limited envelope flight testing. What's all this now? @randomradio ; @Picdelamirand-oil

Can you gentlemen shed some light on this?
Click to expand...
No news about it in France I'm afraid.
Maybe it's a little bit too fresh to have reactions....
 
  • Informative
Reactions: _Anonymous_
It is pretty much a brand new aircraft. No way they can finish it up for production by 2026.

2030 is far more likely. And at that time China once again will have hundreds of J20's, Porkis with tens of stealth J--blah.

Its time has come and gone. With the limited budget available, India needs to work on at least ensuring tech superiority when we are incapable of matching the numbers that are being flown by adversaries.
 
Tsunami said:
Can't stop myself from doing stupid calculations... So hear they are...

Max. take Off Weight =17.5 tons
Weapon Load = 6.5 tons
So Loaded Weight = 11 tons
Internal Fuel = 3.3 tons
So empty weight = 11000 Kg - 3300 kg - 500 Kg (Additional Load) = 7200 KG (7.2 tons)

Fuel fraction = 30%
Wing will be around 40 sq Meter
So wing loading should be around 275 Kg/Sq Meter
If an 70/110 Kn engine is used then Trust to weight Ratio will be 0.65 Dry and 1 max.

ADA defiantly have tried for a very good plane in terms of specs at least on paper.
Click to expand...

Hi I saw similar post on BR,
If u r in BR , please ask Indranil for the following details,

Once he said he came know bout something that makes lungi flutter ...
That's regarding Tejas Mk1.
He gave a clue - about flight envelope

-----

And also eagerly waiting for his write up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shekhar Singh
Sathya said:
Hi I saw similar post on BR,
If u r in BR , please ask Indranil for the following details,

Once he said he came know bout something that makes lungi flutter ...
That's regarding Tejas Mk1.
He gave a clue - about flight envelope

-----

And also eagerly waiting for his write up.
Click to expand...
No I am not on BRF and these are just my stupid calculations.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sancho
Doesn't it look more serpentine?
 

Attachments

  • IMG_20190221_224650.jpg
    IMG_20190221_224650.jpg
    791 KB · Views: 331
  • Like
Reactions: randomradio, TARGET, Pundrick and 1 other person
try and recollect my earlier posts on another forum with @ersaktivel, I had very clearly stated that a tailless delta will never be able to meet the needs of deck ops and that LCA will need additional control surfaces to be able to afford anykind of respectable performance from Deck.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Sathya, randomradio and Bon Plan
randomradio said:
@vstol Jockey

If you are feeling better, can you give us an expert opinion on the aerodynamics of the MCA and N-MCA?

img_20190220_083033-jpg.4437


dz03gwmwkaacw4l-jpg.4439


dz1abcywkaezho9-jpg.4442
Click to expand...

A good look with canards !
Just a small worry about the forward position of the canards versus air intakes. Close coupled canards can disturb the air intakes flow.
The combo of CCC and levcon is interesting.
 
vstol Jockey said:
try and recollect my earlier posts on another forum with @ersaktivel, I had very clearly stated that a tailless delta will never be able to meet the needs of deck ops and that LCA will need additional control surfaces to be able to afford anykind of respectable performance from Deck.
Click to expand...
And I'm afraid a tailed delta is short versus a close coupled canard & delta for deck operation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom