I thought that development of Kaveri as an aero engine had been abandoned after the SNECMA re-work proposal fell through.

A tender for cooperation on a 110/75 KN engine’s LP stage was floated out last year. They have decided to open the tender to everyone to get a better deal. It has happened with the Shakti engine for LUH as well.

However, India is jointly producing the PAK FA with Russia . Chances are that it will be tailor made to India’ specifications . So why the need for a Advanced-Medium-Combat-Aircraft ?

Why need an F-16 when F-15 could do everything ?

So , are there any functions that the PAK FA cannot perform for which India needs a Advanced-Medium-Combat-Aircraft ?

Why did Europe build it’s own birds while they could have purchased F-18 and F-15 ? Same reason.

If a Advanced-Medium-Combat-Aircraft can be made available by 2018 , does India still need the LCA MK2 ?

It’s going to be first flight ready, not entering the service ready.

Here in the US , USAF will have the F 35 that will replace the F 16 and X 47 B UCAV will replace the F 18 Super Hornet AND there will be a 6th gen aircraft that will be inducted towards the turn of the decade . So basically we will have just 3 types of aircrafts .

India may have it’s own operational doctrine and there is no right or wrong in this but somehow the logic of having a Advanced-Medium-Combat-Aircraft , PAK FA , LCA MK2 , Rafale escape me .

No, the US will still have hornets, eagles and f-16s well into the next couple of decades. The arrival of F-22 did not mean instant retirement of all F-15s and neither does the arrival of F-35 means that all f-16s will be scrapped right away. Did the USN stop procuring superhornet the moment X-35 took to the air ? You procure one type till the next generation stuff is ready, then you move on to next generation stuff. I don’t see what’s so hard to grasp in this concept.

‘Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft by 2018’
By V Narayana Murthi – VELLORE Published: 07th January 2014 07:52 AM Last Updated: 07th January 2014 07:52 AM

The product design work of Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft has been started by the Defence Research and Development Organization (DRDO) and the vehicle is expected to be ready in 2018, Dr Tamilmani, Director General (Aeronautical Systems) DRDO, Bangalore has said.

Speaking to reporters on the sidelines of the three-day international meet on ‘Product Life Cycle, Modelling, Simulation and Synthesis (PLMSS) at VIT university on Monday,’ he said the aircraft would be equipped with twin engines with super cruise power and for the first time it would be using the stealth technology to ‘hide’ from radar surveillance.

http://www.newindianexpress.com/states/tamil_nadu/Advanced-Medium-Combat-Aircraft-by-2018/2014/01/07/article1987224.ece

http://www.newindianexpress.com/states/odisha/Longest-Range-Ballistic-Missile-All-Set-for-Undersea-Launch/2013/12/10/article1937718.ece

K-4 SLBM would be launched from an underwater pontoon this month. Also expected soon are Nirbhay and Agni 4 trials.

—————————-
It seems like the current Astra design wasn’t even in the picture back in 2009.

^^It started off as a very rear wing mounted design, circa mid 2000s

^^Then the wings moved more mid body (or the missile was shortened) late 2000s

Around this time the missile was probably going through redesign. Two designs are displayed in a 2009 DRDL document.

One is a low aspect ratio design that was being used at that time and another is a high aspect ratio design (like Derby), both having the same surface area.
(The document from which these are from is perhaps the only document in which the name B-05 for Sagarika is mentioned, 4 years before it was made public. http://drdo.gov.in/drdo/pub/dss/2009/main/38-DRDL.pdf)

2012-13 we get to see a totally new design.

Which makes you wonder that will the design displayed for the Astra mk2 variant at Aero India 11 would remain constant till the time it comes to testing.

Its probably not being built from scratch. They’ll still be sourcing components directly from US based suppliers, lowering the production costs for GE.

The good thing about Indian contract is that single crystal blades would be produced locally, which means in case of minor nicks and damages repairs can be done locally and this part:

The basic engine design, as it is used now for instance on the US Navy’s F/A 18 E/F Super Hornets, would stay the same but as new innovations are developed and adopted, they would also be passed on to India.

http://www.indiastrategic.in/topstories1881_India_finalizes_agreement_GE-414_engine_for_LCA.htm
In all probability SAAB must have also been given the same offer. It’s a good thing to reach understanding about the future growth path with your customers.

Yet you’ve made no mention of range and combat radius? The internal fuel of the Tejas should be around 2,458kg.

The source for that 2458 Kg fuel figure is from DRDO Techfocus Feb 2011 issue and the figures stated there are inconsistent. There is an unexplained discrepancy of around 800 Kg between empty and loaded weight, which even if you take into account the weight of the pilot, unaccounted onboard oxygen and two WVR missiles still leaves in excess of 350 Kgs of unexplained weight. The fuel system underwent a major redesign 2011 and other than this there is no mention of Tejas’ internal fuel capacity. The empty and clean take off weight has been consistent for a while now.

Gripen’s internal fuel is just over 2,000kg.

The link given for 2400 Kg internal fuel is from SAAB’s poster comparing Gripen C and Gripen NG. It’s official info. SAAB’s Gripen C brochure mentions internal fuel as ‘> 2 tons’.

In terms of combat radius, the Tejas is at 300km (Link), Gripen at 800km (Link) and JF-17 at 1,352km (Link, Link). The Tejas’ relatively large wing area (38.4m2), compared to 30m2 for the Gripen and only 24.4m2 for the JF-17 may account for that. Interestingly, the T/FA-50, with a similar wing, LERX and tailplane configuration as the JF-17, gives a range of 1,851km, although it’s not clear if this will be its combat radius (Link).

Did you for one moment just think through when you were copying from wiki ? Some of those numbers are hopelessly outdated. The 300 km combat radius figure is from HAL’s page which hasn’t been updated in forever. It still quotes the empty weight as 5500 Kgs.
Tejas’ claimed combat radius and ferry range figures released on IOC 2 are 500 Km and 1700 Km on internal fuel (flighglobal article on Tejas’ IOC 2 incorrectly attributes it with drop tanks). Combat radius and ferry load with external fuel hasn’t been disclosed.
Gripen’s combat radius on internal fuel alone is 800 Km (on internal fuel) and 1550 Km with drop tanks and a ferry range of 3200 Km
PAC claims a ferry range of 3400 Km. The 1352 km of combat radius was claimed back in 2005 when the ferry range was claimed to be 2000 km.
What kind of on station time, payload, external fuel, flight profile, speed is projected in those figures will probably never be disclosed, therefore comparing range without them is an exercise in futility.

I’m sure the production lines could be expanded to cater for any serious interest in potential exports, if there were any. The current order for Tejas from the IAF stands at only 40.

The production line would reach production rate of 16 only by FY 2017 following which it will switch to mk 2 production. The maximum production rate projected for Tejas is 20 planes annually whose production run will coincide with Rafale, LCH, LUH, ALH, IJT, FGFA, MTA, Rustom 1 & II, Ghatak (AURA), Super 30 upgrades and Saras. There will be no spare sub vendor capacity left to ramp up production even if they wanted to.

Upgraded Mirage-2000