AbhimanyuSo no source….? I thought it was speculated in “defense” circles?
Ok give me an Indian source…
Correction. I didn’t say there was a “source”. That’s your word. I said, there is near consensus in BR, where some are defence journalists too.
I would not trust a Swedish source for the Gripen… just like I would not accept a Chinese source for the J-10. What is there to get so defensive about.
Fine. You’ve made your choice.
AbhimanyuGo to BR and read posts by members?
Give me one non-Indian source…
Really ? Are you an Angrezi that you only trust “non-Indian” sources ?
I mean if a European or American says it, Shri. Samsara will lap it up like Scooby-Doo. But if Indians say it, he’ll cower away in shame.
Get a hold of yourself.
AbhimanyuSpeculated by whom…you?
It is speculated in all defence circles. You go to BR forum, there is almost universal consensus that Tejas Mk.2 will equal Gripen-NG.
AbhimanyuDon’t want to put a damper on this but if Tejas is physically smaller than the others mentioned and (I guess) has a higher proportion of composites, why does it not weigh LESS than the others?
It is because it has a few hundred kgs of testing and telemetry equipment on board. Removal of those will reduce weight, but we still go by the 6.5 ton benchmark, as it is displayed by HAL placards at the Aero-India and DefExpo shows every other year.
If Kaveri hit its targets, why was it condemned – I forget by whom, but it was not a journalist – as being unuseable for aviation applications?
As mentioned earlier, Kaveri would’ve worked on a Tejas weighing 5.5 tons. And the Tejas was indeed meant to weigh as much as per the original ASRs laid out in 1986-87 (in fact, the official ADA website still shows Tejas’ empty weight as 5.5 tons. It hasn’t been updated in a decade). But in 20 years requirements changed, and the Tejas now weighs 6.5 tons. So, now the Kaveri’s target too has increased further.
Since Kaveri is not likely to meet that revised target, a tender has been floated to which GE and Eurojet have responded.
Let’s hope that the Mk 2 does not increase in weight in the same way. Let’s hope that EADS’ input can help limit weight increase over Mk 1 to a minimum.
It is speculated that Mk.2 is likely to equate the Gripen-NG in strike capability and avionics.
AbhimanyuAnd so I was corrected a month back by lca stalwarts however the way the ether is I have come to understand that there maybe some weight issues in the structure which may not be solved by higher thrust engine
See, there are no “weight issues” with Tejas’ structure either. It uses a greater composite percentage than even Eurofighter, and has one of the fewest joints / parts globally. So you can be rest assured of that.
Its true it uses a Jaguar-ish undercarriage, which is NOT weight optimized for a smaller jet like Tejas. But its not a crippling problem. Don’t worry, Tejas Mk.1’s empty weight is the same as its contemporaries like Gripen C/D, JF-17 and KAI T-150. Two of these use the same engine as Tejas Mk.1 too i.e. GE-F404.
What is scarcely reported by the media is that Tejas needs a flat-rated engine. Now, Kaveri in its PRESENT FORM would’ve worked on a Tejas that would’ve weighed 5.5 tons (amusing to note that kaveri actually meets ASR specs laid 20 years ago). But we’ve seen that a 5.5 ton Tejas is impossible to build. That’s why we have media accusations like Tejas is “overweight”, Kaveri is a “dud”, blah..blah..blah.
And if the Gripen’s example is to go by, the NG’s weight is actually 0.6 tons more than the C/D version — after all the landing gear realignment.
AbhimanyuNo one told me about the nlca weight issues but unless they have sorted out the lca weight issues I do not see how the nlca would come out lighter and better performing. I heard about the lca in the ether.
Tejas too has no “weight issues”. You seem to be going by The Hindu newspaper’s reports from 2 years ago, which are totally wrong.
AbhimanyuSpitfire, EADS was roped in to quicken up testing, my guess is that it will be used during IOC–>FOC of Mk-1 itself.
Actually EADs only will eventually provide consultancy for Mk.2 also, given that Lockheed had dropped out of contention even for Mk.1. Also, the chances of Eurojet’s engine being selected over GE-F414 are brighter, given that its an EADs product again. So, the best can be extracted out of their consultancy.
I expect the other two, Mk2 and NLCA to be looked in as well. ADA/HAL for their part have been extremely quiet about how the Mk2 will end up looking like, what changes it would have from Mk1. that is the most important phase in the future.
N-Tejas will get consultancy for the landing gear and undercarriage most importantly. I’m not sure though, whether it too shall get a new engine like Tejas Mk.2, or continue using the older GE-F404.
About Mk.2, the main change is in the engine and undercarriage. Other additions like AESA radar, IRST and sensor-fusion shall also be there.
Even if thrust is sorted they still need to sort out weight issues structural loading will only increase with a higher thrust engine. What do you do then? Limit nlca to 4g?
Who told you there are “weight issues” in N-Tejas ?
AbhimanyuIt was mentioned that since this is the first major attempt, they had over designed the aircraft to avoid any mishaps. The consultancy from EADS will assist in shaving of these extras. Irrespective of that the Navy is looking at future prospects in trying to build a naval fighter. Lice to see that Navy is well committed to the project.
The above is true. It is known that Tejas’ undercarriage has been adopted from the Jaguar (licenced produced by HAL), to be on the safer side during stress tests and fatigue tests. ADA obviously does not have the decades of experience and knowledge, unlike Dassault or Boeing.
It is very likely that if the undercarriage is redesigned by EADs consultancy, it will help not only in weight reduction, but free up more space for fuel — just as in Gripen – NG. In addition to a 95 kN engine the Tejas Mk.2 will give Gripen-NG a serious run for its money.
Once the new engine is selected I guess thrust would not be an issue any longer.
Actually, thrust has never been an issue but the flat-rated feature has been. Had the flat-rated Kaveri been ready, the new engines would not have been needed at all.
AbhimanyuHAL excels in only one thing :- copy produce under licence. Whether they do it for IAF or for exports, doesn’t matter. It is their CORE corporate philosophy.
No wonder RTA-70 and AMCA are being designed indigenously by NAL and ADA respectively. But HAL ? They ran straight to Russia for an outdated MRTA design and a PAK-FA with a twin-seat thrown in.
And when NAL and ADA will turn to HAL to mass-produce the RTA-90 and AMCA respectively, the HAL people will refuse as they’ll have their hands full with licence producing MRTA, PAK-FA, MRCA etc.
AbhimanyuEurope launches a broadside against US in `mother of all defence deals’
The above tabloid gossip could only have come from Times of India. Full of gossip, devoid of relevance. Rajat Pandit does not bother to report about Arjun’s coming of age, or a detailed report on N-Tejas’ rollout.
But a 500 word essay on the heresay of EADs officials is given importance in ToI. Besides, this phrase “mother of all defence deals” is a ToI fabrication only. We must not subscribe to it, and I’m glad BR news page also did not feature this particular news report.
AbhimanyuNow it looks like AK Antony and Pallam Raju(both socialists from Kerala and ardent supporters of the DPSUs) may have forced them into accepting more. I just hope the IAF doesn’t end up browbeaten into taking a product that’s behind the standards of its contemporaries just to support indigenous industry.
Actually IAF had already indicated an option for 20 more Tejas some 3-4 years back, in addition to 28 units (these 28 ones were committed more than 6 years ago). The option of 20 additional jets was to be exercised if the performance of the Tejas to IAF justified even more orders — which it has.
The IAF needs a Mk.2 version, just as later tranches / batches of new & improved Rafale and Typhoon were asked for, by their respective air-forces.
More specifically, the Kaveri is the reason why a Mk.2 version was asked for. Kaveri is a flat-rated engine, meaning that it could provide reasonably high thrust even at low altitudes and high temperatures. But so far, the max. thrust of Kaveri is only 81 kN, whereas the IAF needs 85-90 kN FLAT-RATED.
Thus, the IAF asked to float a tender in which GE’s F-414 and Eurojet’s EJ-2000 are participating. Both are of 95-100 kN class, and will compensate for the lack of the flat-rated attribute in Kaveri.
——
Having said the above, the IAF must order a total of 350-400 Tejas units, and not just 150. In this day and age, when Chinese J-7s alone outnumber the ENTIRE IAF’s fleet strength, the time of having a few hundred units of 1 type has come. Even DRDO’s former chief Dr. Natarajan had emphasized this.
AbhimanyuThe above is very good news. This takes the total number of Tejas Mk.1 jets all set to join the IAF, to 48. The first of these will join the IAF this year itself.
The only “doom sayers” remaining of the Tejas are Times of India and the Indian Express.
It may also be hoped that after a brief stint at Sulur, they are all shifted to their permanent base at Phalodi, Rajasthan.
AbhimanyuDid you also happen to spot its first sentence:
How is it that the GE/Eurojet choice was due 3 months after the article was written but 23 months later the choice has still not been made? Starting from now, when is the choice between the engines due to be made? In another 3 months perhaps? That would be around June 2012, wouldn’t it? 🙁
Please note that GE and Eurojet submitted their bids in response to the RFP in Dec, 2009 (one day before the last date). Only 7 months later i.e. in July 2010, DRDO announced that the technical evaluation was over and commercial evaluation would begin. This will be done by MoD and finance ministry, I think.
I don’t follow why you should feel the need to spend time and money fixing something that is claimed not to be a problem unless it really is a problem.
Please note that Mitsubishi company of Japan has sent an RFI for Kaveri for their 5th gen. fighter project. Its because Kaveri has proven itself in the 81 kN category. Its only that IAF’s requirements are 85-90 kN.
I have the impression that an awful lot of failure in the LCA program is either ignored (eg failure to hold to schedule) or denied (eg air intake problems). You don’t get the result you want by failing to do things on time or by pretending problems don’t exist.
There are NO problems or denials about Tejas.
Please note :-
1) Two years back, a careless report in The Hindu newspaper claimed that Tejas was 2 tons overweight. It was later proven that Tejas is not overweight at all, but on par with its contemporaries like Gripen-C, JF-17 and KAI T-50. That report was baseless.
2) Now this report comes along that claims Tejas’ intakes are “faulty”, when no such thing is there. A delta-wing fighter like Mirage-2000 simply CANNOT execute 50 deg AoA like an F-18 gone crazy. So, this report has also proven to be baseless. As per this official technical document by ADA from 2005, (now defunct), the design target AoA of Tejas is 26 degrees, whereas 22 degrees had been touched at the time of publishing in 2005.
I’m sure that now it has touched 26 degrees AoA.
Please note that contrary to your opinion, Tejas IS THE MOST WIDELY SCRUTINIZED AND CRITICIZED FIGHTER JET OF ALL TIME. ALL ITS TECHNICAL INFORMATION IS PUBLIC IN GREAT DETAIL, WHICH LEAVES NO DOUBT. EVEN THE LEGENDARY F-16s AND MiG-29s CANNOT BOAST SUCH HIGH LEVELS OF TRANSPARENCY.
AbhimanyuWhat ajai shukla is saying is that the lca intake have a tough time getting to 28 degrees because the inlets could choke. He may be wrong to quote the 50 degrees but he is crystal clear about that point.
Actually exactly 2 years ago on 17 July 2008, Ajai Shukla had written a detailed article about Tejas’ new auxillary intakes.
In it he said, and I quote, “Top HAL decision-makers pooh-pooh the IAF’s contention that the LCA’s air intakes are incorrectly designed, resulting in oxygen starvation and incomplete burning and, therefore, sub-optimal engine power from the F-404s. At the same time, however, steps are being taken to improve air intake, without getting into major redesign that could set back the programme by years. Instead, auxiliary air intakes are being provided on the sides of the Tejas engine housing — similar to those on the Jaguar (see photos)……………..later LSPs will incorporate the auxiliary air intakes.“
Again, in the latest article also, he quotes IAF officers as saying that the intakes are incorrectly designed. So its actually a “tussle” between IAF and HAL. As we’ve seen, there is zero merit in IAF’s charge.
————
Shri. Rajat Pandit has written a corner article on Tejas Navy’s rollout. Of course, the tone and tenor have thrown journalistic propriety out of the window, and the articles seems even worse than a highly opinionated and virulent Op-ed or “Letter to the Editor”.
Wonder how Shri. Rajat Pandit gets it past the proof-readers or reviewers at ToI. Whatever be the case, the guy clearly has a mandate to spout scorn on DRDO.
AbhimanyuDont worry about our broken hearts anymore…. 😀
PAF’s JF-17 Thunder to participate in Farnborough Air Show
LONDON, July 5 (APP)- Pakistan Air Force will put on display its latest JF-17 Thunder warplanes at the world famous international air show in Farnborough from July 19 to 22, it was announced by Pakistan High Commission.The spokesperson at the High Commission said two aircraft will display their flying characteristics during the course of the biennial show where leading world defence manufacturers often unveil their latest aviation tools.PAF Chief Air Chief Marshal Rao Suleman Qamar is expected to be present on the occasion.
Well, the official website of Farnborough airshow does not list JF-17s in the flying displays. However, 2xJF-17s by CATIC are listed in the static display section..
Let’s see what happens.
Sign In
