What's new

HAL Tejas | Updates, News & Discussions-[Thread 2]

B96E7NpCMAA-Iam.jpg


B96GgAJCEAM23bQ.jpg


Tejas: Designed dev'd & made in India; by Indians for Indian Air Force for operating from anywhere in India & beyond

B96DLTrCUAEcUgA.jpg
 
.
Looks like we have repositioned Landing gear On the N-LCA Mk2 they will change the position of the landing gear and brought it more towards the wing/fuselage joint. As Cmdr Sukesh Nagaraj, Deputy Project Director of the N-LCA program said The landing gear will then retract into a fairing for that. That will also free up space in the fuselage for additional fuel .

The air intake also to be enlarged by 10mm for MK2 more over due to larger furl intake arrangements for F414-GE-INS6 these changes can be seen ...


Nice Picture . But only thing I was disappointed when I came to know that range won't be increased much when compared to MK1

Due to increase in diameter of engine the centerline has to be stretched a bit .But wing span is same .

And its not Conformal tank . I think


MK2 is supposed have 40% higher fuel so as range.
 
Last edited:
.
MK1 is supposed have 40% higher fuel so as range.
Do u mean MK2 ? But latest post in this thread on interview of Tejas team 2013 Aero India ... States that larger intake for new engine F414-GE so consumption also more . So there won't be too much difference . Am just quoting from the article . He might be wrong but may be right aswell .
 
.
Do u mean MK2 ? But latest post in this thread on interview of Tejas team 2013 Aero India ... States that larger intake for new engine F414-GE so consumption also more . So there won't be too much difference . Am just quoting from the article . He might be wrong but may be right aswell .


Powerful engine consumes more fuel but at peak performance. I will give you an example. Suppose LCA MK1 and MK2 are flying at 800 KM/Hr with same load. It will require power X for Mk1 and Y for MK2. X>Y since Mk2 shall have lower weight and better aerodynamic. Now the fuel required by Mk2 shall be less than that of MK1. Since MK2 powerful engine operates at higher compression ratio and generate same more power for same fuel. So over all Mk2 shall be consuming less fuel than MK1 for a particular output of power.

Alternatively, If X power is required from both engines, Mk1 engine need to propel at at say X rpm than Mk2 engine need to propale at aroung 0.8X since it is 20% more powerful. So Pushing Mk2 engine at 0.8 X will require less fuel.
 
. .
So all in all N Tejas MK2 with a weight of ,7.0 tons with 108 KN engine is laieky to give some handsome T/W ratio.

Not really, the speculated emergency thrust increase is only for specific situations and not ment to be used all the time and you forget a looooooot of weight that was added.

Single seat LCA MK1 - 6560Kg empty (and we need to see if that changes with the FOC version and the added IFR system)
+ Twin seat config
+ LEVCONS, navalisation of fuselage and gear as well as hook

That alone puts a fully developed N-LCA MK1 far above 7t, without the MK2 changes, which includes several airframe changes, additional internal weights of engine, fuel tanks and avionics...
At the moment I don't see how an N-LCA MK2 should come below 8t empty weight with all the changes and weight increase and even if you only take the current internal fuel capacity of 2458Kg, it would put the TWR below 1, add external payloads and it will drop even further.
 
. . .
Just noticed that the Naval Tejas has more ground clearance than the IAF version.
 
. . . . . . .

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom