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

[calmDown@all]

I think there is a bit of problem in ur assessment, u have stated lca mk 2 to be about 5776 cr, while the stealthier version to be 2431 cr.

well yeah i thik so because its an old written reply in rajya sabha by a.k. antony that makes sence if i am wrong about it

 

[Ankit Kumar 001]

Improvements are ok.

But where are Tejas Serial Production aircrafts in IOC2 condition which HAL promised to deliver ?

 

[Hulk]

Yes.

Pl find here with the link.

http://www.nal.res.in/cfdsympo/cfdfullpaperfinal/Influence of Canopy shape on the supersonic drag of a generic Fighter Aircraft.pdf

The present supersonic wave drag reduction due to modified canopy has a huge impact on the performance of the aircraft. The wave drag reduction in the modified fighter is approximately 6% in supersonic region as compared to the base configuration which translates to a 20% improvement in transonic accelerations. Reduction in wave drag has improved the maximum level speeds of the modified fighter by 2%.

To sum up, following is the plan for MK1+

1) Aerodynamic improvement of 6% resulting in 20 % rise in trans-sonic acceleration and highest speed at sea level by 2%.
2) Removal of 300 KG dead weight and reduction of total weight by 800 to 1000 KG resulting in improvement of T/W ratio by at least 15% .
3) New AESA rada,
4) New avionics,
5) More fuel due to readjustment of LRUs and liberation of more space.
6) Newly designed air intake.
7) More agility, More speed.
8) New EW suite.

In short MK1+ will meet all staff requirements in most of of the area and exceed in many area such as AESA and EW.

Again too good.

By the time Mk1+ comes in, India and Israel would have developed a highly potent version of EW. Work is there in fast track. AOA would have passed 30* by than at least. All building blocks to make Tejas a very potent fighter are on. It is possible to surpass Grippen C with Tejas MK1+.



No US is not that Advance. US will take another 100 years to develop DSI.

Are you in twitter?

 

[HariPrasad]

Again too good.


Are you in twitter?

Thanks,

I am on twiter but I forget the password. I will let you know when I open a new accounts.

 

[Hulk]

Thanks,

I am on twiter but I forget the password. I will let you know when I open a new accounts.

come on man, we need people like you on twitter.

 

[HariPrasad]

come on man, we need people like you on twitter.

Ok

 

[sathya]

Home-built Tejas to make up for critical shortage of fighter jets | idrw.org

 

[Agent_47]

We must give modi govt credit for making IAF come around with the LCA mk1 order.
They really choked IAF with only immediate rafales and improved LCA to ordering 120 planes.
import lobby in india is having a hard time i must say. #MakeinIndia

 

[ultron]

SP2, where is SP2? and any news/progress about 3,4,5.....?

This is no SP-2, at least not this year.

 

[knight11]

Tejas Mark 1-A Program will lead revival of Indigenous Jet Engine efence Analyst | idrw.org



TOTAL money spent on KAVERI engine is little more than 2100 crore.


Govt plans to approve Rs 2652 crore for

Follow up KAVERI ENGINE more than 80 kn.

These irdw peoples are insane and don't know what they hear,what they takes that out from what they hear, and what they end up posting to the people. LCA mk 1a ? there is no need for it for IAF or IN airforce; but ADA/HAL can develop them for the personal flying for their staff and their families for joy ride.

Kaveri project have ended and have given India the knowledge of engine know how and various technologies which will be usefull in the future engine project started from the scrap again and till metallurgical knowledge comes to a certain level there is no use other than the UAV like AURA and there is no future in the future tejas mk2 or in AMCA either,

No DSI is a distance dream. It is an alien technology which only highly advance countries may have.

When did the DSI capable ARJUN MK#3 is going to be launched.

 

[Water Car Engineer]

These irdw peoples are insane and don't know what they hear,what they takes that out from what they hear, and what they end up posting to the people. LCA mk 1a ? there is no need for it for IAF or IN airforce; but ADA/HAL can develop them for the personal flying for their staff and their families for joy ride.

Kaveri project have ended and have given India the knowledge of engine know how and various technologies which will be usefull in the future engine project started from the scrap again and till metallurgical knowledge comes to a certain level there is no use other .

IRDW sucks, but its accurate. It's been split, one for advanced uavs, other around 90kn.

 

[Sheikh Hussain]

The LCA Tejas Needs To See Squadron Service NOW

The LCA Tejas needs to see squadron service now. Goalposts, mission objectives, time-lines, costs and specifications have, over 32 years, melded into an amorphous, self-defeating paradox. One that has served no national interest, certainly not that of the Indian Air Force.

Let's be clear. This cannot be about forcing the Indian Air Force to accept a fighter plane. A Reuters report that's been reproduced across media today describes the LCA as obsolete and a potential burden on a reluctant IAF. Several others quote anonymous sources or retired officers as banging their fists on their tables and saying the Tejas is one big chunky albatross the air force needs least. One that will forever stall its planning and acquisition impetus.

Arguments, including several here on Livefist, over the years have now also melded together into one big exasperation. Nose cones. Radar efficiency. The ability to deploy smart weapons. Sustained turn rate. Hot and high operations after a cold soak. Manoeuverability at low altitude. Sea-level operations. Demonstration of air combat weapons. The lack of a mature primary sensor. The maintenance nightmare. The fact that crew will need a chisel and many hours to open any panel of the platform to find out what's wrong. Low power. You've heard it all.

The truth is, there have been too many lines in the sand. And not one of those has been respected. Not by the makers of the aircraft. And not by the Indian Air Force. A chronic lack of mutual trust between the IAF and the Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA) on the one hand, and a laughably hostile status quo between the IAF and Hindustan Aeronautics on the other has bedeviled even basic convergence on delivery timelines, specifications and targets. Hostilities and egos, fuelled by the pulls and pressures of an overbearing acquisition impulse pegged on the arithmetics of sanctioned strength and squadron numbers. Hostilities that have allowed a most unfortunate regime of charges and counter-charges that have achieved only two things: (a) compelled an already troubled program to flounder further, and (b) kept the makers and customer from acknowledging genuine steps of progress towards a ready and usable project. This trust deficit and sneering incredulity needs to be a case study in indigenous project management going forward, for it has never been more manifest than in Project Tejas.

As I said, the exasperations around the LCA have tossed and turned for so long in a cauldron of innumerable pressures, that they appear practically ambiguous now. Few arguments both for and against the LCA Tejas arrive with any of the muscle they did earlier. Circumstances have changed. The IAF is a much more dynamic service in crucial ways. India's military industrial complex is itself in a period of flux that will hopefully see monopolistic development and production swept away to make way for competitive technology advances that involve the private sector. The possibilities are enormous.

Since no prescription on defence really involves a prescription, I'll end with a real one: set one final date for the induction of the LCA Tejas. Induct the Tejas on that date, no matter what has or hasn't been achieved by that date as stipulated in the last discussions on record. Roll out squadron service. Continue testing alongside squadron service (not uncommon for new platforms), as had been the original plan before goalposts were shifted once again. Get the Tejas to stretch its legs regularly at exercises. Send it out to the island bases on detachment to see if it's the workhorse it was built to be. Retrofit all new developments and additions, including IFR capabilities.

What about the air force? Is a sub-optimal platform being foisted on it? Truthfully, only squadron service will ever really tell. Is a reluctant air force being forced to accept an obsolete platform? Not really. The IAF has accounted for the LCA Tejas in its orbat, and has now expanded that requirement based on a matrix of pressures that includes, significantly, the lack of an alternative, seeing sense in moving forward on a platform the IAF is undeniably invested in and, finally, the realisation that the Tejas could conceivably be a platform far superior than its trodden-on image.

That's the key. Get it out into air force stations. That isn't the kind of fatalistic/idealistic prescription it sounds like. Several aircraft that have been mired in development hell have blossomed upon breathing squadron air.

Former IAF chief Srinvasapuram Krishnaswamy once said to me in an interview days before he retired, "I feel we should simply induct the Tejas. Once it is in service, a sense of ownership will come. And we can progressively improve it jointly along with the developers. The aircraft needs to get out of test and into squadrons. That is the only solution."

That was 11 years ago.

LiveFist...

 

[Bratva]

How much LCA are maintenance intensive since it has a higher composite content in it ? @sancho @MilSpec

 

[MilSpec]

How much LCA are maintenance intensive since it has a higher composite content in it ? @sancho @MilSpec

It depends on which structure you are referring to.IMO there are three areas which comes into question, Maintenance, Repair and Manufacturing.

CFRC has a huge advantage when it comes to cyclic loads, which the airframe (main spars, aft spar, wing roots, wing tips, wing skin, airframe skin, stabs, slats etc ) is subjected to, the fatigue strength is more than AL composites, CFRC honeycomb has better static load characteristics, so from maintenance perspective it is highly advantageous to use higher CFRC elements in the airframe. thus it's impact of maintainability of the structure is better than conventional al-ti composites. Stress fractures, fatigue cracks are minimal in comparison, and overhaul for the airframe will be much longer than conventional airframe.

Repair - Repair does pose a significant challenge when it comes to Carbon fiber composites, Uniaxial fiber layout is very difficult to repair with picture frame cutout, irrespective of machine or hand lapping, fiber direction orientation and field repair is quite difficult, where the AL-steel airframe have an advantage. For Biaxial fiber composites, mostly skin surface, bonding is relatively easier. The only way to circumvent this is to make entire additional sub-assemblies of entire uniaxial components.

Manufacturing- Process needs to very precise, Air bubles, Incomplete resin transfusion, dry patches, over penetration, incomplete bonding, resin contamination, Pre-preg rotting, are common issues in manufacturing of composites. Every batch of Pre-preg needs to be cured and tension-tension, tension-compression cyclic fatigue tests, needs to be run before it goes into production. For VARTM and PARTM wet lap fabric, resin and Fabric both needs test before production. So the process is quite elaborate, and there are more chances of introducing failure modes. PFMEA and DFMEA for each and every part is needed on every single failure. I feel for the quality and process engineers in the composite market. these chaps have it rough.

In all the benefits outweigh the headache, and is a welcome development for LCA.

 

[Bratva]

It depends on which structure you are referring to.IMO there are three areas which comes into question, Maintenance, Repair and Manufacturing.

CFRC has a huge advantage when it comes to cyclic loads, which the airframe (main spars, aft spar, wing roots, wing tips, wing skin, airframe skin, stabs, slats etc ) is subjected to, the fatigue strength is more than AL composites, CFRC honeycomb has better static load characteristics, so from maintenance perspective it is highly advantageous to use higher CFRC elements in the airframe. thus it's impact of maintainability of the structure is better than conventional al-ti composites. Stress fractures, fatigue cracks are minimal in comparison, and overhaul for the airframe will be much longer than conventional airframe.

Repair - Repair does pose a significant challenge when it comes to Carbon fiber composites, Uniaxial fiber layout is very difficult to repair with picture frame cutout, irrespective of machine or hand lapping, fiber direction orientation and field repair is quite difficult, where the AL-steel airframe have an advantage. For Biaxial fiber composites, mostly skin surface, bonding is relatively easier. The only way to circumvent this is to make entire additional sub-assemblies of entire uniaxial components.

Manufacturing- Process needs to very precise, Air bubles, Incomplete resin transfusion, dry patches, over penetration, incomplete bonding, resin contamination, Pre-preg rotting, are common issues in manufacturing of composites. Every batch of Pre-preg needs to be cured and tension-tension, tension-compression cyclic fatigue tests, needs to be run before it goes into production. For VARTM and PARTM wet lap fabric, resin and Fabric both needs test before production. So the process is quite elaborate, and there are more chances of introducing failure modes. PFMEA and DFMEA for each and every part is needed on every single failure. I feel for the quality and process engineers in the composite market. these chaps have it rough.

In all the benefits outweigh the headache, and is a welcome development for LCA.

Lets hope it dont become a maintenance nightmare like MKI has become or else little wear and tear on composites make it impossible to maintain required fleet strength most of the time