HAL Tejas | Updates, News & Discussions

[Gessler]

@sancho

Correct, infact IAF hasn't decided yet on the definitive BVRAAM for Tejas Mk-1.

It could be either Derby or R-77, maybe even Astra Mk-1.

 

[sancho]

@sancho

Correct, infact IAF hasn't decided yet on the definitive BVRAAM for Tejas Mk-1.

It could be either Derby or R-77, maybe even Astra Mk-1.

Actually Astra is a given, but the MK1 version will not be capable enough to be used in operational service, that's why IAF will use the same Derby that IN wants anyway. So whenever Astra MK2 will be available, with a useful operational capability, it will replace Derby.

 

[rockstarIN]

Actually Astra is a given, but the MK1 version will not be capable enough to be used in operational service, that's why IAF will use the same Derby that IN wants anyway. So whenever Astra MK2 will be available, with a useful operational capability, it will replace Derby.

By Astra Mk2, you mean the ramjet version same as meteor?

 

[sancho]

By Astra Mk2, you mean the ramjet version same as meteor?

No, an improved version of the current Astra development. A Ramjet version is only a distant dream, we first need to get to a level to have something comparable to current R77.

 

[kingdurgaking]

LOL, he actually showed exactly why IAF doesn't need AMCA! FGFA offers stealth and extreme range, while Rafale covers the medium class, not to forget that there will be around 400 x LCAs and MKIs for the next 3 x decades.
It would had been smarter to argue that AMCA would be a more cost-effective alternative to FGFA, but from operational and technical terms, he hardly can argue in favour for AMCA.

The paragraph says Rafale is not a 5th generation fighter and so there is a room for AMCA from the perspective of IAF

 

[SrNair]

I think this is our last modernization that uses foreign imported weapons.In next modernization we use only the weapons made in India.And also when present modernization( with some imported weapons)complete we have enough indegenious aerospace infrastructure and aviation industry that can compete major players in the world.LCA and all other system is base and intitiation for that

 

[Water Car Engineer]

Total flights

 

[Sri]

LCA brochure says Empty weight is 9800 Kgs and MTOW is 13000 Kgs and also the 3500 Kg ordinance... Somehow its not adding up. Also Envelope is is expanded to 24 deg. but from other sources it says 22 Deg?

 

[Lil Mathew]

LCA brochure says Empty weight is 9800 Kgs and MTOW is 13000 Kgs and also the 3500 Kg ordinance... Somehow its not adding up. Also Envelope is is expanded to 24 deg. but from other sources it says 22 Deg?

9800kg is not empty weight (=6560kg)... It is the clean take off weight (As per old brochure Mk1 internal fuel was around 2,560kg) .... Also in new brochure Max take off weight is not mentioned... only external stores =3500kg is noted...

 

[Sri]

9800kg is not empty weight (=6560kg)... It is the clean take off weight (As per old brochure Mk1 internal fuel was around 2,560kg) .... Also in new brochure Max take off weight is not mentioned... only external stores =3500kg is noted...

Sorry for the typo, question is 9800 + 3500 = 13300 is more than 13000 KG which is MTOW.

 

[Anony]

Sorry for the typo, question is 9800 + 3500 = 13300 is more than 13000 KG which is MTOW.

Because 9800kg is the clean take-off weight. And clean take off weight includes 2 BVR missiles (300kg-350kg).

 

[Lil Mathew]

Sorry for the typo, question is 9800 + 3500 = 13300 is more than 13000 KG which is MTOW.

Clean take off wt. =wt. of internal fuel+ wt. of pylons+wt. of two wvr missiles=9800kg.
wt. of two wvr missiles R73E= 2*105=210kg.(Wiki)
Total payload= 13000-9800+210 ~ 3.5T
Only a guess... No valid links...
But according to latest brochure, External store=3500kg.,Empty wt=6560kg, Take off clean=9800kg.

 

[GURU DUTT]

Clean take off wt. =wt. of internal fuel+ wt. of pylons+wt. of two wvr missiles=9800kg.
wt. of two wvr missiles R73E= 2*105=210kg.(Wiki)
Total payload= 13000-9800+210 ~ 3.5T
Only a guess... No valid links...
But according to latest brochure, External store=3500kg.,Empty wt=6560kg, Take off clean=9800kg.

well bhai i dont still get it if LCA is lightests and smallest fighter jet in its class with maximum composites how come its wieght is almost identical to JF 17 and F 16 please do care to explain

 

[indiatester]

LCA brochure says Empty weight is 9800 Kgs and MTOW is 13000 Kgs and also the 3500 Kg ordinance... Somehow its not adding up. Also Envelope is is expanded to 24 deg. but from other sources it says 22 Deg?

@sancho @Abingdonboy @sandy_3126 can you clarify about the 24/22 degree AoA.
IIRC the ASQR asks for 26 degree AoA.

 

[Sri]

Clean take off wt. =wt. of internal fuel+ wt. of pylons+wt. of two wvr missiles=9800kg.
wt. of two wvr missiles R73E= 2*105=210kg.(Wiki)
Total payload= 13000-9800+210 ~ 3.5T
Only a guess... No valid links...
But according to latest brochure, External store=3500kg.,Empty wt=6560kg, Take off clean=9800kg.

Thanks for the answer, but my understanding is based on article - Broadsword: The Tejas LCA: improving performance with the current F-404 engine
Here Mr. Shukla does not consider R73E as part of ordinance i.e. 3.5T.

2. Reduction of Tejas' weight.
The LCA’s designers say that the removal of telemetry instrumentation, which is essential during flight testing, will bring the Tejas’ weight down by as much as 300-400 kilos. Re-engineering some of the displays and sub-systems within the cockpit will lop off another 300 kilos; the weight reduction of 600-700 kilos is expected to allow the carriage of more weapons.

There is a lack of understanding about what the Tejas’ weight is, since all kinds of figures are bandied about. Let me clarify: The 10.5 tons that I wrote about in my last post is the total weight of the Tejas, with full fuel on board; all 7 pylons fitted but not carrying weapons; and two outboard missiles being carried. The maximum payload of the Tejas is 3.5 tons… carried on its pylons. This could be armament or external fuel tanks; if external fuel tanks are fitted, the weight of fuel will correspondingly bring down the weapons load carried.

But there’s a catch! The maximum take-off weight of the Tejas is 13 tons. So if you load the maximum payload of 3.5 tons onto the 10.5 ton fighter, your weight of 14 tons is beyond the maximum take-off weight. So you’ll have to shed one ton… or either internal fuel or external fuel/armaments. That’s what happens when a fighter’s weight goes beyond what was originally planned.

So the reduction of 600-700 kilos may not actually go into making the Tejas more manoeuvrable. This shaved off weight may be made up by allowing the Tejas to carry (close to) its full capacity of external fuel-cum-armament.


Thanks in Advance...