What's new

HAL Tejas | Updates, News & Discussions

Status
Not open for further replies.
039AFG_110212_0018.jpg
too small is tejas
 
Can't they use Rafale's AESA considering we will be using it large numbers? So there will be commonality, or is it impossible due to dimensions of Tejas?

For that you need to first sign the deal and induct Rafale. Plus as arrogant as French are, they might hike the price.

How many LCA have been built and how many inducted?
 
For some reason, I like the Naval LCA better than the one maiden form. Am talking of the looks dept :)
 
just like the gears of the N-LCA were "over" designed for the requirements and maybe even the nose too.
I really don't think I understand what you mean.

and boy do I have a petty rank?
 
So the belly fuel tank is integrated as per the picture. @sancho

At least for testing, but it's interesting that they test it on the N-LCA MK1, rather than on the latest LSP versions of the IAF.

I really don't think I understand what you mean.

and boy do I have a petty rank?

Check this older presentation:


For that you need to first sign the deal and induct Rafale. Plus as arrogant as French are, they might hike the price.

Not really, the RBE 2 AESA can be bought for LCA indepently as well, but with the timeline of MK2 it makes more sense to buy Rafale first and start the licence production of the radar in India and use it for both fighters.

How many LCA have been built and how many inducted?
You mean how many LCA's were inducted since the last time you asked? Same answer as last month:

HAL Tejas | Updates, News & Discussions | Page 609
 
Last edited:
At least for testing, but it's interesting that they test it on the N-LCA MK1, rather than on the latest LSP versions of the IAF.

But the drop tank is smaller size than usual, isn't it?

Also I mentioned you somewhere about Astra's launch where the missiles is fired from the rail itself, not the missile dropped from the rail and fly to the target unlike Armraam launches. Will this be a problem for it to integrate underbelly stations in MKI/M2k?
 
But the drop tank is smaller size than usual, isn't it?

Also I mentioned you somewhere about Astra's launch where the missiles is fired from the rail itself, not the missile dropped from the rail and fly to the target unlike Armraam launches. Will this be a problem for it to integrate underbelly stations in MKI/M2k?

Yes (725 to 800l, compared to 1200l of the bigger wing fuel tanks), because of the size limitations between the gears and gear bays. Any payload on the centerline station must fit behind the front gear and between the rear gear bays, therefor must have a certain lenght or width.
That's not a problem, Aim 120 for example can be used from the wingtip rails of the F16 too, the Aim 9 then will be carried at the external wingstation. So it's just a matter of the pylons and if used at the centerline stations of the MKI it might just change that. Astra is too long for the M2K fuselage stations and could be carried only at the inner wing stations, blocking a wet station and that is not going to happen anymore. IAF will use 2 larger fuel tanks in any mission now and MICAs at the fuselage stations.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom