HAL Tejas | Updates, News & Discussions

[MAFIAN GOD]

• Total of 4 Tejas (2 + 2) will be inducted before December 2011. (Antony)
• Tejas Squadron to be raised in Bangalore for operational convenience and then will be moved to Sulur. (CAS)
• To start with it will have 2 squadrons. (CAS)
  [*]MCA project is moving ahead with funds for technology development released. (Saraswat)
  [*] The Sencma-Kaveri pact should bring the results in 3-5 years. (Saraswat)
• Tejas is in the class of Mig 21++, but not yet a 4th generation machine. It will eventually become one. (CAS)
• Initially we are planning to manufacture 10 Tejas per year and the scene will change with increased orders. (HAL)
• Tejas is currently 60% indigenous and eventually will be 75 per cent by FOC. (Saraswat)
• Money is not an issue and the government will fund any R&D project. (Antony)
  [*]HAL modernization in the pipeline. (Antony)

More in

Tarmak007 -- A bold blog on Indian defence: Part 4: This day, that age: Exactly 41 years (10 Jan '70) after India lost Groupie Suranjan Das in the HF-24 crash, Tejas gets IOC (10 Jan '11)

My most favorite quotes

 

[GORKHALI]

MILITARY AVIATION AND SPACE TECHNOLOGY NEWS: CRUISE N SNOOZE
WHO SAYS WEST DONT TAKE INSPIRATION FROM EAST ??THINK AGAIN LOL
Alenia Aermacchi M 346

LCA TEJAS

 

[SpArK]

http://www.defence.pk/forums/military-forum/88772-alenia-aermacchi-tests-low-radar-cross-section-kit-m-346-a.html

 

[jha]

Elated Tejas team dreaming big

While the first of the Tejas light combat aircraft is yet to be delivered to IAF, an upbeat LCA team is talking of upgrading the aircraft, with the initial funding coming through for the development of LCA into a medium combat aircraft (MCA) in three-and-a-half to five years.

Scientists associated with the project believe that the upgradation, considering that the technological know-how is available now, will not be too hard to execute.

“Given that the technology is ours, tweaking it to suit requirements will not be difficult unlike in imported aircraft,” National Flight Test Centre Group Director (Project Tejas) Wng Com (retd) P K Raveendran told Deccan Herald.

Tejas is equipped with missiles (the R73) conventional bombs, laser-guided bombs and BVR (beyond visual range) missiles. Also, the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) has completed development and testing of the digital weapon system –– the Pylon Interface Box (PIB) and Stores Interface Box (SIB) –– compliant with the 1760C standard.

“The procurement and integration of the weapon system to be done by DRDO and us will happen based on the IAF’s requirement and the Hindustan Aeronautics Limited has the final operational clearance in mind,” says HAL Chairman Ashok Nayak.

Sources in Team Tejas believe that India’s LCA will become a good fighter with the ability to supplement combat fighters: Sukhoi-30MKIs, the medium multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA) and the fifth-generation fighter aircraft in the future.

“By the time India inducts these aircraft, the LCA would have served the nation for sometime and will be completely compliant with the IAF’s requirement,” says a scientist who has worked on the project.

The immediate challenge on the supply side continues to be meeting delivery deadlines to enable IAF raise its first Tejas squadron this year.

IAF sources say that concern has been raised at various fora and both the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) and the Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) are now working in tandem at the production centres.

In order to meet the IAF’s requirement, the HAL needs to create an efficient production supply chain, DRDO sources say. Experts say that it has to be a supply chain that can handle the initial orders and the next 20 too.

“The configuration for the second 20 will be different, which means the producer must think ahead and plan for that while not compromising on the production of current orders.”

The HAL, however, is confident of meeting the deadlines On Monday, its Chairman stated that everything that the LCA project wants would be provided for. “Tejas presently has about one-and-a-half hangars dedicated for it and we will expand it if required,” without giving a timeline on that even as Defence Minister A K Antony said two of the initial 20 will be delivered by June.

Elated Tejas team dreaming big

 

[jha]

Elated Tejas team dreaming big

While the first of the Tejas light combat aircraft is yet to be delivered to IAF, an upbeat LCA team is talking of upgrading the aircraft, with the initial funding coming through for the development of LCA into a medium combat aircraft (MCA) in three-and-a-half to five years.

Scientists associated with the project believe that the upgradation, considering that the technological know-how is available now, will not be too hard to execute.

“Given that the technology is ours, tweaking it to suit requirements will not be difficult unlike in imported aircraft,” National Flight Test Centre Group Director (Project Tejas) Wng Com (retd) P K Raveendran told Deccan Herald.

Tejas is equipped with missiles (the R73) conventional bombs, laser-guided bombs and BVR (beyond visual range) missiles. Also, the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) has completed development and testing of the digital weapon system –– the Pylon Interface Box (PIB) and Stores Interface Box (SIB) –– compliant with the 1760C standard.

“The procurement and integration of the weapon system to be done by DRDO and us will happen based on the IAF’s requirement and the Hindustan Aeronautics Limited has the final operational clearance in mind,” says HAL Chairman Ashok Nayak.

Sources in Team Tejas believe that India’s LCA will become a good fighter with the ability to supplement combat fighters: Sukhoi-30MKIs, the medium multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA) and the fifth-generation fighter aircraft in the future.

“By the time India inducts these aircraft, the LCA would have served the nation for sometime and will be completely compliant with the IAF’s requirement,” says a scientist who has worked on the project.

The immediate challenge on the supply side continues to be meeting delivery deadlines to enable IAF raise its first Tejas squadron this year.

IAF sources say that concern has been raised at various fora and both the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) and the Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) are now working in tandem at the production centres.

In order to meet the IAF’s requirement, the HAL needs to create an efficient production supply chain, DRDO sources say. Experts say that it has to be a supply chain that can handle the initial orders and the next 20 too.

“The configuration for the second 20 will be different, which means the producer must think ahead and plan for that while not compromising on the production of current orders.”

The HAL, however, is confident of meeting the deadlines On Monday, its Chairman stated that everything that the LCA project wants would be provided for. “Tejas presently has about one-and-a-half hangars dedicated for it and we will expand it if required,” without giving a timeline on that even as Defence Minister A K Antony said two of the initial 20 will be delivered by June.

Elated Tejas team dreaming big

 

[500]

Lets compare Tejas with most popular modern strike fighter today: F-16 block 50.

Their electronic eqipment is very similar EL/M-2032 or APG-68 radars with slotted planar array antenna and SAR capabilities. Both carry Litening E/O targeting system, have Dash HMD.

---------------------- Tejas ------ F-16 blk50
empty weight ----- 6540 kg ----- 8,700 kg
wing area --------- 38.4 m2 ----- 27.87m2
power ------------- 8,600 kg ----- 13,180 kg
intermal fuel ------- 2400 kg ------ 3,250 kg

Now lets calculate two missions.

1) Fighter mission with 4 MR AA missiles + 2 SR AA missiles.

That's 4*160 + 2*90 = 820 kg

Full fiel weight:
Tejas - 6540 + 820 + 2400 = 9760 kg
F-16 - 8,700 + 820 + 3,250 = 12770 kg

Fuel/weight ratio:
Tejas - 2400/9760 = 0.246
F-16 - 3250/12770 = 0.254

Very close, that means range will be pretty similar. F-16 however can add CFT, then F-16 gets advantage in range.

Half fuel weight in fighter mission:

Tejas - 6540 + 820 + 1200 = 8560 kg
F-16 - 8700 + 820 + 1625 = 11145 kg

power/weight ratio:
Tejas - 8600/8560 = 1
F-16 - 13,180/11145 = 1.18

Serious advantage of F-16, better acceleration and vertical maneuvring.

wing loading:
Tejas - 8560/38.4 = 223 kg/m2
F-16 - 11145/27.87 = 400 kg/m2

Serious advantage of Tejas, can provide better horisontal maneuvring and take off/landing capabilities

2) Strike mission with 2 2000-lb bombs + 2 short range AA missles + 2 MR AA + Litening pod.

That gives 2*900 + 2*90 + 2 * 160 + 200 = 2500 kg

Full fiel weight:
Tejas - 6540 + 2500 + 2400 = 11440 kg
F-16 - 8,700 + 2500 + 3,250 = 14450 kg

Fuel/weight ratio:
Tejas - 2400/11440 = 0.21
F-16 - 3,250/14450 = 0.22

Again pretty close.

Half fuel weight in strike mission:

Tejas - 6540 + 2500 + 1200 = 10240 kg
F-16 - 8700 + 2500 + 1625 = 12825 kg

power/weight ratio:
Tejas - 8600/10240 = 0.84
F-16 - 13,180/12825 = 1.03

wing loading:
Tejas - 10240/38.4 = 267 kg/m2
F-16 - 12825/27.87 = 460 kg/m2

Quite a similar picture as it was in fighter mode (in fighter mode F-16 has 18% advantage in t/w ratio, while in strike mode - 23%).

Conclusion:
Tejas can compete with F-16 block 50 both in strike and fighting missions.

Pros:
Cheaper to prosecute and operate. Much smaller wing loading, thats good for take of and landing, training.

Cons:
Underpowered (that can be corrected with F414), no CFT option.

 

[sancho]

Lets compare Tejas with most popular modern strike fighter today: F-16 block 50...

...Conclusion:
Tejas can compete with F-16 block 50 both in strike and fighting missions.

Pros:
Cheaper to prosecute and operate. Much smaller wing loading, thats good for take of and landing, training.

Cons:
Underpowered (that can be corrected with F414), no CFT option.

Hi, that's an interesting comparison thanks!
But it covers mainly the best possible situation with afterburner thrust and without external fuel, which means it's too theoretical to conclude that Tejas can compete the F16, especially in A2G.

For example, realistically the heaviest strike load for Tejas should be 2 x 1200l fuel tanks, 1 x 1000Kg LGBs, 1 x targeting pod and 4 x AAMs.
While the heaviest load for F16 B50 (btw, CFTs should be carried from B52 onwards only) can carry 3 x similar fuel tanks, 2 x 1000Kg LGBs, 1 x targeting pod and 4 x AAMs. Which means it offers more payload and range.

In A2A instead both offers similar configs (F16 can carry 2 more AAMs), Tejas as you said offers also lower wing loads and RCS, while F16 offers a higher TWR and the better weapons.
That's once again shows that such light single engine fighters like Tejas, JF 17, or Gripen are mainly designed for interceptions and lighter strike missions. While single engine fighters J10, or F16 adds some more punch for strikes as well.

 

[GORKHALI]

MILITARY AVIATION AND SPACE TECHNOLOGY NEWS: We never had a single failure in 1,500 flights of Tejas: ADE
SOURCE : Economictimes India ensured its place among an elite group of countries making a fighter jet from scratch when the indigenous multi-role Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) Tejas got initial operational clearance this week. A key part in this success was placed by the avionics and flight control systems that were designed by DRDO ’s Aeronautical Development Establishment (ADE). PS Krishnan, distinguished scientist and Director, ADE gives Anirvan Ghosh an inside view of Tejas’s journey and the challenges faced along the way It took the Tejas 1,500 test flights and 23 years of development to get to this point. Isn’t that too long? You have to see that it started as a thought process in 1983 and there was no funding at that point. For the next ten years, we firmed up the requirements and then went into project definition phase. We went to France and Germany and took their expertise in fixing up the aerodynamic configuration. Post that we were ready with a firm proposal and the funding finally started from the second half of 1992. It did take time, but we had to go through the proper processes. Then there were the sanctions after Pokhran II. How did that affect the development of Tejas? Let me be clear — we perhaps got delayed by two years. On the day the sanctions came into force, our team was in the US offices of our partners there (Lockheed Martin and BAE Inc.).
The team was working on integration of software with the hardware of the LCA. Suddenly we were asked to leave the offices, and we were not even allowed to take back the designs we were working on the systems there, and those were almost ready to be tested. We had to again develop it from memory, because we weren ’t allowed to copy our own stuff, which delayed the whole thing. You are saying that you had to spend some time recovering what you had already worked on and then build on it? Exactly. But the sanctions also spurred us on to do better, and to make the entire fighter aircraft on our own. So in the next few years, we did not just recover what we had lost back then, but also went some steps ahead and achieved the expertise that we had tied up with the US companies for. So now we had what they had but need not rely on them anymore. So ultimately that did delay us, but also made us stronger. Was there a point where you were close to losing faith because of the difficulties that cropped up? Never really. When we came back from the US, I was called by Dr APJ Abdul Kalam (who was then the scientific adviser to the Prime Minister). I met him in his office, along with my boss at that time. He asked me directly, “Can you guys do it?” and I replied, “Yes. ” At that time I just thought we could and didn’t think much about the odds. When I did, well of course we were up against quite a few obstacles. What was driving you at that point in the face of those odds and how did you ensure the team stayed motivated? The thought that alternatives simply wouldn ’t do. Here we were making the fly-by-wire system, which would control the aircraft like anautomated system. Procuring the same from MNCs would have firstly cost more and made us just a small cog in the wheel. Here we were staring at odds but we also had the chance to create a new wheel, to invent a new system. This was a challenge we all rose up to. I told my team at ADE that they had a chance to create history and be a part of creating something that had never been done before. They were up for it and responded. In all the 1,500 flights we have had so far, we never had one single failure. Those included Tejas in its stages as tech demonstrators, prototype vehicles and limited series production (LSP). Did you succeed in retaining more of the core team and talent after the pay commissions’s pay hike? That came later when the team had already done a major
portion of the work. Surely, the pay hikes by the government have allowed us to retain talent. Before that some people did move out of the project and went in the private
sector where they were better paid. But when I met them later at some event, they said that they missed working on cutting edge technology and making something entirely new. Now you are working on the Regional Transport Aircraft as well as the unmanned aerial combat vehicle? Yes, we are making the flight control systems for that project which is headed by NAL. The flight control system and data link packages of Aura (unmanned combat aerial vehicle) will be designed and developed jointly by ADE and Defence Electronic Application Laboratory, Dehradun. Many private and public agencies worked on the Tejas. They are now collaborating on the transport aircraft. Does this lead to confusion and delays? No, because the parameters are clearly defined. In fact, this happened smoothly also because of BAE North America. When we were partnering with them, they had formulated the methodology on how various agencies would work, and we followed it rigorously. There are certain things like wake penetration, and others that the IAF chief said need to be ironed out and the deadline is June. Will you be in a position to meet the deadline? Of course, we already have done most of it. There are some control loss trials, which are essential before it can be operationalised. Those flights will be completed before June. No modifications are required as I see it, but then we will have a clearer picture post the tests and then whatever changes are needed will be implemented.

 

[Storm Force]

I think the LCA tejas is a fantastic achievement by the DRDO/HAL group.

The indians have a TRUE 4 generation fighter which when FOC is achieved in the same class as a F16/50 Mirage2000 & Gripen C/D.

It looks like a european design due to delta input from Dassult
Is powered by a highly efficient combat proven American engine
Hasa a ppwerful Elta israeli core tech in the radar which is indengious
Highly advanced digital FBW flight system compsite material build and glass cockpi.

Best of it will use weapons from INDIA RUSSIA & ISRAELI .

When you look what this will replace ie 200 mig21s its a 1.5 generations ahead of india current mig21 fleet...And equal or BETTER to anything in the PAF fleet already including thie F16 MLU & Thunders and Mirages

 

[500]

Hi, that's an interesting comparison thanks!
But it covers mainly the best possible situation with afterburner thrust and without external fuel, which means it's too theoretical to conclude that Tejas can compete the F16, especially in A2G.

For example, realistically the heaviest strike load for Tejas should be 2 x 1200l fuel tanks, 1 x 1000Kg LGBs, 1 x targeting pod and 4 x AAMs.
While the heaviest load for F16 B50 (btw, CFTs should be carried from B52 onwards only) can carry 3 x similar fuel tanks, 2 x 1000Kg LGBs, 1 x targeting pod and 4 x AAMs. Which means it offers more payload and range.

You'r right. Lets check this loading.

F-16 fuel:
3250 kg (internal) + 2200 kg (2 wing 370-gal) + 900 kg (300 gal central) = 6350 kg.

F-16 weight:
8700 kg (empty) + 6350 kg (fuel) + 300 kg (drop tanks) + 1800 kg (2 LGBs) + 500 kg (4 AAMs) + 200 kg (pod) = 17,850 kg

Tejas fuel:
2400 kg (internal) + 1900 kg (2 wing 1200l) = 4300 kg

Tejas weight:

6540 kg (empty) + 4300 kg (fuel) + 200 kg (drop tanks) + 900 kg (1 LGB) + 500 kg (4 AAMs) + 200 kg (pod) = 12,640 kg

Fuel/weight ratio:
Tejas - 0.34
F-16 - 0.36

Thats very close, especially considering that more fuel additional tank and bomb make more drag. So range would be about same, but F-16 carries 2 times more bombs.

If Tejas takes 2 LGBs and 1 drop tank then we get:

3350 kg fuel and 12,490 kg weight. Thats 0.27 fuel weight ratio compare to 0.36 of F-16. Thats 33% less. But actual range difference will be lower that 33% because of drag (20-25% I guess). In short either one bomb at similar range or same number of bombs at lower range.

In A2A instead both offers similar configs (F16 can carry 2 more AAMs), Tejas as you said offers also lower wing loads and RCS, while F16 offers a higher TWR and the better weapons.
That's once again shows that such light single engine fighters like Tejas, JF 17, or Gripen are mainly designed for interceptions and lighter strike missions. While single engine fighters J10, or F16 adds some more punch for strikes as well.

Light fighters can be very good for CAS missions too, they fall in deep strike missions.

Tejas needs F414 engine. It gives 15% more thrust but weights almost same as F404 + additional fuel. That was done on Grippen NG.

Here the thrust difference between F404 and F414:

 

[angeldemon_007]

Is it right that ADA is also thinking about a medium size fighter apart from AMCA ??/

 

[damiendehorn]

Is it right that ADA is also thinking about a medium size fighter apart from AMCA ??/

i think they were talking about the AMCA, ie the AMCA and medium size fighter is one and same.

 

[rockstarIN]

i think they were talking about the AMCA, ie the AMCA and medium size fighter is one and same.

I think there is no MCA but LCA Mk2, now there is no point going for a Medium fighter like F-16 or so coz 5th gen has arrived + MRCA and more numbers of MKI

 

[RadyLeo]

Tejas LCA: Lessons for the future

By Adm. Arun Prakash (retd)

(The writer, a former Chief of the Naval Staff, is currently chairman of the National Maritime Foundation)

The formal induction of the light combat aircraft (LCA) Tejas into the Indian Air Force on January 10 is not just a historic landmark for our aerospace industry, but also a significant step forward in India’s quest for the status of a great power.

Not more than a handful of countries can claim the ability and competence to successfully bring a project of such complexity to fruition. It would therefore be churlish not to acknowledge the achievement of our aircraft designers, scientists, production engineers and the flight-test team for having delivered -- albeit belatedly -- a state-of-the art combat aircraft to the IAF.

With the accord of initial operational clearance (IOC), the Tejas is, today, at the same stage where India's first nuclear submarine, Arihant, was, on its launch, last year. Both these strategic and prestigious platforms are on the threshold of entering service, but with a fairly arduous road to traverse before attaining fully operational status.

The LCA project attracted maximum criticism because of the time it took and the cost overruns it had. Obviously, the DRDO over-estimated its own competence. This led to the ambitious claim that they had the capability to develop, in-house, not just the airframe and engine, but also the radar as well as a complex fly-by-wire (FBW) flight control system required for an "agile" (or aerodynamically unstable) fighter.

This blunder was compounded by trotting out hopelessly optimistic cost and time estimates, on the incorrect premise that since India had earlier designed and built the HF-24 Marut, we possessed the design skills and manufacturing expertise.

The Marut, putatively India's first indigenous fighter aircraft, was, in fact, designed by a contracted German team led by Kurt Tank, designer of the famed World War II fighter, Focke-Wulf FW 190. Inducted into the IAF in 1965, the Marut was only a qualified success, since its advanced airframe was a mismatch to the under-powered Orpheus engine.
The assumption that the advanced LCA would benefit from the expertise acquired from the 30-year-old Marut project was, therefore, largely fallacious.

The second contributory cause was the decision of the DRDO, typically, to pursue this strategic project without ensuring adequate involvement of the end users: the armed forces.
The IAF, understandably, more concerned with extant problems of meeting its operational roles and missions took a detached view of the LCA and remained focused on looking abroad for its needs. This, arguably, deprived the project of impetus, moral support and funding.

The last and most crippling impediment for the project was posed by the denial of crucial technologies by the West. Post-liberalisation advice and consultancy in certain key areas of the LCA design, notably the FBW system, was obtained from aerospace firms in the US and Britain.

Unfortunately, the sanctions imposed after Pokhran II brought this crucial cooperation to an abrupt halt. This is where our scientists showed their true mettle and went on to develop and qualify the incredibly complex flight control algorithms, almost entirely on their own.

Apart from this, the electro-hydraulic actuators for the controls, the pumps, motors, instruments and many of the major systems have all been developed by scientists working in dozens of DRDO laboratories, and produced by industrial units across the country.
The seeds of an aerospace ancillary industry have been planted, and will, hopefully, be nurtured by a long production run of the Tejas.

For all its good work and achievements, there remain two critical areas in which the DRDO has sadly disappointed the nation, and contributed to delays in the LCA project.
One is, of course, its failure to deliver the fighter's primary sensor; a multi-mode radar, which, eventually, had to be imported. The other is the long-awaited Kaveri aero-engine, which has remained, for 40 years, in limbo, nowhere close to attaining its promised performance parameters and yet, inexplicably, being kept alive to justify the existence of its parent R&D establishment.

Having missed all deadlines and targets, the DRDO has now sought foreign collaboration to assist in its development. The US-origin F-414 engine now contracted for the Tejas barely meets its thrust requirements, and the heavier LCA Navy will need an even more powerful engine for carrier operations. It can only be hoped that the Kaveri will eventually emerge in time for Tejas Mark II.

Twenty-seven years and Rs 17,000 crore down the line, the LCA experience has generated a number of important lessons for India. Firstly, DRDO should not be permitted to undertake any major project whose staff targets have not originated from the Defence Acquisition Council or Chiefs of Staff Committee.

Once the project is approved, the sponsoring service must associate intimately with the DRDO to refine the staff requirements, and contribute uniformed personnel as well as funding during development. It is, perhaps, time for the IAF to create an establishment along the lines of the navy's Directorate of Naval Design to conceptualise future aircraft.

With globalisation, the quest for attaining autarchy in every aspect of technology has become a counter-productive activity. A conscious and early decision must be taken in every project regarding the technologies we need to develop in-country and those that we can acquire from abroad.

Developmental projects undertaken by the DRDO should have fairly rigid time-frames, after which they should become candidates for review and abortion. The DRDO practice of in-house "peer reviews" of projects by scientists must be replaced by hard-nosed audits and progress-checks by independent experts, as well as end users.

Six decades after independence, 80-90 per cent of our military hardware remains of foreign origin, and India has the dubious distinction of being among the top arms importers in the world.
The comprehensive capability to design and undertake serial production of major weapon systems and ordnance is an imperative that has, so far, eluded us. Our claims to big-power status will ring hollow as long as we remain dependent on imports for major weapon systems.

For all the scorn and criticism that we often (justly) heap on the DRDO and our PSUs, the fact remains that, properly restructured and synergised with India's innovative private sector, both these national institutions have the capability to rescue India from the unending arms-dependency trap. First Arihant and now Tejas have provided tangible proof of this.

 

[Sri]

Hey Guys the below report says
he Tejas is touted as a fly-by-wire system; that is, one that uses sophisticated computer electronics to make it as foolproof as possible. A fly-by-wire aircraft normally has four circuits for each connection, meaning even if one circuit to the landing gear fails, three others will still operate. But in reality, the Indian Tejas has only two such circuits, not four. Technically it does not qualify as a fly-by-wire aircraft.
The Invisible Bird | OPEN Magazine
Want to know how far this is true.