IAF to order 16 more HAL LCA Tejas Mark I Twin Seater Trainer Aircrafts

[PoKeMon]

So will the Mark-1 production could reach to 100 or 150 if IAF orders more.... ?

No, since Mk II will arrive by the time they could produce 50-60 of Mk I.

 

[Chanakya's_Chant]

So will the Mark-1 production could reach to 100 or 150 if IAF orders more.... ?

IAF will eventually order at least 14 Tejas squadrons that is some 294 Tejas fighters for each IAF combat squadron has 21 fighter aircraft. The 21 comprise 16 frontline, single-seat fighters, two twin-seat trainers and three reserve aircraft to make up losses in a war. So far, the IAF has committed to inducting only six Tejas squadrons — two squadrons of the current Tejas Mark I, and four squadrons of the improved Tejas Mark II (excluding these 16 aircrafts). In addition, the navy plans to buy 40-50 Tejas for its future aircraft carriers.

IAF will buy 14 Tejas squadrons, lowering costs | Business Standard News

 

[HariPrasad]

Gripen will use the GE 414G engine, with the same 98kN as LCA MK2 will have. The EPE engine with more thrust is offered by GE, but it requires more funds for development and has trade offs by reduced life and increased maintenance, which is why Saab will most like go for the already available version, unless a Gripen E/F customer requires the EPE.
Besides that, a speculated MK3 will only be another upgrade step of the LCA but by far not a stealth or NG fighter as DRDO tries to show it in the media. You can make some airframe shapings, but that makes it also less aerodynamic and LCA already has issues in that regard.
Not to mention that we first need to see what the MK2 will finally be look like and what final specs it will have. In fact, we don't even know what the weight difference today is between the LCA MK1 IAF version and the N-LCA MK1, which would be highly interesting to know, since that gives us an idea what the difference of MK2 IAF and MK IN might be.
Gripen E for example is now given with an empty weight of 8000Kg, which puts the Sea Gripen around 8500Kg and there are more modifciations for N-LCA need from LCA, than for the Sea Gripen from the Gripen E. Wonder if IN will go for N-LCA MK2 twin seater, if the emptyweight goes beyond 7000Kg?

GE 414 has 98 KN of thrust but people says that GE will increase that upto 120 KN which will meet the requirement of Indian Navy.

So far as weight is concern Saurav Jha quotes that 350 KG of weight is shaved in MK 1 and target is 500 KG.

Together with the IAF, ADA has also introduced what Dr Tamilmani terms a 'weight reduction approach' and as per him some 350 kgs have already been shaved off the Mk-II design with a reduction of 500 kgs being the ultimate goal vis a vis the baseline Mk-I design. The Mk-II design is also expected to achieve a 5 percent improvement in drag characteristics through 'production improvements' related to further streamlining (reduced contour variations etc) of the Mk-I airframe.

Saurav Jha's Blog : The Radiance of Tejas: A bright prospect for 'Make in India'

so hopefully it will be a fighter of light weight and very high T/W ratio. We should work on wing redesign to reduce the drag and make it more agile.

 

[sancho]

GE 414 has 98 KN of thrust but people says that GE will increase that upto 120 KN which will meet the requirement of Indian Navy.

Doesn't matter what "people" say, because the EPE engine is not developed and nobody has funded the development, so unless we provide GE with more money to do so, we will get the same base engine that the Gripen E will have too and we already have seen official GE infos on the thrust level of our version:

So far as weight is concern Saurav Jha quotes that 350 KG of weight is shaved in MK 1 and target is 500 KG.

Possible, maybe that's why the take off weight is down from 9800Kg to 9500Kg, but that matters only LCA MK1, because the MK2 comes with credible "additions", which have to increase the weight (engine, radar, airframe extentions, additional fuel tanks, most likely IRST and other avionics...). Again Gripen weight increased from 6800Kg in the C version to 8000Kg in the E version and a lot of the changes should be similar to LCA MK2, which means the the weight increase can be very credible too, even more so if the naval changes are included.

 

[he-man]

We have already committed a blunder by starting work on AMCA instead of pumping all money in mk2 subsystems.

 

[Echo_419]

We have already committed a blunder by starting work on AMCA instead of pumping all money in mk2 subsystems.

As far as i know Design team was sitting idle so they were given the go ahead of Starting the work on AMCA

 

[he-man]

As far as i know Design team was sitting idle so they were given the go ahead of Starting the work on AMCA

No,they are going to issue rfp next year for two 110 kn class engines too...............mod has lost it.

 

[Echo_419]

No,they are going to issue rfp next year for two 110 kn class engines too...............mod has lost it.

Idiots
I hope that they don't delay LCA MK 2

 

[he-man]

Idiots
I hope that they don't delay LCA MK 2

What dou think will happen when they work simultaneously on

lca mk2
rafale
pakfa
amca

+others??????

 

[Stephen Cohen]

What dou think will happen when they work simultaneously on

lca mk2
rafale
pakfa
amca

+others??????

HAL is not designing LCA MK2
ADA is responsible for it
Even LCA mk1 is not complete so why blame HAL ; HAL is just the production agency

Similarly AMCA is also being designed by ADA

 

[he-man]

HAL is not designing LCA MK2
ADA is responsible for it
Even LCA mk1 is not complete so why blame HAL ; HAL is just the production agency

Similarly AMCA is also being designed by ADA

But my problem has to do with budget and production,not design.
And i am blaming MOD and not HAL or ADA.

 

[Stephen Cohen]

But my problem has to do with budget and production,not design.
And i am blaming MOD and not HAL or ADA.

First of all Budget is NOT the reason for delay in DRDO's programmes

It is the knowledge gap and technological gap ; India is always playing catch up
Though in missile programmes we have done very well

Blaming MOD makes no sense either ;
they cannot remove people for delays but only for corruption

In fact if they start removing people for delays it will cause a TOTAL breakdown of
DRDO and we can forget about indigenous systems

This is NOT Russia or China

Once some programmes reach a dead end ONLY then
they are stopped like Trishul missile and Kaveri engine

 

[HariPrasad]

Possible, maybe that's why the take off weight is down from 9800Kg to 9500Kg, but that matters only LCA MK1, because the MK2 comes with credible "additions", which have to increase the weight (engine, radar, airframe extentions, additional fuel tanks, most likely IRST and other avionics...). Again Gripen weight increased from 6800Kg in the C version to 8000Kg in the E version and a lot of the changes should be similar to LCA MK2, which means the the weight increase can be very credible too, even more so if the naval changes are included.

But there are some other areas where the weight can be reduced.

1) It will not have 200 to 300 K G dead weight for balancing the CG.
2) More composite shall go into Tejas.
3) There is a scope of weight reduction in landing gear.
4) It is heard that new high strength composites are developped. So thiner composite shall provide the same strength.
5) Mk1 in itself is a conservative over engineered design.Many parts shall loose the weight in MK2.
6) More LRUS shall merge in single unit to reduce the part which shall further reduce the weight.
7) May be some structural optimization shall take place in Mk2 compare to Mk1.

 

[sancho]

But there are some other areas where the weight can be reduced.

1) It will not have 200 to 300 K G dead weight for balancing the CG.
2) More composite shall go into Tejas.
3) There is a scope of weight reduction in landing gear.
4) It is heard that new high strength composites are developped. So thiner composite shall provide the same strength.
5) Mk1 in itself is a conservative over engineered design.Many parts shall loose the weight in MK2.
6) More LRUS shall merge in single unit to reduce the part which shall further reduce the weight.
7) May be some structural optimization shall take place in Mk2 compare to Mk1.

Well all that are hopes, but can't be backed up with proper sources and lets be realistic here, we don't really believe that DRDO / HAL can do things Saab with all their experience and know how couldn't do right?
I am hoping to see more credible infos during Aero India next year, since ADA / DRDO should be able to present some more specs then. Emptyweight and even more importantly, the internal fuel capacity will be very interesting to understand what performance is possible with the MK2 and the N-LCA, although I am putting more hope on the IAF version anyway.

 

[American_Millenium]

When someone says JF 17 resembles F 16, I think most of the JF 17 countrymen will feel happy about it..

But not us, even when you say LCA resembles mirage 2000, we don't take it as a compliment .

The LCA or Tejas is garbage, probably the worst combat aircraft produced (and I use that term lightly) in recent memory. Sorry, just a fact.

Mirage 2000 would run circles around this 'indigenous' creation. The lightest, most ill-equipped, combat aircraft in service today, they probably can't even take a MiG-21 with an experienced Russian or American pilot head on.