Tejas grounds Medium Combat Aircraft project

[IND151]

What is the thrust of the F-404 variant powering the MK.1, 49Kn dry and 79Kn wet at 1050 Kg weight..isn't the Kaveri already producing around 51 Kn dry and 82 Kn wet at 1235 Kg? So isn't it almost good enough to power the MK.1 NOW?

As far as I know IAF wants 90 KN wet thrust

 

[Beerbal]

What is the thrust of the F-404 variant powering the MK.1, 49Kn dry and 79Kn wet at 1050 Kg weight..isn't the Kaveri already producing around 51 Kn dry and 82 Kn wet at 1235 Kg? So isn't it almost good enough to power the MK.1 NOW?

Brother its not that simple.. IAF changed its requirement. Its Basic idea of corrupt traitors..
Step1: Give a Unrealistic requirement
Step2: Change the requirement before one reach the goal.
Step3: Repeat the vicious cycle until ppl get tired
Step4: Put all blame on R&D and purchase Foren maal (With heavy commission, prostitutes and child sex workers)

I bet if Kaveri will achieve 100KN today, these animals will change the requirement to 120KN. These child-molesters are biggest traitor.

I have seen how this child molesters killed Arjuna

First requirement: IA want 3 crew member moderate Tank
Last requirement: IA want 4 crew member Super-Tank..

 

[Dillinger]

As far as I know IAF wants 90 KN wet thrust

For the MK.2 not for the original MK.1 as it was envisioned- even so I was incorrect- the Kaveri is generating 71-72 Kn wet thrust while the F-404 variant for MK.1 generates 84-85 Kn and is probably a good 150Kg lighter. Another 5 years for the K9 to reach its original specs and validate our design and manufacturing capabilities...after that we can go for blisk fans and more advanced engine core tech for better engines in the future..this should be the stepping stone IF all that has been gleaned is consolidated unlike before.

 

[IND151]

For the MK.2 not for the original MK.1 as it was envisioned- even so I was incorrect- the Kaveri is generating 71-72 Kn wet thrust while the F-404 variant for MK.1 generates 84-85 Kn and is probably a good 150Kg lighter. Another 5 years for the K9 to reach its original specs and validate our design and manufacturing capabilities...after that we can go for blisk fans and more advanced engine core tech for better engines in the future..this should be the stepping stone IF all that has been gleaned is consolidated unlike before.

I hope Kaveri becomes successful, reliable and on par with Russian engines

 

[ptltejas]

It would be better to start project with intent to export. neither project will be delayed nor trouble to gov. or IAF.
I don't know why "Sancho" had stated that IAF not interested in AMCA. though it would be better fighter to fill the gape of Mig-21. Strongly believe need to change Mig-21, Mig-27 and all Jaguars.

 

[Badbadman]

Why not go to private sector with the AMCA project. Am sure by 2020 they will come up with a few different prototypes for the IAF. We will have a far better plane that ADA or HAL can give us. They can provide consultation.

 

[SRP]

Why not go to private sector with the AMCA project. Am sure by 2020 they will come up with a few different prototypes for the IAF. We will have a far better plane that ADA or HAL can give us. They can provide consultation.

But our private sector doesn't have technological know how about a plane making let alone fighter plane design with stealth features.

 

[Badbadman]

But our private sector doesn't have technological know how about a plane making let alone fighter plane design with stealth features.

True. But they can definitely rope in western or Russian firms. It is very much possible. The best about going private is that we can get fast results and development in less time instead of wasting money on delays. We already gonna get a stealth fighter FGFA but what we need is a good fighter with mass production.

 

[Pulsar]

Can we expect the AMCA project to start on New Year's day, 2100? Hope so!

 

[SRP]

True. But they can definitely rope in western or Russian firms. It is very much possible. The best about going private is that we can get fast results and development in less time instead of wasting money on delays. We already gonna get a stealth fighter FGFA but what we need is a good fighter with mass production.

But this needs a higher fdi in defence and govt is not going to allow greater than 30% fdi in defence in near future.

 

[Dillinger]

@S-DUCT @sancho @Abingdonboy @arp2041

Ok I talked to a particular individual and I tired to get some very specific answers.

1) What exactly ails the LCA program other than the obvious engine and radar problems:- one has to realize that the MK.1 despite various changes and modifications throughout the various LSP iterations is still using the same original LRUs and components...are these components obsolete..some are BUT the bigger problem is that many were not manufactured in India..they were stockpiled from their OEMs and are mostly out of production now- to top that off they are reaching depreciation induced end of life. Even those stockpiled have a certain lifespan and are becoming veritably non-applicable. The agencies have now begun a belated process of getting indigenous replacements since many such specific LRUs were never manufactured in country and are not in production anymore. So this is not as much about capability as it is about proper management..according to the person concerned- adequate replacements will easily be manufactured within 2-3 years BUT they need them NOW and they could have had them if the process had been initiated earlier but it was not. Complete lack of foresight.

2) Radar issues:- Since only 1 test article has actually flown with the integrated radar (for MK.1)..the radome was found to be unsatisfactory for that specific radar in some parameters and requires minor redesigns for the MK.2 variant too (tweaks will probably have to be made on the radome for both variants but nothing intensive as such). Something people don't seem to appreciate is that radars are not plug and play systems..the reason you see foreign OEMs transition between such systems with ease is largely due to years of accumulated experience and familiarity with the system in question because they are usually jointly developed and the integrator is either the manufacturer itself or otherwise has had privileged insight into the specs and development process of the system beforehand. The MK.2's issues are exacerbated by the unavailability of the final radar system to be put on the operational article..so its not possible to even start thinking of possible modifications required yet. On the engine front the MK.2 is secure thanks to the signed contract on the engines and thus the availability of the specs and compatibility criteria.

3) Its not true..the article's quoted turnaround rate of 3 days. Period!

4) Many many building blocks have been mastered and aggregated and some critical gaps still exist..BUT the biggest problem is a coherent path of integration, utilization and collation of these blocks in an efficient manner.

 

[sancho]

Wouldn't this be the ideal role for a light combat aircraft?

You mean interception roles? Yes and that's what LCA can do as well, but the higher the payload and the more range you need (which is the same for any fighter), the more fuel you need to carry. Most fighters needs additional external fuel tanks for this and if the more of them you carry, the less weapons can be used.

Here are some possible load configs for LCA:

(Interception, CAP, CAS, heavy strikes)

 

[sancho]

I got several names here so far, but Defence Minister is a new one!

 

[Kloitra]

What is the thrust of the F-404 variant powering the MK.1, 49Kn dry and 79Kn wet at 1050 Kg weight..isn't the Kaveri already producing around 51 Kn dry and 82 Kn wet at 1235 Kg? So isn't it almost good enough to power the MK.1 NOW?

Wasn't there a thread recently which stated the problem with acceleration? The 200 Kg additional weight is a killer too.

 

[S-DUCT]

@Dillinger:
Are All LSP's are fitted with ELTA-2032-MMR and after logging more than 2000 test flights,why they have not tested BVR AAM till now?