Dismiss Notice
Welcome to IDF- Indian Defence Forum , register for free to join this friendly community of defence enthusiastic from around the world. Make your opinion heard and appreciated.

LCA Tejas Multirole Aircraft

Discussion in 'Indian Air Force' started by Dark_Prince, Apr 14, 2010.

  1. randomradio

    randomradio Mod Staff Member MODERATOR

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2013
    Messages:
    10,058
    Likes Received:
    5,068
    And F414 qualified for that.

    The Mi-28 did not qualify in the attack helicopter tender, only Apache did.
     
    GSLV Mk III likes this.
  2. Sancho

    Sancho Lt. Colonel Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    4,516
    Likes Received:
    2,685
    Yes, but probably because it suited LCA and NLCA, while the EJ200 would have suited only the IAF version.
     
    zebra7 likes this.
  3. Sancho

    Sancho Lt. Colonel Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    4,516
    Likes Received:
    2,685
    http://www.janes.com/article/72988/india-s-tejas-programme-suffers-more-delays
     
  4. randomradio

    randomradio Mod Staff Member MODERATOR

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2013
    Messages:
    10,058
    Likes Received:
    5,068
    No. F414 qualified because ADA wanted to modify the design into Mk2, that way they get extra money for the development. As I said, they should have asked for an engine that they could simply drop into Mk1. That way they could have finished the development of Mk1 with the regular Ej200 and used an uprated engine for Mk2. They effed up.
     
    SR-91 likes this.
  5. Sancho

    Sancho Lt. Colonel Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    4,516
    Likes Received:
    2,685
    That's the point, they wanted to modify MK2 INs requirements in mind! IAF never required additional internal fuel tanks, but IFR capability and higher thrust. Only the naval factor of the MK2, preference the GE414.
     
  6. randomradio

    randomradio Mod Staff Member MODERATOR

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2013
    Messages:
    10,058
    Likes Received:
    5,068
    No, no. The Mk2 was aimed at the IAF also because ADA realized they screwed up Mk1. The IN Mk2 was screwed up anyway, which they knew but they couldn't do anything about it because there is no engine that exists today that can actually power the N-Mk2.
     
  7. Sancho

    Sancho Lt. Colonel Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    4,516
    Likes Received:
    2,685
    No it isn't, because MK1 can't carry a payload mor than 3500Kg!

    1 × LDP ~ 200Kg
    2 x 1200l fuel tank ~ 1920Kg
    2 x Python 5 ~ 180Kg
    2 x 500Kg class LGB ~ 900Kg
    => 3200Kg without pylons

    A 3rd LGB or centerline 725l fuel tank, then would require a payload of 4000Kg or more.
     
  8. randomradio

    randomradio Mod Staff Member MODERATOR

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2013
    Messages:
    10,058
    Likes Received:
    5,068
    Okay, you are nitpicking over a technicality. My point was the Mk1, Mk1A and Mk2 will have the exact same loadout. Not that they can actually carry that much.

    I'll simply say the Mk1 can take off with empty tanks and refuel mid air.
     
  9. Sancho

    Sancho Lt. Colonel Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    4,516
    Likes Received:
    2,685
    Nope, I point to the fact that they have different payloads and therfore load capabilities will be different.
    Only with payload increase, you can also add more weight to each hardpoint, which is evident at the Gripen E now too, since it can now carry RBS15 at 4 wing stations, while earlier versions could only carry 2. That also increases your load capabilities, when a hardpoint can carry larger weapon loads.

    And please don't come with the mid air refuelling excuse, that Gripen fanboys used for years as well. Either you can take off with full load or you don't, but no air force in the world will divert tankers to cover these kind of capability shortfalls. When LCA can't take off with higher loads, IAF will simply use other fighters for these roles. That's why they insists for MMRCAs for example and why LCA makes sense only for light payload missions with limited range and endurance.
     
    Blackjay likes this.
  10. randomradio

    randomradio Mod Staff Member MODERATOR

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2013
    Messages:
    10,058
    Likes Received:
    5,068
    You didn't get my point.

    Give the Mk1 only 3 LGBs, it will take off. You are confusing payload and loadout.
     
  11. Abingdonboy

    Abingdonboy Major Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2016
    Messages:
    2,646
    Likes Received:
    11,942
    Country Flag:
    United Kingdom
    Tejas fighter finally achieves production target

    Since December 2013, when the indigenous Tejas fighter was operationally cleared to join the Indian Air Force (IAF), Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) has struggled to establish an assembly line that could build the homegrown light fighter quickly and cheaply.

    With just three Tejas delivered until this year out of the 20 ordered in 2013, the IAF’s complaint that the Defence R&D Organisation (DRDO) had taken too long in development gave way to the charge that HAL was not building the fighter fast enough to replace the IAF’s retiring MiG fighters.

    HAL’s manufacturing shortfall became even starker last November, when the defence ministry cleared the acquisition of 83 more Tejas 1A fighters. This successor to the Tejas Mark 1, with four specified capability improvements, is required to enter production in 2019. This plan hinges on establishing a high-capacity assembly line.

    Now, finally, HAL’s Tejas assembly line in Benguluru is meeting its targets. On a visit by Business Standard to the Tejas assembly line, HAL chief T Suvarna Raju has confirmed that eight Tejas fighters will roll off the line this year – the rated capacity of the assembly line.

    Furthermore, with an additional investment of Rs 1,231 crore sanctioned for enhancing capacity, the Tejas line is projected to build 10 fighters in 2018-19; and 16 Tejas Mark 1As each year from 2019-20 onwards.

    Thereafter, the line is expected to build the Tejas Mark II fighter, an advanced variant of the Tejas with a more powerful General Electric F-414 engine and upgraded avionics.

    Outsourcing to private defence firms has been key to achieving HAL’s production targets. “HAL is now focusing mainly on putting together large assemblies that are built and supplied by private aerospace companies. That has allowed us to speed up work exponentially”, says Raju.



    HAL has created five “Tier-1” suppliers that each build a part of the Tejas. The front fuselage is supplied by Dynamatic Technologies Ltd, Bengaluru; the centre fuselage by VEM Technologies, Hyderabad; rear fuselage by Alpha Tocol, Bengaluru; wings by Larsen & Toubro, Coimbatore; and the tail fin and rudder by National Aerospace Laboratory and Tata Advanced Materials Ltd.



    Each of these Tier-1 suppliers sources components and sub-assemblies from lower-order Tier-2 and Tier-3 suppliers, creating an aerospace industry around the Tejas.


    In addition, a range of equipment is sourced from other private firms that are emerging as players in the aerospace realm: avionics racks and air intakes from Lakshmi Machine Works, Coimbatore; electrical panels from Amphenol, Pune; slats and elevons from Aequs, Belgaum; pipelines from Rangson, Mysore, and precision mechanical assemblies from Sri Koteswara Cam Systems, Secunderabad.

    HAL plans to eventually outsource 69 per cent of the production of Tejas structural modules, with just 31 per cent of the work done in-house – consisting mainly of assembly and equipping work.

    A visit by Business Standard to the Tejas production hanger reveals the most technologically advanced production line that HAL has ever set up – significantly more high-tech than the Hawk advanced jet trainer line that was established with BAE Systems.

    The production jigs, on which Tejas components are fabricated, are calibrated with lasers to an accuracy of 50-80 microns (one micron is one-thousandth of a millimeter). This ensures repeatability, which means that every component coming off a jig is precisely the same, and can be switched across aircraft.

    There are also robotic machines to drill the thousands of holes that are required in each Tejas’ carbon “skin”. These robots drill in two days what manual drillers earlier took two months to do.

    “It earlier took us 19 months to build a Tejas, from start to finish. This is now down to 11 months, and we will be building each Tejas in nine months by September this year”, says Raju.

    HAL’s plan for expanding Tejas production to 16 fighters per year involves establishing a second assembly line. This has physically replaced the Hawk trainer line that is close to completing delivery of its orders.

    The cost of Rs 1,231 crore is being half-funded by HAL, with the IAF and navy picking up the tab for the other half.


    Tejas production schedule

    Year
    Production
    Cumulative
    Configuration





    Upto March 31, 2017
    3 Tejas Mk 1

    2017 – 2018
    8 Tejas Mk 1


    2018 – 2019
    10 Tejas Mk 1


    2019 – 2020
    16 Tejas Mk 1A


    2020 – 2024
    67 Tejas


    2024-25 onward
    Tejas Mark II


    http://ajaishukla.blogspot.co.uk/2017/08/tejas-fighter-finally-achieves.html?m=1


    Outsourcing has become key- increased outsourcing to private sector with HAL taking the role of lead integrator (as many of us always wanted). With no addtional infrastructure HAL can up production capacitt to >20 units/year without adding any physical infrastructure but by increasing the outsourcing content to 85%. If there's a deficit as the IAF says in SE jets then they should commit to an addtional 83 jets which will allow HAL to expand their capacity.


    Some points though:

    - No mention of the 20 FOC MK.1s, Skukla is saying it is 20 IOC MK.1 + 83 MK.1A but we know there are meant to be 20 IOC+ 20 FOC MK.1s
    - HAL will be converting some of the Hawk's production line into the LCA's second production line- if more Hawks are ordered what happens to these plans? Conversly, this indicates the "Combat Hawk" concept is offically DEAD.




    @PARIKRAMA @Ankit Kumar 001 @Sancho @nair @Agent_47 @Gessler @Sathya @randomradio @Grevion @Blackjay @bharathp @MilSpec @Hellfire @GuardianRED @BON PLAN @Picdelamirand-oil @Levina @Lion of Rajputana @Butter Chicken @Fox @Vergennes @Skull and Bones @ni8mare @SrNair @X_Killer @proud_indian @Darth Marr @GSLV Mk III
     
    Last edited: Aug 16, 2017 at 8:10 PM
  12. Blackjay

    Blackjay Developers Guild Developers -IT and R&D

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2016
    Messages:
    330
    Likes Received:
    609
    Country Flag:
    India
    Hmm you missed out a lot of discussion and bashing that happened when this news was first reported,few hours ago.
    Go here-
    http://indiandefence.com/threads/tr...-a-reality-heres-how.63532/page-7#post-586685
     
  13. Abingdonboy

    Abingdonboy Major Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2016
    Messages:
    2,646
    Likes Received:
    11,942
    Country Flag:
    United Kingdom
  14. Sancho

    Sancho Lt. Colonel Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    4,516
    Likes Received:
    2,685
    Oh I got your point quite well, you want to fake things, just to not admit that there is a crucial load difference between MK1 and hopefully MK1A. That's why you brought the mid air refuelling excuse and now try to hide the fact that an MK1 with 3 x 500Kg LGBs, has to reduce the fuel load dramatically to take off.
    If you want to fake it like that, why stop at 3 x LGBs? LCA can even take off with 4, if you just use a centerline fuel tank, just that it has no operational meaning, since it''s range is so limited without the necessary fuel.

    That's why a real MK1 strike config remains to look like this:
    [​IMG]
     
  15. LonewolfSandeep

    LonewolfSandeep Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2017
    Messages:
    420
    Likes Received:
    521
    Country Flag:
    India
    Why LCA cant have wing top missiles like Jaguar
    (2 missiles on each wing top is easily possible, just above 800kg & 1200kg pylons, ie 4Qty 150kg AAM on top) That will make LCA superb in strike config & it wont require much alteration to make it possible.
    [​IMG]
    LCA (2).jpg

    @vstol jockey @randomradio @PARIKRAMA @Hellfire comments pls
     
    Last edited: Aug 17, 2017 at 1:38 PM
    Angel Eyes likes this.

Share This Page