Delay to Tejas Mk 2 could push IAF into accepting modified Mk 1s

[Zarvan]

Aircraft LSP2 was part of an initial series production batch of Tejas aircraft and is fitted with the F404-GE-IN20 powerplant. HAL is urging the IAF to take on such aircraft, albeit lightened to improve performance, due to delays in development of the LCA Mk 2. Source: IHS/P Allen
Delays by India's state-owned Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) in developing the upgraded Tejas Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) Mk 2 are likely to pose operational problems for the Indian Air Force (IAF), which is facing a steady decline in its fighter squadrons.

According to official sources HAL recently proposed to the IAF that, instead of waiting for it to design the more capable LCA Mk 2, the air force should acquire the under-development Tejas Mk 1A variant, which is marginally more proficient than the existing Mk 1.

Powered by the General Electric F404-GE-IN20 engine, with a limited 80-85 kN thrust that restricts its angle of attack and weapon-carrying capabilities, the LCA Mk 1 failed to meet the IAF's qualitative requirements (QRs), but is currently being series built by HAL.

HAL claimed its scientists and engineers are overstretched with developmental projects such as the Hindustan Turbo Trainer-40 basic trainer and the Sitara Intermediate Jet Trainer, and are consequently unable to ensure the LCA Mk 2's timely development.

HAL went on to state that the Mk 2 variant it is jointly developing with the government-run Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA) is unlikely to enter series production before 2024, some five years after conducting its maiden test flight around 2019.

The company contended that this delay would render HAL's LCA production lines in Bangalore inactive after 2019 once it has completed the IAF's pending order for 40 Mk 1s.

The IAF took delivery of the first Mk 1 in January - 32 years after the LCA programme was initiated.

Consequently, HAL wants the IAF to initially acquire 40-60 additional LCA Mk 1As in order to keep its production lines open until 2024. Thereafter the Mk 2 variant, fitted with the more powerful F414 GE-INS6 engine generating 90-98 kN thrust, would be ready to go into production to meet the IAF's projected requirement of 120-140 LCAs.

HAL declined to comment on the issue.

Industrial sources say HAL envisages the Mk 1As as being around 1,000 kg lighter than the Mk 1, which weighs 6,500 kg. It aims to achieve this weight loss by shedding 200-300 kg of ballast secured in the aircraft's nose to stabilise it and another 700-800 kg by reducing its heavy and 'over-engineered' landing gear.

The platform would also be fitted with Israeli firm ELTA Systems' active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar, replacing the heavier and less capable 'hybrid' version of ELTA's EL/M-2032 lightweight multi-mode radar, which was developed jointly with India's Defence Research and Development Organisation.

HAL maintains that these changes would make the Mk 1A operationally more agile and proficient - despite being fitted with the less powerful F404 engine - and more closely aligned with the IAF's QRs.

Official sources said HAL even "obliquely hinted" that these modifications to the Mk 1A could even render developing the Mk 2 for the IAF redundant.

However, the F414 engines - the first eight of which HAL is expected to receive by the end of the year - would still be needed to power the under-development LCA (Navy) to assist in its take-off from an aircraft carrier deck.

The Indian Navy has an initial requirement for some 40 LCA (Navy) aircraft.

Want to read more? For analysis on this article and access to all our insight content, please enquire about our subscription options ihs.com/contact




To read the full article, Client Login
(551 of 642 words)

Delay to Tejas Mk 2 could push IAF into accepting modified Mk 1s - IHS Jane's 360

 

[Indian Patriot]

A very smart move by HAL to compel IAF to buy the utterly worthless LCA Mk1.

 

[The Huskar]

Why does not GOI ask GE to uprate the dry thrust of F404 as they did with Volvo for Gripen C/D.6-10 kn increase in dry thrust would go a long way if HAL manages to shed 1000 kilos off Tejas.

 

[sathya]

Why does not GOI ask GE to uprate the dry thrust of F404 as they did with Volvo for Gripen C/D.6-10 kn increase in dry thrust would go a long way if HAL manages to shed 1000 kilos off Tejas.

I think we already did.
From GE 404 to GE 404IN20

 

[punit]

get an expert consultant ( from Israel or gripen/SAAB) on board and handover the blue print to some private company.

 

[NKVD]

A very smart move by HAL to compel IAF to buy the utterly worthless LCA Mk1.

Holy IAF which is Still Flying 60 era Mig-21/23 and will operate it till 2025.

 

[The Huskar]

I think we already did.
From GE 404 to GE 404IN20

GE 404IN20 seems not enough for a high T/W ratio.We need a even higher thrust engine to make Tejas Mk1A an able interceptor.

 

[NKVD]

Why does not GOI ask GE to uprate the dry thrust of F404 as they did with Volvo for Gripen C/D.6-10 kn increase in dry thrust would go a long way if HAL manages to shed 1000 kilos off Tejas.

First All GE 404IN20 More Upgraded Advanced Engine than Volvo RM12. Secondly LCA already Achieved 24 Degree AOA at IOC-2 Stage which is More than Enough For Aircraft of Light Weight Category

Source Direct From GE Original Site :

The F404 Engine | Engines | Military | GE Aviation

 

[Mitro]

IAF can only digest foreign Mal hahaha good going IAF .

 

[NKVD]

GE 404IN20 seems not enough for a high T/W ratio.We need a even higher thrust engine to make Tejas Mk1A an able interceptor.

TWR of LCA Is Much Better than Gripen C/D Itself Due to better Engine and Less Empty weight. Mate I Think you are Mis-Informed

@The Huskar the Engine that LCA Currently Operates is Even More Further upgraded According to Govt Official Site of LCA the current Engine Category Has Performance: Thrust 9,163 kg (20,200 lb) or 89.8 KN

Source:
Powerplant - Specifications | Tejas - India's Light Combat Aircraft

 

[The Huskar]

TWR of LCA Is Much Better than Gripen C/D Itself Due to better Engine Mate I Think you are Mis-Informed

Wet thrust is not that important when compared to the dry thrust since the plane would be flying without afterburners most of the time.Also high T/W ratio enables supercruise above Mach 1 but that would be impossible unless the engine is given almost 60-65 kn dry thrust and empty weight of body is low.

 

[NKVD]

Wet thrust is not that important when compared to the dry thrust since the plane would be flying without afterburners most of the time.Also high T/W ratio enables supercruise above Mach 1 but that would be impossible unless the engine is given almost 60-65 kn dry thrust and empty weight of body is low.

Well there Dry Thrust Is Lies in Same Category of 54 kN. But LCA has Less Empty Weight than Gripen C/D which is also A Factor in TWR.Also LCA main Weaponry is Israelis Made Light weight Python/Derby Missiles.

It All Speculation As Air-forces Hide There True TWR.But All Unofficial Sources Quote LCA has Better TWR.

 

[MilSpec]

Let me be the devil's advocate or rather HAL's here.

For LCA-1P, HAL is basically doing what the project management team of ADA should have resolved by 2006. All of us have seen the CTP's remarks on over-engineered MLU and NLU, we have all heard of the dead weight stabilizers, so why hasn't the prime design agency whose only project is LCA hasn't completed the Job.

Usually in the G4 gate review for a project, i.e. once it goes into production/prototype, issues regarding subsystem go into a Common- Rolling action item list (C- Rail), Without getting a green on all C-Rail items you cannot next Gate review to close the project.

So, lets ask ourselves, what has ADA engineers done.

And I am sure some of you will comment why is HAL still trying to work on Sitara and Htt-40, the truth of the matter is massive number of engineers for HAL are actually on the MKI, AJT, and Mig27 and Jaguar ovehaul lines and not of sitara and htt40 project.

Lets ask ourselves how much of the Unused Defence budget has been returned to the FM by MoD in last 10 years, and why couldn't we establish a small percentage of that fund to hire a few more engineers and managers by increasing the opex budget for HAL, especially for the ARDC....

 

[The Huskar]

Well there Dry Thrust Is Lies in Same Category of 54 kN. But LCA has Less Empty Weight than Gripen C/D which is also A Factor in TWR.Also LCA main Weaponry is Israelis Made Light weight Python/Derby Missiles.

It All Speculation As Air-forces Hide There True TWR.But All Unofficial Sources Quote LCA has Better TWR.

I can only wish that Tejas have a >1 T/W ratio.It would enable it to outclass JF Thunder Block 2 and Block 3 by miles.Also any idea of Elta 2052 radar in the Mark1A.I thought Israel blocked its sale in 2012 owning to US pressure.

 

[PARIKRAMA]

An important question is if light category majority of birds are assumed to be future Mk2 and LCA navy also needs GE414 (Mk1 itself), then whats the point of continuing on Ge404 based 80 new orders of LCA Mk1A (advanced) version.
Logic says better focus on 99 engines 404 we procured and be happy with that only.. Dont increase that numbeer.. If majority of bird in excess of 150-200 (IAF and IN) combined need GE414 powerplant better focus on MK2 and bring simple commonality of engine pool and service/operations..

To me these 80 new orders proposed makes it look that MK2 will never meet timeline schedules ever and if we get say a total of 120 Mk1s/Mk1A birds we are ultimately reducing Mk2 numbers by almost 4 squadrons over time..

The worst is that even if LCA Mk1A gets an MLU, there is less than 5% chance of replacing the powerplant from 404 to 414.. On top 120 Mk1s needs at least minimum 240 404 engines (1 on board and 1 standby/replacement).. prudently that figure can go up to 360-400 GE 404 engines.. So does that make really any sense?