HAL Tejas | Updates, News & Discussions-[Thread 2]

[ranadd]

It can be done very easily. Indian media is owned by Indian intelligence agencies. Not that this practice is immoral. Not only is it legitimate, it is also necessary. Because if desi intelligence agencies don't own Indian media houses, foreign intelligence agencies would buy them.

Now coming to your question of how to hide plane crashes and frames:

If media doesn't report it, nobody will come to know about it. The locals who witness such events would forget it in one or two years. Cover-up of plane crashes is very easy.

Please stop.

 

[X_Killer]

Most respondents are missing the point and callously throwing Mk1 term. There are TWO Mk1 airframes!! I have already described the differences and the advantages of one over the other in earlier posts.

I'm talking about Tejas MK1 (air force)

 

[Vertiti Scrutator]

I'm talking about Tejas MK1 (air force)

There's no confirmed report on that. But if you're right, then it would be quite a tragedy!!
IAF had kinda of dumped the air force version. ADA too was just focussed on developing and testing the Naval & Trainer variant, until MOD insisted that ADA 'finish' the air force variant project before focussing 'all' its attention on the newer variant - just so that 'something' was completed. Tejas Mk1A concept came much later - it would be hard for me to digest that HAL or IAF would have ordered 83 frames of something that they didn't like to start with!!

As I said earlier, Mk1 is clearly not aerodynamic; the naval/trainer variant airframe is much more aerodynamic.

 

[RISING SUN]

http://idrw.org/tejas-foc-points-on-the-verge-of-completion-ada-chief/

 

[X_Killer]

There's no confirmed report on that. But if you're right, then it would be quite a tragedy!!
IAF had kinda of dumped the air force version. ADA too was just focussed on developing and testing the Naval & Trainer variant, until MOD insisted that ADA 'finish' the air force variant project before focussing 'all' its attention on the newer variant - just so that 'something' was completed. Tejas Mk1A concept came much later - it would be hard for me to digest that HAL or IAF would have ordered 83 frames of something that they didn't like to start with!!

As I said earlier, Mk1 is clearly not aerodynamic; the naval/trainer variant airframe is much more aerodynamic.

I watched a wind tunnel test video which shows that MK1 is more aerodynamic but won't performance Better CARRIER based landing.
Naval MK1 produce more vortex which produce larger drag comparable to AF MK1

 

[Vertiti Scrutator]

I watched a wind tunnel test video which shows that MK1 is more aerodynamic but won't performance Better CARRIER based landing.
Naval MK1 produce more vortex which produce larger drag comparable to AF MK1

Mk1's geometry doesn't completely conform with the aerodynamic laws and as such produces a lot of drag!! And Mk1 is also not capable of producing significant lift at low speeds (a requirement for carrier based fighters anywhere).
Yes, NLCA is intentionally designed to produce more vortices at low speeds (with the LEVCONs added to the airframe) - these are good vortices that actually help in producing more lift at low speeds.

 

[aftab_s81]

How is LCA's payload and range comparable to an F-16?

 

[Vertiti Scrutator]

How is LCA's payload and range comparable to an F-16?

Lower in both respects.

 

[Water Car Engineer]

NLCA Mark 2

You can note airframe changes from Mark 1.

 

[Nilgiri]

NLCA Mark 2

You can note airframe changes from Mark 1.

Is that a conformal fuel tank that I spot?

BTW is Navy actually interested in mk 2?

 

[Vertiti Scrutator]

Is that a conformal fuel tank that I spot?

BTW is Navy actually interested in mk 2?

Nope there's no conformal fuel tank - that's the body of the aircraft.
As of now, Navy is not - things could always change!!
(I think some of the pics are several years old - not sure if they reflect the most recent iteration)

 

[Water Car Engineer]

Nope there's no conformal fuel tank - that's the body of the aircraft.
As of now, Navy is not - things could always change!!
(I think some of the pics are several years old - not sure if they reflect the most recent iteration)

It is the most recent design, it's from Aero India 2017. Pretty fresh at that.

These are the older ones, as you can see, pretty much IAF model with LEVCON, slight nose drop.


vs

 

[Vertiti Scrutator]

It is the most recent design, it's from Aero India 2017. Pretty fresh at that.

These are the older ones, as you can see, pretty much IAF model with LEVCON, slight nose drop.


vs

I wish they could add 2 hardpoints on the wingtips (of Mk2) to carry lightweight WVRAAMs. Normal configuration of Tejas will consume 4 hardpoints just for air/self defense (2xWVRAAMs + 2xBVRAAMs) leaving only 3 for any kind of mission payload. Now given that Tejas has a small internal fuel tank, it might carry one or two external tanks for longer range missions (for likely most of the missions).
That means ONLY ONE or TWO hardpoints left for the mission payload!!!!!!!! This could happen even if the total payload may not reach the max payload weight limit!
If hardpoints on the wingtips is not possible, then perhaps a dual launcher to carry both WVRAAM and BVRAAM could also be considered!!
F16 has 9 hardpoints AND conformal fuel tanks - leaving all 9 hardpoints for weapons carry even on very long missions!!!

 

[Water Car Engineer]

 

[Vertiti Scrutator]

I wish they could add 2 hardpoints on the wingtips (of Mk2) to carry lightweight WVRAAMs. Normal configuration of Tejas will consume 4 hardpoints just for air/self defense (2xWVRAAMs + 2xBVRAAMs) leaving only 3 for any kind of mission payload. Now given that Tejas has a small internal fuel tank, it might carry one or two external tanks for longer range missions (for likely most of the missions).
That means ONLY ONE or TWO hardpoints left for the mission payload!!!!!!!! This could happen even if the total payload may not reach the max payload weight limit!
If hardpoints on the wingtips is not possible, then perhaps a dual launcher to carry both WVRAAM and BVRAAM could also be considered!!
F16 has 9 hardpoints AND conformal fuel tanks - leaving all 9 hardpoints for weapons carry even on very long missions!!!

These are good developments....