How can The weight of LCA MK2 to be reduced by 500 KG?

[AMCA]

Weight can be reduced if we come out with an equally strong alloy from Titanium, lighter in weight than most of the metals being used on the aircraft nowadays. The aircraft weight can further be reduced by decreasing the dependency on riveting, screwing and usage of adhesive joints and instead introduce diffusion bonding.

"Easier said than done"

 

[HariPrasad]

What we "believe" and what we "know" are 2 different things!

We know, that the airframe will be extended for about 0.5m and that such an ammount of airframe parts will add to the empty weight. But we don't know about possible weight reductions now, that's where your believe comes in, but that hardly prove anything.
You also believe that only 1 or 2 avionics will be added, or that they will not weight much, but that's not a prove either. The cockpit alone will see new larger MFDs, it is likely that more EW sensors or systems will be added, so no matter what, the weight will increase.
Btw, it's wrong that AESA's will be lighter, since the whole radar system is much heavier even without a repositioner:

Zhuk ME (puls doppler radar with repositioner) - diameter of 624mm, weight 220Kg
Early Zhuk AE (AESA) - diameter of 575mm, weight 220Kg
Later Zhuk AE (AESA) - diameter of 688mm, weight 275Kg

All official specs, of the Phazotron specboards! The fact is, the weight increase of the AESA's is even a problem, since they often limit the size of the radar. The Russians promised to offer a Zhuk AESA with 200Km detection range, but the radar was far too heavy which badly shifted the weight balance of the fighter. That's why they had no option than to reduce it's size to the current 688mm and a reasonable weight increase. The Gripen AESA adds around 50KG compared to the older radar and both have repositioners. The EF AESA radar is so heavy, that the consortium thinks about adding weight to the rear end of the fighter, to balance the weight again..., so an AESA in the LCA MK2 will add more weight for sure!
Gripen E's IRST adds around 55Kg, compared to the older version without the system.
...
...
...

So if you stick to what we know and judge that, you will see that a considerable ammount of weight will be added. You simply can't counter that by using more composites, especially not at the surface. Even if the newly added 0.5m of the airframe are fully made of composites, they add weight!
The main counter of this weight addition is the increased fuel, while only minor weight reductions can be achieved. Even the Gripen E is given in latest specs with more than 500Kg weight increase compared to the older version.

Thanks for elaborate answer.

Why are you silent on merging of LRUS, Landiang gear, and that 300 KG dead weight of ballasts which increases the weight.

More and more composite shall be used in MK2 That will also decrease weight.

 

[MilSpec]

Hi friends,

As designers have said, LCA MK 2 shall be lighter by 500 KG and its weight shall be around 6.0 Tons. Can we discuss the possible areas where this weight reduction can be achieved?

Your views are well come.

No trolling Please.

1> Uniaxial Carbon composites for Wing skin instead of biax fabric will reduce around 100-125 kgs of fabric and resin.

2>Titanium stitched carbon Biax fiber facing material could be used for fuesealage

3> Reduction of ribs for fuselage

4> potential for weight savings in the main landing gear, it seems to over engineered.

5> Aluminium cylinder and actuator for control surfaces.

6> Removal of balancing dead weights

7> Aluminium Servo valves instead of carbon steel

8> Fiber-optic single spine cable instead of copper cables

9> Composite main spar made from carbon-Methyl acrylite-carbon pultrusion instead wet lam Biax

10> AL-Ni-Ti alloy honey comb stamping for Wing assm instead of 6066 honey comb stamping.

 

[HariPrasad]

1> Uniaxial Carbon composites for Wing skin instead of biax fabric will reduce around 100-125 kgs of fabric and resin.

2>Titanium stitched carbon Biax fiber facing material could be used for fuesealage

3> Reduction of ribs for fuselage

4> potential for weight savings in the main landing gear, it seems to over engineered.

5> Aluminium cylinder and actuator for control surfaces.

6> Removal of balancing dead weights

7> Aluminium Servo valves instead of carbon steel

8> Fiber-optic single spine cable instead of copper cables

9> Composite main spar made from carbon-Methyl acrylite-carbon pultrusion instead wet lam Biax

10> AL-Ni-Ti alloy honey comb stamping for Wing assm instead of 6066 honey comb stamping.

Very Impressive and lots of new information.

Thanks dubby!

 

[dr.crazze]

The whole project is over engineered ,they should focus on production in bulk these adjustments can be done on later blocks ,

 

[sancho]

Thanks for elaborate answer.

Why are you silent on merging of LRUS, Landiang gear, and that 300 KG dead weight of ballasts which increases the weight.

More and more composite shall be used in MK2 That will also decrease weight.

Because I don't think they have reduced the weight of the gear to that extend, or because it would be silly if DRDO or HAL give out official specs of LCA that includes dead weight that only applies to prototypes in testing stages and not for the serial production versions. And as stated earlier, more composites does not automatically mean less weight, only if it replaces metal parts, but if it is added for parts that weren't available earlier it adds weight. Also we know that LCA was designed and developed with a high use of composites from the start, so there is not much left to replace and reduce the weight, otherwise they would have done it earlier. It's not like applying composites to older Mig 29s or Flanker versions, but to find minor parts that still can be improved.

 

[my2cents]

Why do we have to reduce weight?? As it is LCA is light weight- no room for reduction.

If the power to weight is the problem then we should try increase the thrust with more powerful engine.

 

[sancho]

The whole project is over engineered

Of course, because they wanted to do something special, all on their own and show off with PR terms like worlds smallest multi role fighter, or having developing an carrier fighter, or having developed an indigenous radar or engine...
If they had focused on developing a 4th generation multi role fighter in a simple manner, with good potential, but by increasing the capability over the years of operational service, it would had been a success today too.

Why do we have to reduce weight?? As it is LCA is light weight- no room for reduction.

If the power to weight is the problem then we should try increase the thrust with more powerful engine.

Once because the initial planned weight was roughly 1t lower than it currently is, but also since future upgrades will increase the weight, which makes some weight corrections not bad. But yes, even if the power to weight ratio would be bad (which it isn't btw), higher thrust is a solution and that's what they aim on with the GE 414 engine in the MK2.

 

[MilSpec]

Because I don't think they have reduced the weight of the gear to that extend, or because it would be silly if DRDO or HAL give out official specs of LCA that includes dead weight that only applies to prototypes in testing stages and not for the serial production versions. And as stated earlier, more composites does not automatically mean less weight, only if it replaces metal parts, but if it is added for parts that weren't available earlier it adds weight. Also we know that LCA was designed and developed with a high use of composites from the start, so there is not much left to replace and reduce the weight, otherwise they would have done it earlier. It's not like applying composites to older Mig 29s or Flanker versions, but to find minor parts that still can be improved.

there still is some potential.

 

[sancho]

there still is some potential.

I don't rule that out, but not to reduce the weight by 1t to get MK2 at an emptyweight of 6t. Imo design changes to counter drag and add either a useful ammount of internal fuel or additional hardpoints are more important than weight reduction anyway.

 

[k7x]

fly without pilots, thats will reduce weight by at least 90lbs considering its Indian pilots

Bingo!!! You are 100% correct and it might come true one day. No I am not ranting.. go thru this article. there was a proposal to convert tejas into an unmanned aircraft.

You can remove hell lot of life support equipment .


Also you know we indians are damn good in programming ! we might do that. soon!

Livefist: Unmanned Tejas in a decade?

 

[HariPrasad]

I don't rule that out, but not to reduce the weight by 1t to get MK2 at an emptyweight of 6t. Imo

Do you mean that LCA weighs 7 ton right now?

 

[sancho]

Do you mean that LCA weighs 7 ton right now?

No 6.5t empty now + around 500Kg for MK2 changes. So if you want the weight down to 6t, you have to reduce it by 1t, which is doubtful.

 

[Asian.Century]

Cut the wings....for greater weight reduction.

Possibly use light weight pedastle fans than the current western engine.

 

[GURU DUTT]

single crystal
composites
fibers

to be procise we need to develop fast

1. 3rd gen single crystal blade tech
2.advanced composites which have same strenth but less bulky
3.high voltage fiber opticks