Key.Aero Network
Register Free

Page 1 of 21 1234511 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 621

Thread: Tejas Mk1 and Mk2 thread

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,646

    Smile Tejas Mk1 and Mk2 thread

    India's Gas Turbine Research Establishment (GTRE) aims to integrate the Kaveri powerplant with the Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL) Tejas fighter within the next nine months.
    Which engine would that be? Kaveri could mean more than 1 thing.

    In March, Antony told parliament that the Kaveri's development cost was Rs28.39 billion ($520 million), nearly 10 times greater than the Rs3.83 billion originally allocated.
    Somebody thought you could develop a state of the art jet engine for about 50 million dollars? Wonder what planet he lives on.

    http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...d-2013-379684/

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,646
    Does anyone have any news on progress with the SNECMA contract to produce a revised engine to power AMCA and possibly Tejas at some future point?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,528
    Quote Originally Posted by Spitfire9 View Post
    Which engine would that be? Kaveri could mean more than 1 thing.


    Somebody thought you could develop a state of the art jet engine for about 50 million dollars? Wonder what planet he lives on.

    http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...d-2013-379684/
    Same old Kaveri.

    Kaveri engine to fly futuristic unmanned aircraft
    Ajai Shukla / Bangalore Dec 26, 2012, 00:22 IST


    .......................

    The Indian USAV project is a lease of life for the Kaveri engine. Although India will import jet engines worth Rs 1,60,000 crore over the next decade (DRDO projections) none of these can be used for the USAV. The Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) prohibits its 34 signatories — including every major engine manufacturing country — from selling engines for unmanned systems with ranges of over 300 kilometres.

    An Indian jet engine, therefore, must power the USAV and the Kaveri is the only option. Although underpowered for fast-moving fighter aircraft, the DRDO believes the Kaveri is well suited for the USAV, which is lighter, flies slower and manoeuvres less sharply.

    Business Standard visited the Gas Turbine Research Establishment (GTRE), the DRDO laboratory that is developing the Kaveri engine. It reached a key landmark last year, when a prototype Kaveri was flight-tested in Russia at the Gromov Flight Research Institute (GFRI). The engine’s performance was measured on a “flying test-bed”, a four-engine IL-76 transport aircraft that had one of its original engines replaced with a Kaveri.

    During this test the Kaveri did well, generating 49.2 KiloNewtons (KN) of “dry thrust”, marginally less than its target of 51 KN. But there was a serious shortfall in “wet thrust”; the Kaveri generated just 70.4 KN, well short of the targeted 81 KN.

    .........................

    GTRE has a threefold plan for perfecting the Kaveri for the USAV. First, it will remove the design flaws that were detecting during testing in Russia in 2010-11; then, after ground testing in Bangalore, the Kaveri will undergo a round of confirmatory tests in Russia; finally, it will be fitted on a Tejas fighter for flight tests.

    Meanwhile, the Bangalore-based Aeronautical Development Establishment (ADE), another DRDO laboratory, will develop the USAV. Four years from today, the Kaveri — having proved itself on the Tejas — will be mated with the USAV.

    After extensive ground testing at GTRE, the Kaveri will go back to Russia for flight-testing to ascertain that all the problems have been solved. This is essential for airworthiness certification. Finally, we will test the Kaveri in the single-engine Tejas fighter,” says C P Ramnarayanan, director, GTRE.

    The Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA), which oversees the development of the Tejas, confirms that it will provide a Tejas prototype for flying with the Kaveri. It has even nominated an aircraft — the first prototype, numbered PV-1 — which is currently being used for flight-testing new systems.

    (The PV-1) was originally built to support the Kaveri engine. While the engine, in its present form, would not suffice for the Tejas, a Kaveri “dry engine” could be used for one of the futuristic unmanned systems,” says P S Subramanyam, director, ADA.

    http://www.business-standard.com/ind...rcraft/496801/

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,528
    LSP-8 will fly soon, hopefully before new year.

    For the first time, LCA-PG Division's production shop team was authorized to carry out the initial Engine Ground Run (EGR) on LCA (LSP-8) aircraft by National Flight Test Centre team(NFTC) and initial EGR was carried out by Shri Pradeep C Koppal on December 12, 2012.
    http://www.hal-india.com/HAL-CONNECT...SSUE%20-46.pdf

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Tampa, Florida USA
    Posts
    11,705

    Lightbulb

    With the advent of more and more 5th Generations Types. If, I were India I would order the majority of LCA MK2 & N-LCA. As "Advance Trainers" with a Secondary Strike Role. Which, would be perfect for the type. With something like 75/25 mix of Two Seaters vs Singles.


    If, memory serves me I remember RAF Hawks operating in a similar role during the Cold War. With the Hawks being equipped with pylons mounted with Sidewinders AAM's for Point Defense!
    F-35 Lightning II

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,646
    Quote Originally Posted by Twinblade View Post
    "During this test the Kaveri did well, generating 49.2 KiloNewtons (KN) of “dry thrust”, marginally less than its target of 51 KN. But there was a serious shortfall in “wet thrust”; the Kaveri generated just 70.4 KN, well short of the targeted 81 KN."

    http://www.business-standard.com/ind...rcraft/496801/
    I know nothing of jet engine design but if Kaveri dry thrust is within 3%-4% of target, why the need re-design it around the M-88?

    The fundamental flaw with power output seems to be the afterburning system (should increase thrust by about 30Kn but only increases thrust by about 20Kn).

    I don't understand why a foreign jet engine designer was not brought in to (a) sort out any problems with the engine including raising dry thrust slightly (b) redesign the afterburning system. Kaveri could have been used to power Tejas Mk1, thus lowering USAV risk considerably - it would be use a proven engine.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    285
    Quote Originally Posted by Scooter View Post
    With the advent of more and more 5th Generations Types. If, I were India I would order the majority of LCA MK2 & N-LCA. As "Advance Trainers" with a Secondary Strike Role. Which, would be perfect for the type. With something like 75/25 mix of Two Seaters vs Singles.


    If, memory serves me I remember RAF Hawks operating in a similar role during the Cold War. With the Hawks being equipped with pylons mounted with Sidewinders AAM's for Point Defense!
    good idea, lca can be saved by making it as a trainer. lca is exactly like ftc-2000, same size and same skill. ftc-2000 would fail as a local light fighter but they reinvent it to a trainer and then it got sold.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Essex UK
    Posts
    734
    Remember the old saying if it looks right it will fly right sorry Tejas doesn’t look right I feel India need to learn from it and start again and start with an engine that can knock out 12000 lbs dry thrust and 18000 + in AB and build from there with a new design


  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    285
    Quote Originally Posted by Tempest414 View Post
    Remember the old saying if it looks right it will fly right sorry Tejas doesn’t look right I feel India need to learn from it and start again and start with an engine that can knock out 12000 lbs dry thrust and 18000 + in AB and build from there with a new design

    its too small like a baby. small nose, cant put big radar. no range.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    3,559
    Tejas nose is proportionately bigger compared to other small fighters. So no issue there and yes to my mind too it does not look right. The fuselage is too small and wings too big, they are yet to reach the claimed aerodynamic performance till now. But the plane's biggest problem is its delays.

    If I were ruling India I would just inject millions onto the project and get it to pass FOC, and then make the IAF buy 150 MK1 and 350 Mk2 regardless of whether they want them or not.
    Love Planes, Live Planes

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    145
    I actually think the Tejas is a very nice looking design and the fact that it has a big wing is a plus, not a minus, as low wing loading is always a plus in a fighter that's required to maneuver. The only real problem I see with it is its about twenty years too late.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    8,048
    Isn't the point of the Tejas to be a small lightweight fighter? They have Su-30's and MiG-29's to fulfill the larger fighter requirements....
    Fox-4!

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    83
    Quote Originally Posted by Tempest414 View Post
    Remember the old saying if it looks right it will fly right sorry Tejas doesn’t look right I feel India need to learn from it and start again and start with an engine that can knock out 12000 lbs dry thrust and 18000 + in AB and build from there with a new design

    Another saying is you need to walk before you can run... Tejas is the first step for India, and IMO not too shabby!

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    4,893
    Quote Originally Posted by quadbike View Post
    Tejas nose is proportionately bigger compared to other small fighters. So no issue there and yes to my mind too it does not look right. The fuselage is too small and wings too big, they are yet to reach the claimed aerodynamic performance till now. But the plane's biggest problem is its delays.

    If I were ruling India I would just inject millions onto the project and get it to pass FOC, and then make the IAF buy 150 MK1 and 350 Mk2 regardless of whether they want them or not.
    Pumping millions alone wont solve the issue... They should just move onto the MCA and stop dragging the government along and the IAF claiming they can make LCA worthwhile...that ship sailed as soon as the MMRCA RFP/RFI was sent out.
    Wrinkles wrinkles my kingdom fallen to a wrinkle

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    5,587
    IIRC Tejas has a bigger nose than JF-17 (MiG-29 sized)....soooo....
    http://img818.imageshack.us/img818/9098/rsz11rsz3807.jpg

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    915
    Quote Originally Posted by Confucius says View Post

    Another saying is you need to walk before you can run... Tejas is the first step for India, and IMO not too shabby!
    Not shabby at all. I really feel with the Indians here. They have put so mouch time, effort, monny and sheer optimism in the Tjeas-programme and they keep hitting one mine after the other. Must be devasting for morale. They have deserved to have some good for a change.

    I really hope Tejas get into active duty with IAF eventually. If not as a one for one replacement for the Bisons then at least as a homegrown hi tech weapons platform that can provide invaluable experience for future projects.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Essex UK
    Posts
    734
    I feel as a first effort they have done well but there are more problem then fixes and I just feel that a project this far down the line should not have so many key problems and that taking the lessons learnt starting again with a new air frame
    and using the avionics and GE 414 much more could be done and the key is to give India a good home grown platform

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    U.S.A
    Posts
    312
    Does anyone know by how much longer Tejas 2 is vs. Tejas 1 (length, not delay in induction)?

    Wiki states its longer by 1 meter (13.2m + 1m)
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HAL_Tejas#Tejas_Mark_2

    However, there is this image from BR that says its only longer by 0.5 m (dated 17 Feb 11):
    http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/media/...s-mk2.jpg.html
    MTFBWY

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,528
    ^^Latest reports say 1 meter. Would be confirmed at Aero India 13.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    324
    Quote Originally Posted by TR1 View Post
    IIRC Tejas has a bigger nose than JF-17 (MiG-29 sized)....soooo....
    yep, LCA radar diameter (650mm) is slightly bigger than Mig-29k radar.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    285
    Quote Originally Posted by killerbean View Post
    yep, LCA radar diameter (650mm) is slightly bigger than Mig-29k radar.
    actually i do think indians have skill to make lca better fighter than mig29

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    349
    ^^^ LCA is smallest fighter out there and Mig29 is pretty much medium weight fighter if you believe in Lo-Med-Hi terminology, like IAF does. Its roles will be point defence, escorting and also be multirole if it is needed for other things and NOT competing with Mig29.

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    285
    Quote Originally Posted by Corrosion View Post
    ^^^ LCA is smallest fighter out there and Mig29 is pretty much medium weight fighter if you believe in Lo-Med-Hi terminology, like IAF does. Its roles will be point defence, escorting and also be multirole if it is needed for other things and NOT competing with Mig29.
    mig29 is of course much heavier than lca but its still point defense fighter. mig29 engines use lots of gas and the airplane has a small gas capacity and a very draggy airframe so it suffer in its range. range of mig29 and lca is comparable actually but lca has smaller rcs values.

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    poland
    Posts
    345
    Quote Originally Posted by Tigershark View Post
    actually i do think indians have skill to make lca better fighter than mig29
    I don't think that Tejas will be overall better fighter than new MiG-29K/KUB/M2 and MiG-35.
    MiG has much more experience in building fighter aircrafts than Indian.
    Both fighter will belong to the same generation, but the weapons, avionics and performance together will make a difference.

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Reading
    Posts
    11,791
    Quote Originally Posted by Confucius says View Post
    Another saying is you need to walk before you can run... Tejas is the first step for India, and IMO not too shabby!
    First step? What about Marut & Ajeet? What about the decades of building MiG-21, MiG-23, MiG-27 & Jaguar under licence, & developing & fitting upgrades?

    The problem with Tejas is that India has failed to build sensibly on that huge basis of experience. There's been no systematic capture & preservation of experience & knowledge. Instead of incrementally building on previous achievements, India threw away painfully & expensively gained knowledge & skills, then tried to do everything at once with Tejas.
    Juris praecepta sunt haec: honeste vivere, alterum non laedere, suum cuique tribuere.
    Justinian

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    1,405
    True.

    It was awfully ambitious to do a new, completely-from-scratch airframe, engine, and avionics programme without a systematic build-up, or seamless transition from a previous programme.

    But, on the topic of the Tejas, let's not lose sight of the picture. They have prototypes and development aircraft flying, and have made important decisions to get top foreign companies involved in the problematic or lagging areas.
    India must perservere, and not throw the baby out with the bathwater.

  27. #27
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Reading
    Posts
    11,791
    Agreed.

    India now has a great deal of knowledge & skills, built up through the Tejas project & other developments such as the Jaguar Darin upgrades, & it looks as if some of the lessons of the past may have been learned, & now there is an attempt to keep what's been learned & build on it. I believe that's the right way to go.
    Juris praecepta sunt haec: honeste vivere, alterum non laedere, suum cuique tribuere.
    Justinian

  28. #28
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,528
    Quote Originally Posted by Spitfire9 View Post
    Does anyone have any news on progress with the SNECMA contract to produce a revised engine to power AMCA and possibly Tejas at some future point?
    R.I.P Snecma-Kaveri.

    http://www.business-standard.com/ind...artner/497740/

    DefenceMin goes global in search for Kaveri partner
    The process for selecting a partner that has these technologies is underway
    Ajai Shukla / Bangalore Jan 04, 2013, 00:43 IST

    The Ministry of Defence (MoD) will no longer ask French aircraft engine builder Snecma to help it in resurrecting the indigenous Kaveri jet engine, which has reached a dead end in development.

    Instead, major global aero engine manufacturers will compete in a global tender to partner the Gas Turbine Research Establishment (GTRE) — the Bangalore-based DRDO engine laboratory — in refining the Kaveri engine to the level where it can power the Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA), an indigenous, fifth-generation fighter that is on the MoD’s long-term horizon.


    “We are abandoning the plan for co-development with Snecma. We still need an overseas partner. But it will not be Snecma on a single-vendor basis. We will select our partner through competitive bidding,” says Dr CP Ramnarayanan, director, GTRE.
    Business Standard, on a visit to GTRE in Bangalore, was briefed that the Kaveri still delivered significantly less power than what a modern fighter requires. In flight-testing last year at the Gromov Flight Research Institute (GFRI) in Russia, the Kaveri’s maximum thrust (termed “wet thrust") was measured at 70.4 KiloNewtons (KN). High-performance fighters like the Tejas or the AMCA need engines that generate at least 90 KN of thrust.

    “To develop a more powerful Kaveri engine quickly and to become self-reliant in engine design, we need a foreign partner which can bring in core technologies. Otherwise the next cycle of engine development could take another 15-20 years,” admits Ramnarayan, frankly.

  29. #29
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    349
    How did Mr. Ajay Shukla reach the conclusion AMCA will need engines with at least 90KN Thrust, when its design is not finalized yet.

    ADA should design AMCA around something they have and not something GTRE tend to achieve, which they might never achieve.
    Last edited by Corrosion; 6th January 2013 at 09:26.

  30. #30
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,528
    Quote Originally Posted by Corrosion View Post
    How did Mr. Ajay Shukla reach the conclusion AMCA will need engines with at least 90KN Thrust, when its design is not finalized yet.

    ADA should design AMCA around something they have and not something GTRE tend to achieve, which they might never achieve.
    It isn't his conclusion, multiple reports in the past have stated so.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

- Part of the    Network -

KEY AERO AVIATION NEWS

MAGAZINES

AVIATION FORUM

SHOP

 

WEBSITES