Wednesday, February 09, 2011

AERO INDIA: First Impressions Of The Tejas Mk.2

Sent using a Sony Ericsson mobile phone

56 comments :

Anonymous said...

Hi Shiv,

how many hard points does the MK2 have?

Thanks

Anonymous said...

awesome!!!!!!!

Anonymous said...

What the heck is this? I'm quite disappointed! We have to wait till 2017 for this piece of crap? First flight in 2014 for a re-engined tejas, with no design change? They still using that no-maneuverble 18 degree AoA frame? Fuck LCA i'm so disappointed! Scrap that shit! I think they learnt those re-stickering lessons from hero honda.

Sudheendra said...

No rectangular intakes. thats bit surprising...considering the fact that F 18 earlier versions were upgraded to rectangular intakes in super hornet.

This aircraft should be better than gripen with GE-F404 engine, be it in terms of weapons payload, or range. Otherwise this upgradation makes no sense. May be it should be on par with gripen NG with F414 engine.

Anonymous said...

I hardly see any major changes. R they fooling us with mark2 version.

Raman Kumar Singh said...

Hi,

Can anyone help me to find out the difference between Tejas MK 1 and MK 2 in term of structure?

Anonymous said...

For LCA Mk II , there seems no increase in air inlet to add more engine thrust
and it is just a replica for LCA MK -1 so where is the modification visible from outside

Anonymous said...

LCA mk2 If pitted against Chengdu J 10 may not defy it in terms of maneuverability.Looks have almost no change(lca navy looks moor cool). On board oxygen generation, retractable fueling system, increased fuel capacity are highlights of mk2(It lacks AESA RADAR) but i would have loved to see some changes in its wing and nose design.
It was a good chance for HAL and ADA to change the image of LCA as a 3++ gen(& there own) but since the design has almost no interesting change Like canards etc It partially Disappoints me. I Think still It is a milestone partially achieved by HAL and ADA .
If the design was to be like this It would have been better to select EJ200 thrust vectoring engine instead of F414. Angle of attack(AOA) would still be a concern.
Anyhow This is a step Forward And we should appreciate and enjoy it.
Jai Hind

tcdd said...

I think this is truly a good decision by ADA and IAF… without major structural design changes and improving major systems will bring Tejas Mk2 into service without any delay and make really a potent figther… Now world is moving next gen fighters… breaking our head in to the pervious gen fighter is wasting resources… we have handful of next gen projects…. Will show our capabilities in that…. Let tejas fly in our sky…. All the beat ADA

Sudhagar chennai

Anonymous said...

This clears up the air surrounding the use of canards on Mk2... I wonder if any upgrades are being made on reducing RCS on Mk2 as compared to the Mk1!

Devesh said...

I couldn't find any difference/improvement in airframe.

Anonymous said...

Don't you have any camera? lol BTW if you can pls post some videos of LCA and LCH as well. Thanks.

Anonymous said...

Extremely disappointing to say the least. No wonder IAF Chief has been so vocal about it. MMR? Might as well turn them into UAV's ...

nag said...

i dont see major changes. intakes wings hardpoints are all same. only change is length and reteactable probe.are we missing some thing??????

Abhishek Nayak said...

what is this??....it looks same as mk1

Parminder Grewal said...

why are they spending money on models, damn it they should make good on their promises, they are capable I'm sure, really for once a I wish they would
Also , this is a bit out of context but India really need to steal a march on the space race, you should cover ISRO as well. The GSLV Mk II and III need to be made successful as should the RLV.

Anonymous said...

What the ****, there is not even a single change to its airframe and they called it MK2. I am very very disappointed after seeing this mockup model of LCA MK2.

Anonymous said...

Even the mk2 wont be near the Gripen C when it comes to overall performance. You cant just look at the empty weight and the T/W-ratio and assume that range, payload, agility and speed will be the same. I mean, there must be something fundamentally wrong with the design of the airframe if the Mk1 is considerered underpowered when the Gripen C is not. There will be no way that the mk2 will benefit from all the extra thrust from the 414. And whats the selling point on these pictures? "Fuel dump" & "multi-mode radar"??? Welcome to the 80s...

/Andreas

Armchair Expert said...

What, no stealth, cloaking device or submarine capability? No anti satellite lasers? I am so disappointed.

Anonymous said...

I am agree with TCDD. Plz stop abusing ADA guys. let them do thier work.sure they know better then you people. i am sure that something better will going to come out.lets wait & watch. jai hind

Practical me said...

I hope the MKII is on schedule.. and comes into service as soon as possible.. all the said upgrades and features are pretty decent and fulfills its operational requirements..

For those who are very "disappointed" ,
go watch SWAT KATS! and be happy!

Keep going ADA and the rest!

BigLulli said...

Shiv, Kon sa teer marra hai...looks the same yaar.

Paul said...

TCDD, what are you saying, do you ever think before saying anything. It is all the hard worked Indian taxpayers money which is put in this project. We can let just like that go, lot of money and time has been invested in this project and we need results. You mentioned without structural design changes LCA is a potent fighter, I would like you to know what IAF chief mentioned about this aircraft "MIG21++", this is what the LCA really is and that is why it should be changed. Every one knows that Having a rectangular air inlets is better that the present sliced circular shape. In this present work Stealth makes a huge difference in areal battle then why not reduce LCA's RC signature to the lowest possible and add some radar evading shapes with out complete airframe change. Why not change the airframe to increase angel of attack. Do you really think IAF is really happy with LCA MK1 and when it finds out LCA MK2 is nothing bot avionics upgraded LCA MK1. I am pretty sure that IAF is already pissed off after locking at LCA MK2.

This status of LCA, it will not be able to stand up against other fighters in any foreign military purchase competition. So no profit only loss...... :(

Anonymous said...

Reply to the one posted "I am agree with TCDD.".

Have you even know about Indian government staffs be it scientist or municipality and every other gov staffs. Do they work hard "no never and for ever no". Do they think about working hard no not at all. Gov jobs are permanent jobs, so what the hell I will get my salary.

If you really what to know how gov staffs work then you need to ask any person who has done an apprenticeship in defense PSU's.

Note: There are very few gov staffs who really set a standard for the way they work, but the percentage is not so high to make any difference or good.......

Anonymous said...

LCA MK2 should have been displayed on April 1

Anonymous said...

@Paul
You could also think..but then i suppose its too much of a chore...
A lot of money has been spent???BS LCA Mk1 has only after its "monumental over-runs" spent $2.8bn (13K crore) ..which seems a lot...but is not much in the new a/c development thingy.....the monumental cost overrun is with comparison to this..initial funding on 560 cr...which is a little over the cost of 2 units of the F/A 18...as quoted for MRCA


about hard earned money..... [CAG suspects tax evasion tot the tune of 8K crore by telecom companies in 1 financial year alone]....including a company employing 32k people paying about 2.8k less..do the math how much that comes to each head.....

Timescale..

Full scale funding for the TD-1 & TD-2 was granted....in 1993
now think about timescale

Anonymous said...

Paul: You state " I would like you to know what IAF chief mentioned about this aircraft "MIG21++"...".. I'd like you to know that the IAF Chief is a fat, corrupt, incompetent turd!!!!!!!!!!

Mr Bassi said...

Baakaas at least it should be lookin better in looks like gripen Ng or Rafale ...totally disappointed...n one more thing About Hal ANd ADA "Hathi ke Dant khane ke Aur Dekhane Aur "

Paul said...

correction has become a culture in India, so can't help it. F18 has a global market value, does this apply to LCA. Money spending power, believe me it's completely different when you compare India and US. US can easily recover the money spent for a development but India it either takes a very long time or goon for a toss.

Can any one tell me if LCA MK2 is better than any of the six contenders in MMRCA?

Anonymous said...

Bassi

you dont have to crap on every post.... one place was enough

Sourabh said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
MUKESH said...

?????????????? WELL ???

Paragreen said...

If you see the specifications, the Mk2 will be a slightly bigger(thus heavier a/c) than the mk1.

Its good in a way that there are not many changes in the structure or else there would be another set of regression testing and thus further delays.

And avionics wise I think LCA would fulfil its role as Air superiority and Interceptor a/c.

People crying for AESA, don't be sad India has Phalcon and LCA has a good enough data link, it will serve the purpose as such.

We are Indians, if we dont get the right thing we can always do the "Jugaad"

Paul said...

I would like to know if F414-GE-INS6 is equipped with super cruise capability?

Anonymous said...

Few suggestions to HAL and ADA

1. Change its name to "Dheeras" or "Neeras"
2. Please just build models from now onwards. That will not waste your and our time
3. Start making something after MK 10 ( I do not know whats your level)
4. Please do some R & D on how we can bomb PAK or china by cycle.

Anonymous said...

It sometimes appalls me when I see the level of knowledge shown by commentors here. If you can't see the difference, then it is not HAL/ADA's fault. Before you start bad mouthing other people's hard work atleast know a little of what you are speaking of!

The LCA MK2 is longer by 0.5 mtrs. behind the cockpit. The spine a wasp waist shape. At the back of the fuselage the wing body fuselage has been smoothened out and lengthened. This makes the area ruling much smoother and decreases the wave drag immensely. This will ensure much better aerodynamic performance at low altitudes and higher speeds.

Can somebody tell me why we need a canard. It is detrimental. We already have a compound wing. If you don't know how it works, please find out.

The pylons would be optimized for lesser drag with sharper leading edges.

There will be more active CG management.
They will have more fuel. Close to 3T of internal fuel now.

And these are things that I know of about the aerodynamic changes. There must be more.

Forget the avionics upgrade altogether.

If you can't see something, doesn't mean that its not there. Try to find out rather than opening a big mouth and blurting out whatever you deem just!

Indranil Roy

Anonymous said...

@ Indranil

you RATshaker...how dare you question people who criticize DRDO/HAL etc....we are the most knowledgeable people on earth......us armchair experts should not be questioned....my unborn child could come up with a better design!!!....

Anonymous said...

It would have been better than this to showcase our national fighter plane a RICKSHAW..........LOL

Practical me said...

@ Paul : since care so much hard working Indian tax payers money, you should ask the following questions also.. its your right dude!

1)can LCA fly to the moon and come back?

2)it it equipped with cloaking device so that not even naked eyes can detect it?

3)is it equipped with force field for better protection from incoming missiles?

4)are it sensors compatible with iTunes?

5)can the digital cockpit and display play FULL HD moives?

6)can it download free Apps at 10mbps speed?

7)can it fly reverse?

8)is it equipped with emergency shitting capability? what if the pilot wants to go to loo badly during mission and he finds out that there is no "capability" available?!?

9)and oh yes does give better mileage and does it have good market value?

Anonymous said...

@ Paul

i said the unit cost of two...not twice the development cost of f/a 18.....

to develop a bike if all u have made is a cycle...will cost more than a car...dont u agree???

Anonymous said...

Anonymous @ 2:48

"4. Please do some R & D on how we can bomb PAK or china by cycle."

It has already been done by Shah 'Rick' Khan and Farah Khan in "Main Hoon Na" where SRK chases a Mahindra SUV and beats the hell out of an ex army chap.

Taking our cycles and rickshaw's to China and Pak is no big deal getting them back safely is. Maybe DRDO and ADA can pitch in.

The best part is the RCS of a cycle is zero and you don't have to worry about MK1 / 2.

Cool, no.

Anon @ 11:09 - ROFL

bits222 said...

this anonymous crap posting should be stopped shiv...

Jyo said...

LCA Mk.2 is truly Disappointing. Just 50cm increase in length and 20cm increase in height. and they need another 3 years to design this?

Shiv... can u just find out what are the kind of Improved performance, Maintainability and survivability our expert scientists are talking about?

Anonymous said...

Jyo ... obviously, you have no clue about how aircrafts are tested and validated.

It is not just the length. A lot of things are being changed, structurally and arrangement wise. So please find out before commenting.

Indranil Roy

Anonymous said...

to all the duffers talking about stealth technology not incorporated in mk2 let me tell you something:
1.tejas mk2 incorporates a great amount of composites which either absorb tracking waves or are simply not detected by radars
2.the lca 'light combat aircraft'
is smaller in size than all aircrafts you possibly see in your fantasies thus, it will be difficult to spot for enemy aircraft during combat
remember it is no b22 bomber to require a 'harry potter' invisibility cloak.
3.the electronic warfare suits incorporated in mk2 will be highly modern, for an lca ew suits give the necessary electronic invisibility.

while finishing i would like to tell all the self appointed critics that those scientists and researchers working 18 hours a day ,seven days a week and getting a measely salary know a great deal than you, work harder than you may ever do.they know what the country requires not you.
always remember A FIGHTER AIRCRAFT TAKES AT LEAST 12-15 YEARS FOR COMPLETION WHILE WRITING A SILLY POST TAKES ONLY 15 SECONDS , LEARN TO APPRECIATE WHAT THESE MEN DO FOR THE COUNTRY .DO NOT USE YOUR ARROGANCE AND IGNORANCE AS A CLOAK FOR ALL THE RUBBISH YOU POST. PUT YOURSELF IN THEIR SHOES BEFORE UTTERING ANY RUBBISH ABOUT THE HARDWORK OF THE SCIENTISTS . JAI HIND.

Jyo said...

Indranil... Thank you for your reply.

Structurally I don't see much of a difference between Mk.1 and Mk.2. Rather than missing something on the spine( as in LSP Models) not much of a difference.

Arrangement wise sure there will be changes. My only concern is how it is going to fare against enemy aicrafts like J-10 and JF-17. How good is the rate of turn and climb of LCA compared to enemy aircrafts. EoD LCA will have to face the dog fight. Tell me if the structure of LCA (Present and Future) good enough for that.

Jyo said...

"scientists and researchers working 18 hours a day ,seven days a week and getting a measely salary know a great deal than you, work harder than you may ever do.they know what the country requires not you."

I wish the last sentence was true...

But what are they. Robots???

Let them work just 8 hours a day and 5/6 days a week. And make them responsible for the projects they are undertaking. Working too much and delivering nothing makes them look like a bunch of idiots.

Any way I would accept the fact that there is lot more professionalism and commitment from the part of these scientists lately. And that is why we are seeing success in LCA, Arjun Tank and other projects.


And my dear friend LCA was never meant to be a Stealth Fighter. Mk.1 or Mk.2

Anonymous said...

What is its sustained turning and instantaneous turn performance? What is the AOA? any improvements on these parameters?

Sudheer said...

All I want to see is sleeker front end, the front end looks quite heavy and over sized especially cockpit area.

by minimising the size, overall weight can be reduced as well

And Delta wing design is good but, i would like to see it is supported by Thrust vectoring nozzols system. so that it gets more agile and maneuverable at higher speeds.

As i came to know this GE engine F414 INS6, is derived from F414 EPE variant, which produces 75KN of Dry Thrust and 118 KN of afterburner Thrust. And according to GE Company this GE F414 INS6 is the highest Thrust producing variant and latest of all F414 Series.

Hope everything goes fine and India gets this masterpiece very soon.

Anonymous said...

Jingos,

The point is -

When do I get my first squadron ? If gripen Ng can come with a squad before this , lets get that baby and keep this as a tech demonstrator - demonstrating God knows what.

It appears that we need a Anna Hazare now to fight for our defense forces. Our chief's have simply given up.

Anonymous said...

wat do u folks think designing an aircraft is an easy task?, airframe is not the only thing that matters
avionics, engine, etc also matters , increasing 20 and 30 cm on wing could have such drastic effects that can destroy it, so shut up and respect wat we have made, let me tell u kaveri engine is almost ready and is as going to replace F404. kaveri also has thrust vectoring. LCA also EW with advanced HOTAS system. JAI HIND

Anonymous said...

What will we do with dark, hazy pics. only? Give some good, interesting info too. dude.

Anonymous said...

Shiv,Why no design change in mk2? We should have worked upon increasing stealth factor.Tejas already has much lesser radar cross-section than birds like Mirage2000,partial redesigning,if not drastic does't cost billions.

sntata said...

Since Tejas Mk-2 will be fitted with GE 414, which is a bigger engine than 404,there should have some structural changes in air vents and air frame but they are not apparent.

Anand said...

Procuring off the shelf aircrafts,or any other defence equipment can't be a long term solution.we must develop our own hardware,no matter whatever the cost.lastly to all the doubting toms,SHUT UP.

Anonymous said...

please post a information which tells detailed differences b/w tejas mk1 & mk2. with its graphical figure....