LCA AF Mk2 (Medium Weight Fighter) - News and discussions

The new engine can be designed to match F414 form and fitting, similar to how EPE variant of F414 is. Can the existing intakes handle the increased airflow requirements? Now that's something to be considered
Except almost everywhere in the world, the aircraft is designed around the engine and not the other way around.

The f414 example doesnt work because its a growth variant within the same mass flow and integration. So the intakes don't need much redesign. The aircrafts aren't designed first because the engines airflow, distortion limit, thermals and weight affect the intakes, ducting and layout of the aircraft. So it won't be a plug and play solution.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Rajput Lion
Speculations turn out to be true , my hairy a r s e ! If even a single such prediction turned out to be true PST would be all over town like he is with that one about the Rafale deal being done in 2027-28 featuring a mix of F4 & F5 versions.

I don't think there's anyone here who didn't think this was impossible given the way decision making runs in the GoI coz logic & timeliness have never been our strong points .

Having said that 36 nos additional Rafales were always on the cards given the bases we'd paid for in advance to Dassault . Furthermore , the IN then went ahead & placed an order for 26 Rafale M .

There's absolutely no way we're getting VCE technology from either RR or SAFRAN in the next decade. For a good reason.

Unlike what Professional Story Teller has been repeatedly crowing about this isn't some plug & play technology. GE one of the pioneers of TF mfg actually spent 14 years to come up with a XA-100 ACE TF.

GE Aerospace developed the XA100 adaptive cycle engine over a roughly 14-year period of partnership with the U.S. Air Force, starting from initial research in 2007 through the first prototype run in December 2020


This is how long P&W took to develop the XA-101 VCE TF .

Pratt & Whitney’s development of the XA101 variable cycle engine (VCE) spanned approximately 9 years, from its entry into the technology maturation phase in 2012 to the start of full-engine ground testing in 2021.


SAFRAN has no experience whatsoever in having developed such technology but they're working at it & given their depth in technology as well as experience in TF mfg should be expected to take as much time to come up with their version of a VCE TF .



Another canard being floated by PST is that it's easy peasy to convert / redesign a non adaptive cycle TF to a VCE. It isn't .

Had it been worth their while besides being technically & economically feasible , the USAF wouldn't have decided upon the Engine Core Upgrade ( ECU ) program of the F-135.

This is how the AETP panned out with USAF eventually refusing to replace the F-135 with an ACE / VCE TF.

No, the Pratt & Whitney F135 turbofan is not being upgraded to a Variable Cycle Engine (VCE).

Instead, the Pentagon and the U.S. Air Force have officially chosen the F135 Engine Core Upgrade (ECU) as the path forward for the F-35 fleet. This is an incremental improvement rather than a complete transition to adaptive technology.

Key Differences in the Upgrade Path

  • F135 Engine Core Upgrade (ECU): This chosen "drop-in" package focuses on increasing power and cooling capacity to support the F-35's Block 4 capabilities. It maintains the current two-stream low-bypass turbofan architecture to ensure compatibility across all three aircraft variants (A, B, and C) and keep costs lower.
  • Adaptive Engine Transition Program (AETP): This was a separate effort to develop a true VCE (or adaptive cycle engine) like the GE XA100 or Pratt & Whitney XA101. While these engines offered significant performance boosts—such as a 25% improvement in fuel efficiency and 10-20% more thrust—the Pentagon canceled their integration into the F-35 in 2023 due to high development costs and integration risks.
Current Status
  • Fielding Timeline: The F135 ECU is currently on track for integration and is expected to be fielded as early as 2029.
  • Future Use of VCE Tech: The VCE technology developed under AETP has been transitioned to the Next Generation Adaptive Propulsion (NGAP) program, which will power the upcoming sixth-generation Next Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) fighter instead of the F-35.


Now why would any OEM share tomorrow's technology with us which they've developed after heavy investments not just financially speaking but also after tremendous efforts lasting years.

One of the reasons SAFRAN or even RR was amenable to assist us was because our aims in developing the 120 KN TF was fairly modest.

You could say 1800°C TET with CMC is at the very entry level for a 5th Gen TF as of the present especially & this is very important you're set to transition to VCE capable of generating 1MW power which is what RR is attempting with the TF to power the GCAP.

We're at an inflection point in FA propulsion systems just like when TurboJet engines to power FAs gave way to TurboFans in the 1970s . In the next two decades practically all the FAs coming out will be equipped with these VCEs & possibly 5th Gen FAs of today may well be retrofitted with ACE / VCE .

Now in the light of the above information does anyone here think these F- OEMs would share this technology for a few billion USD ? I mean at this point I really can't tell if he's insulting the collective intelligence of this forum or revealing his own !


The lack of knowledge part which PST exploits is right on the money. That's the reason he gets away with a lot of 24 karat BS which he wouldn't in a technically accomplished forum like say B-R-F or even on X where the collective amateur & specialist defence aficionados there would leave imprints of their footwear on his worthless rear .

We just lack members with the kind of technical expertise to call him out . Earlier there were a few but they gave up given arguing with him is like a war of attrition plus he's a well known goal post shifter with all the time in the world to spin elaborate stories post after post which others obviously can't if they're engaging in good faith for unlike PST they've a life to live beyond being on the virtual world forever correcting faulty technical information & then being led down a merry ride under the mulberry bush which is never ending for all their pains .

That's the reason he prefers being here instead of displaying his knowledge to the whole wide world. That's also the reason he's declined repeated requests by me to start a blog like Trishul now that master story teller PKS is no more or a YT channel like Alpha Defence or Defence Matrix or Defence Decode to inflict on the world what he's doing here.

The comments section there would be filled with people expressing their appreciation for him his technical knowledge & his wisdom plus debating skills asking for a mukalaat as opposed to a mulaqat.

Better to be king of a pond than just another fish in the ocean. Plus you run the risk of being eaten up by bigger or cleverer fish in the big bad ocean. And thus the gravy train continues.


Petty & jealous ?? I forgot . There's normally an appraisal this time of the year with the management here wherein deserving members receive a raise , bonus & a promotion.

I haven't received any for all my pains after promotion to Senior Member which was half a decade ago plus zero remuneration leave aside incentives but this is precisely where PST finds himself too in spite of all that fan fiction he's been subjecting us to.

As far as hubris goes , Professional Story Teller once claimed he held 3 PoVs simultaneously - that of the end user in defence, that of a scientist in a R&D lab & that of a lay person which is what enabled him to understand the technical requirements of the end user & the reason a product is what it is , its future iterative cycle along with the pros & cons & of course the ability to dumb it down for people here.

I couldn't believe my eyes. For a few moments I couldn't tell if I was blessed with the darshan of Mahadev himself with his 3 eyes or I was seeing a case of Multiple Personality Disorder unfold before my very eyes. To verify I did ask him a few times if what I read was what he intended to convey. He replied yes all times.

I leave it to you to decide whether to go on your fours & venerate him or ...

Now for name calling . I didn't go about claiming I was an employee / former employee of a DPSU nor do I make tall claims nor do I call others bloody civilians implying I'm in the armed forces ( don't know whether I should list this one here or in the hubris paragraph ) .

It's PST who does it. Repeatedly. This is classic paint a bull's eye on my back / backside behaviour. Why wouldn't someone attempt a shot ?! And then why cry when one gets it good.
 
Man, that's why stupid people shouldn't be given access to computers.

The 2022 date for a 2026 signature was for F4. 2030 with 2033 deliveries was for F5, if the 2026 signature didn't happen. The fact that they turned the 6th squadron into F5 indicates a wider plan to induct more F5.

In fact, my dream of making changes to our procurement rule that I had stated a decade ago, which is what destroyed MKI, has been fulfilled. In the previous procedure, we couldn't buy 2 different versions via a single contract. So we couldn't bring in phased upgrades into MKI during production itself, and instead had to do that during overhauls. But new process allows space for two different versions. So wish and prophecy fulfilled.

The 2017 XA101 we are talking about is a different engine to the XA101 that was tested in 2021. The first one was a modified F135, the second one was a clean-sheet 6th gen engine.

In 2017, Pratt & Whitney wrapped up tests of a three stream engine with a F135 core under the XA-101 programme. In 2018, the engine manufacturer changed its development plan for the F135, and offered an adaptive three-stream fan that is separate from the XA-101, which would have a new engine core instead.
Two different engines.

AETP was launched in 2016 for the F-35 and the three cycle XA101 was tested in 2017 under AETP.

The engines for NGAD are XA102 and XA103.

The levels of stupidity in the post still remains unmatched. Just basic common sense would have helped.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Rajput Lion
Not trying to argue but I'm not sure how realistic those numbers are considering the likelihood of US trying to cause supply chain issues. Hope MoD does something to mitigate these risks.
GE414 would be manufactured in India with 80% TOT, which is higher than even AL-31FP. There won't be any supply chain issues regarding it. In fact, despite all troubles, Indo-US defense partnership shall continue to soar 'cause we are their bulwark against China and they can't afford to let go of us(despite Trump's stupid tantrums).
Success of every plan depends on execution at right time..

By the time 120 Kn engine is ready ( T + 14 years ), world would have moved to next generation.

Even the Mk2 production would have stopped.

Many fighter jets are getting designed around F414, Mk2 , Amca,TEDBF , HLFT 42 ( proposed )

We are buying F414 with 80 % ToT to mitigate sanction risk..

I doubt we ll change engine mid way.

Anyways whatever production facilities are available, we ll be building one or other fighter jets to that capacity.
Unlike popular conventions, don't think 4th/4.5 gen jets are going out of vogue any time soon. Future fleet will consist of near-space 7th gen fighters, MUM-T enabled 6th gen fighters, frontal stealth and maneuverability optimised 5th gen fighters while 4.5 gen jets will do the heavy-hitting with huge external air-to-air & air-to-ground payload.

We will procure plethora of MK2s. Mark it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sathya
We will procure plethora of MK2s. Mark it.

There's not much space for 500 though. 200 is the best we can do, but it requires expansion of squadron numbers.

Right now, 13 MKI, 11 LCA Mk1/As, 8 Rafales, 6 LCA Mk2s, and 7 AMCAs give us the 45 squadrons we need. This is the first modernization cycle.

Assuming 2 Mk1s and 4 MKIs leave service from 2045-50, we will have 6 more holes to fill, which can be filled in by AMCA and SCAF/GCAP. The next big hole is when all the MKI MLUs and LCA Mk1As leave between 2055-65, but it's obvious Rafale and LCA Mk2 won't be in production by then.

So any options for Rafale and LCA will have to come in well before 2035, ie, followed by an expansion of the air force from 45 to 50-54 squadrons at the very least by 2040, so Rafale and LCA follow-ons can take over the space meant for AMCA by replacing Mig-29 and M2000, and AMCA gets new space via the expansion while the 6 old LCA and MKI squadrons can be replaced by AMCA NG and partially by SCAF/GCAP, 4+2, kickstarting the second modernization cycle.

SCAF/GCAP can then replace all the MLU'd MKIs while a new ADA aircraft can replace all the LCA Mk1As in the 2060s.

Regardless, 500 LCAs are impossible. Just getting to 200 will be a matter of luck.
 
Except almost everywhere in the world, the aircraft is designed around the engine and not the other way around.

The f414 example doesnt work because its a growth variant within the same mass flow and integration. So the intakes don't need much redesign. The aircrafts aren't designed first because the engines airflow, distortion limit, thermals and weight affect the intakes, ducting and layout of the aircraft. So it won't be a plug and play solution.

AMCA engine will be designed as a dropfit for F414. That's how the AMCA Mk1 to Mk2 transition will happen. In fact, there's no airframe difference between Mk1 and Mk2, and all Mk1s can be upgraded with AMCA engine.

The same with TEDBF and LCA Mk2, although both aircraft are being designed natively to handle F414 right from the outset. Unlike AMCA, it's unclear if TEDBF and Mk2 will get the 120 kN upgrade anytime during MLU. It is possible on TEDBF though.

F414's service life is at least 8000 hours, if not closer to 12000 hours, so both TEDBF and Mk2 can be phased out with the same engine. For perspective, AL-31FP came with 2000 hours life and has been upgraded to 3000 hours in the current batch of 240.

F414's life can decrease if its rated thrust is increased a bit on production models from 98 kN to 107 kN, if they intend to do that, and that will reduce the time between overhauls, but both aircraft will still only need 1 overhaul to survive to end-of-life.
 
We need atleast 300-400 mk2's. And we need to copy the PLAAF and RuAF system of Brigades for our air force. We need to build more airbases too.

Russia uses regiments. China uses brigades. Our model of squadrons is superior. Russia and China are actually slowly emulating our system. Now 1 Russian regiment is equal to 1 American squadron. And 1 Chinese brigade is equal to 2 Indian squadrons, both led by the same officer rank.

We have more air bases than Pakistan and China combined within tactical range. China's airbases are largely around Taiwan and Japan and pose very little threat to India.

We need 300-400 LCAs in total and we will have that. 220 LCA Mk1/1As and 200 Mk2s. We bought 97 additional Mk1As in lieu of Mk2s. It's a pretty healthy mix. IAF would have preferred the MK1As to be Mk2s, but you can't win 'em all.
 
Russia uses regiments. China uses brigades. Our model of squadrons is superior. Russia and China are actually slowly emulating our system. Now 1 Russian regiment is equal to 1 American squadron. And 1 Chinese brigade is equal to 2 Indian squadrons, both led by the same officer rank.

We have more air bases than Pakistan and China combined within tactical range. China's airbases are largely around Taiwan and Japan and pose very little threat to India.

We need 300-400 LCAs in total and we will have that. 220 LCA Mk1/1As and 200 Mk2s. We bought 97 additional Mk1As in lieu of Mk2s. It's a pretty healthy mix. IAF would have preferred the MK1As to be Mk2s, but you can't win 'em all.
Why we are inducting handicapped MK1a in large numbers when superior MK2 will available on similar time frame. Its like a trainer like aircraft vs a Gripen class aircraft scenario. Earlier one lacks range & endurance compared to MK2.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Rajput Lion
There's not much space for 500 though. 200 is the best we can do, but it requires expansion of squadron numbers.

Right now, 13 MKI, 11 LCA Mk1/As, 8 Rafales, 6 LCA Mk2s, and 7 AMCAs give us the 45 squadrons we need. This is the first modernization cycle.

Assuming 2 Mk1s and 4 MKIs leave service from 2045-50, we will have 6 more holes to fill, which can be filled in by AMCA and SCAF/GCAP. The next big hole is when all the MKI MLUs and LCA Mk1As leave between 2055-65, but it's obvious Rafale and LCA Mk2 won't be in production by then.

So any options for Rafale and LCA will have to come in well before 2035, ie, followed by an expansion of the air force from 45 to 50-54 squadrons at the very least by 2040, so Rafale and LCA follow-ons can take over the space meant for AMCA by replacing Mig-29 and M2000, and AMCA gets new space via the expansion while the 6 old LCA and MKI squadrons can be replaced by AMCA NG and partially by SCAF/GCAP, 4+2, kickstarting the second modernization cycle.

SCAF/GCAP can then replace all the MLU'd MKIs while a new ADA aircraft can replace all the LCA Mk1As in the 2060s.

Regardless, 500 LCAs are impossible. Just getting to 200 will be a matter of luck.
I am not saying that we "would" order 500 MK2s, rather am saying that we "should" order 500 MK2s and end our depleting squadron problem forever. 200 is a given. Rest is just icing on the cake.
Why we are inducting handicapped MK1a in large numbers when superior MK2 will available on similar time frame. Its like a trainer like aircraft vs a Gripen class aircraft scenario. Earlier one lacks range & endurance compared to MK2.
MK1A is a very good light-fighter and is sufficient for a war with Pak. MK2 would be like our Gripen E and would be better than all fighters of PAF sans KAAN & J-35AE. MK1A numbers are sufficient, not let's order MK2s in huge numbers and end our squadron problem once and for all and get ready to fight a 2-front war simultaneously.
 
I am not saying that we "would" order 500 MK2s, rather am saying that we "should" order 500 MK2s and end our depleting squadron problem forever. 200 is a given. Rest is just icing on the cake.

MK1A is a very good light-fighter and is sufficient for a war with Pak. MK2 would be like our Gripen E and would be better than all fighters of PAF sans KAAN & J-35AE. MK1A numbers are sufficient, not let's order MK2s in huge numbers and end our squadron problem once and for all and get ready to fight a 2-front war simultaneously.
The optimistic scenario i envision for manned IAF fighter fleet in early-mid 2040s is something like this.

~200+ upgraded su30, ~200+ tejas mk2, ~200+ Tejas mk1a/mk1b, ~150-200 rafales, 150+ Su57mki, 350+ AMCA.



~500 Stealth jets, ~800 non-stealth.
 
AMCA engine will be designed as a dropfit for F414. That's how the AMCA Mk1 to Mk2 transition will happen. In fact, there's no airframe difference between Mk1 and Mk2, and all Mk1s can be upgraded with AMCA engine.

The same with TEDBF and LCA Mk2, although both aircraft are being designed natively to handle F414 right from the outset. Unlike AMCA, it's unclear if TEDBF and Mk2 will get the 120 kN upgrade anytime during MLU. It is possible on TEDBF though.

F414's service life is at least 8000 hours, if not closer to 12000 hours, so both TEDBF and Mk2 can be phased out with the same engine. For perspective, AL-31FP came with 2000 hours life and has been upgraded to 3000 hours in the current batch of 240.

F414's life can decrease if its rated thrust is increased a bit on production models from 98 kN to 107 kN, if they intend to do that, and that will reduce the time between overhauls, but both aircraft will still only need 1 overhaul to survive to end-of-life.
They are designing it as a replacement but it won't be a plug and play solutions, there is just too many factors behind an engine design to assume it will be a perfect plug and play solution.
 
It looks like the spine duct top.
Apparently, they have a partnership with TASL to build this stuff for MK1/MK1A.


Even if these are for the first proto, it's not a worrisome thing considering these are the parts that form the top skin of the aircraft, particularly the spine and the nearby area. Basically outer panels. We best hope the internal LRUs have been fitted.