LCA Tejas Mk1 & Mk1A - News and discussions

Sathya

Senior member
Dec 2, 2017
2,312
1,305
India
From what we know

Elta 2032 has the highest clarity in IAF before rafale was inducted.

Mk1 nose cone had a dead weight about 200kg.

Mk1A aesa elta 2052 removed dead weight.
But due to power constraints antenna is smaller in size with approx 750 elements.


Mk2 nose cone diameter is reduced but aesa elements are increased I guess around 900 elements.
Reduction in nose cone diameter help reduce the drag.

That means mk1 is paying 200 kg dead weight and drag penalty.

Mk1A is paying price of drag & still cannot increase elements becuz of power shortage.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SammyBoi

Lolwa

Well-Known member
Feb 6, 2020
1,208
830
Delhi
From what we know

Elta 2032 has the highest clarity in IAF before rafale was inducted.

Mk1 nose cone had a dead weight about 200kg.

Mk1A aesa elta 2052 removed dead weight.
But due to power constraints antenna is smaller in size with approx 750 elements.


Mk2 nose cone diameter is reduced but aesa elements are increased I guess around 900 elements.
Reduction in nose cone diameter help reduce the drag.

That means mk1 is paying 200 kg dead weight and drag penalty.

Mk1A is paying price of drag & still cannot increase elements becuz of power shortage.
Still better than most radars in the IAF..
It's superior to the mig 29 and mirages radar. Making it one of the best aircrafts in the fleet..
 
  • Like
Reactions: SammyBoi

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
12,016
9,169
India
@randomradio wht is the radar antenna size of mk 1, mk1A & Mk2?

650mm, unknown for the other two. Could be 550-600mm, the same as the Rafale. Due to the bigger footprint of the AESA's front end, the antenna has to be moved forward and because the nose tapers, the diameter of the antenna also becomes smaller. Plus the Uttam prototype doesn't use all of the potential real estate in the nose or the antenna. Plus there's the possibility of the Mk1A using the 700+ TRMs version instead of the 992 TRMs version being developed for Mk2. The Mk2 has a bigger nose due to its 0.5m plug.

So my guess is 550mm for Mk1A and 600+mm for Mk2.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sathya

Sathya

Senior member
Dec 2, 2017
2,312
1,305
India
650mm, unknown for the other two. Could be 550-600mm, the same as the Rafale. Due to the bigger footprint of the AESA's front end, the antenna has to be moved forward and because the nose tapers, the diameter of the antenna also becomes smaller. Plus the Uttam prototype doesn't use all of the potential real estate in the nose or the antenna. Plus there's the possibility of the Mk1A using the 700+ TRMs version instead of the 992 TRMs version being developed for Mk2. The Mk2 has a bigger nose due to its 0.5m plug.

So my guess is 550mm for Mk1A and 600+mm for Mk2.

Mk2 has smaller nose cone than mk1A but bigger antenna and higher TRMs.

Saw that in some interview. Some 6 % drag improvement because of that I think.
Also lesser radar cross section.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Hydra

Tatvamasi

Well-Known member
Jan 5, 2018
890
862
India
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
12,016
9,169
India
Mk2 has smaller nose cone than mk1A but bigger antenna and higher TRMs.

That likely refers to the tip, not the base. The Mk2 has a longer nose, so the nose is thinner, not "smaller".

For the radar, it's the width at the broadest end that matters. The additional plug extends it even more.
 

_Anonymous_

Senior Member
Dec 4, 2017
14,567
10,540
Mumbai
Extremely substandard article like most of Eurasian Times output.

"However, Thomas Newdick, a defense writer with The War Zone, says the chances of success of the two-seat LCA Navy prototype “must be considered extremely slim”.

Except for the above produced excerpt there's nothing in the article remotely connected to the USN rejecting the Tejas . If anything it'd be rejected ( in all probability ) for being way above the service requirements of the USN & consequently way too expensive as compared to the competition.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chain Smoker

Vicky

Rajaraja Chola
Dec 1, 2017
368
410
Canada
LCA Trainer for the IAF has still not been certified. It's dreaming if we think it's got a chance in US.

None of the ac under competition even has an flying prototype. They has to start delivering by 2028. And none of them has an naval version. While the chance is tough, HAL should have tied up with Boeing or LM to get a better chance at a deal. While Embraer/Airbus has won US defence contract in the past, this is a huge order. 700+. It would give valuable experience and if we win it would be a huge booster. But they need to tie up with some company in US for lobbying.
 

Ankit Kumar

Senior member
Nov 30, 2017
2,561
2,344
Bangalore
None of the ac under competition even has an flying prototype. They has to start delivering by 2028. And none of them has an naval version. While the chance is tough, HAL should have tied up with Boeing or LM to get a better chance at a deal. While Embraer/Airbus has won US defence contract in the past, this is a huge order. 700+. It would give valuable experience and if we win it would be a huge booster. But they need to tie up with some company in US for lobbying.
Most of the participants have had actually done the thing they claim. HAL/ADA hasn't till date.

The most important thing is to actually get enough manpower and enough airframes to certify the system as soon as possible and then get that into service and then keep improving it over production blocks every 5 year atleast.

Untill this happens, we are not going to get any meaningful aircraft sales.

With the attitude we have in India we will take 10 more years to have as many aircrafts exported with atleast the final assembly done in India compared to what Pakistan already has. We are a joke. Accept that, untill we do, we do not work on the problem.
 

_Anonymous_

Senior Member
Dec 4, 2017
14,567
10,540
Mumbai
Most of the participants have had actually done the thing they claim. HAL/ADA hasn't till date.

The most important thing is to actually get enough manpower and enough airframes to certify the system as soon as possible and then get that into service and then keep improving it over production blocks every 5 year atleast.

Untill this happens, we are not going to get any meaningful aircraft sales.

With the attitude we have in India we will take 10 more years to have as many aircrafts exported with atleast the final assembly done in India compared to what Pakistan already has. We are a joke. Accept that, untill we do, we do not work on the problem.
Most of the participants have done what here ? If you're referring to their past track record it doesn't amount to much as far as HAL goes for unlike the others HAL already has a product which flies & only needs modifications for this project. Perhaps HAL needs to check if it needs US certification in this regard.

Further , I've just noticed one of the requirements of USN is for the said aircraft to "touch & go " off Aircraft Carriers. I wonder if the NLCA is not a better fit here as compared to the SPORT LIFT version of the LCA Tejas.