Tejas Mk2 (Medium Weight Fighter) - News and discussions

Sathya

Senior member
Dec 2, 2017
2,586
1,527
India
Deodhare conceded that there have been delays in the Tejas programme due to optimistic projections of time by its designers, developers and producers, and added that Tejas Mark II will be a twin-engine advanced medium combat aircraft (AMCA) with a heavier GE-414 engine as compared to the GE 404 engine of the Mark I.

**** .Read more at India No 1 Defence News Website 35 years after inception, Tejas Mark I design frozen – Indian Defence Research Wing .


What the hell is this ?
 

sid4587

Active member
Jan 10, 2018
385
189
India
People are saying that wings are shifted back, i feel air intake has been just extended to bent it down. anyone here to guide?
 

R!cK

Well-Known member
Dec 8, 2017
240
536
Dubai, UAE
People are saying that wings are shifted back, i feel air intake has been just extended to bent it down. anyone here to guide?

The air inlets seem a lot more slanted than the Mk-1's? Aerodynamic improvements are to be expected, so no surprise though -

View attachment 4322
View attachment 4323

The air intake is made wider at the inlet section to cater for higher mass flow for the new engine. This gives the impression of the air intakes being more slanted when viewed from this angle.

The current GE F404 engines have an air mass flow of about 153 lb/sec as against the figure of 170 lb/sec for the GE 414. The higher mass flow requirement results in a wider inlet section for the Mk2.

Good Day!
 
Last edited:

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
14,554
10,788
India
looks gripen E-ish to me

Both are delta canard designs.

ADA should have designed the LCA with canards right from the beginning though.

Gripen E entered the assembly process this month. We could have been doing the same had we planned LCA with canards right from the start. Too late for that.
 

R!cK

Well-Known member
Dec 8, 2017
240
536
Dubai, UAE
looks gripen E-ish to me

Actually besides having a canard, its nothing like Gripen - E. Gripen honestly has a better aerodynamic design with good performance improvement with their Canard-Wing arrangement, and they have made real improvements with regard to mid fuselage arrangement and landing gear compartment. I'm with @Vstoljockey on this one, it's really difficult to make out how useful this canard arrangement will be on Tejas. All they have done is lower the leading edge of the wing at the root and make space to attach a canard there. The leading edge of both the canard and the wing root is surprisingly close and with very minimal clearance, this will also result in limitation of canard deflection angles. For some serious performance improvement, the only choice was to redesign intake/wing/canard arrangement which is not an option right now due to the amount of time required to design and test all that. What were they seriously doing for the last few years apart from bringing different scale models to every AeroIndia shows?
 

LoneWolfSandeep

Well-Known member
Dec 25, 2017
526
483
India
Actually besides having a canard, its nothing like Gripen - E. Gripen honestly has a better aerodynamic design with good performance improvement with their Canard-Wing arrangement, and they have made real improvements with regard to mid fuselage arrangement and landing gear compartment. I'm with @Vstoljockey on this one, it's really difficult to make out how useful this canard arrangement will be on Tejas. All they have done is lower the leading edge of the wing at the root and make space to attach a canard there. The leading edge of both the canard and the wing root is surprisingly close and with very minimal clearance, this will also result in limitation of canard deflection angles. For some serious performance improvement, the only choice was to redesign intake/wing/canard arrangement which is not an option right now due to the amount of time required to design and test all that. What were they seriously doing for the last few years apart from bringing different scale models to every AeroIndia shows?
You are taking it too literally, comparing nuts & bolts - i explicitly mentioned "ish" at the end for a reason. Center fuselage tender hasnt released wings design detail yet, so a lot is left to imagination of how it would be, Canards are defiantly there.
Never said its a Gripen E & cant deny whats released in tender has some similarity to Gripen E - Hence my stress on "Looks"
 
Last edited:

hellbent

Senior member
Dec 4, 2017
667
1,454
Actually besides having a canard, its nothing like Gripen - E. Gripen honestly has a better aerodynamic design with good performance improvement with their Canard-Wing arrangement, and they have made real improvements with regard to mid fuselage arrangement and landing gear compartment. I'm with @Vstoljockey on this one, it's really difficult to make out how useful this canard arrangement will be on Tejas. All they have done is lower the leading edge of the wing at the root and make space to attach a canard there. The leading edge of both the canard and the wing root is surprisingly close and with very minimal clearance, this will also result in limitation of canard deflection angles. For some serious performance improvement, the only choice was to redesign intake/wing/canard arrangement which is not an option right now due to the amount of time required to design and test all that. What were they seriously doing for the last few years apart from bringing different scale models to every AeroIndia shows?

Read this to understand why they included carnards

@vstol Jockey
 

Attachments

  • 493.pdf
    1.3 MB · Views: 444
Last edited:

Sancho

Well-Known member
Oct 13, 2018
645
321
Na
Like I said, we're being extremely optimistic with regard to Mk-2 timelines. And @randomradio was expecting us to start building Mk2 prototypes this year itself. :p

Well, even if randomly made claims often turn out to be wrong, I wouldn't take PSK as the best source either. Lot of his conclusions turn out to be wrong as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: _Anonymous_

_Anonymous_

Senior Member
Dec 4, 2017
17,189
13,065
Mumbai
Well, even randomly made claims often turn out to be wrong, I wouldn't take PSK as the best source either. Lot of his conclusions turn out to be wrong as well.
Welcome back. A contrarian view is always appreciated. Especially, in the face of unabashed optimism.
 

Sancho

Well-Known member
Oct 13, 2018
645
321
Na
Definitely not .

Sancho is full time critic.

Always trying to find out the drawbacks / wrong doing in deal.

Not at all, I give credit AND criticism when it's due. But if you prefer factually wrong, pride driven and over optimistic views, I am certainly the wrong one for you. 😊

PKS provides interesting official info's and if I were him and had the access to such informations, you would have seen them before.
 

Sancho

Well-Known member
Oct 13, 2018
645
321
Na
Empty structural weight - 1800 Kg (approx. excluding Wings/Tail/Canards)

The most important question is, what will this MK2 weigh at the end and how will the design changes effect the drag?
MK1 airframes already suffered from overweight and drag, which resulted in limited flight performance. The engine tender and the required thrust was aimed on an MK2 with much less design changes and still in the light class. So will all these changes make it any better, or end up in making things worse?

Would be interesting to know the weight of the carnards or even better, the emptyweight of MK2.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: R!cK

Ankit Kumar

Team StratFront
Nov 30, 2017
3,816
3,679
Bangalore
LCA MK2 or MCA
 

Attachments

  • IMG_20190220_083038.jpg
    IMG_20190220_083038.jpg
    449.5 KB · Views: 332
  • IMG_20190220_083036.jpg
    IMG_20190220_083036.jpg
    483.4 KB · Views: 346
  • IMG_20190220_083033.jpg
    IMG_20190220_083033.jpg
    385.6 KB · Views: 333

TARGET

Well-Known member
Dec 2, 2017
697
579
LCA MK2 or MCA
Include a inbuilt IRST in MK2

The canard position are just placed between existing Space (no change in width between wing and cockpit ) but yes due to longer fuselage the glass cockpit moved little bit forward...that’s my observation.
 
Last edited:

Sathya

Senior member
Dec 2, 2017
2,586
1,527
India
Good Day![/QUOTE]
11 Hardpoints which includes 2 wingtip rails, 6 wing pylons, 2 intake pylons and 1 centerline pylon. Inbuilt IRST and EW suite. Really hope this works out, atleast on paper this is a good aircraft to replace Jaguars and M2000.

any pic of side mounted gun ?