[bullock-Car]

Originally Posted by DrPriyankT

Tejas and its significance to the IAF





The Tejas is an all-round multirole fighter which can perform air to ground and air to air missions with equal elan, something the Mig 21 cannot (it can carry only unguided bombs and rockets). It’s small size and carbon composite construction enables it to stay relatively unseen on radar and even visually until its too late. Its like how Wing Commander Abhinanadan suddenly jumped up on to the unsuspecting Pakistani’s in his tiny Mig 21. The Tejas can take it a step further. In the valleys of Ladakh or the Northeast, it can spring a nasty surprise on the adversaries, when it suddenly emerges from the valley floor below radar clutter, to intercept enemy fighters. This ability gives the Tejas the ability to stealthily take out enemy air defence nodes, especially in hilly areas.


People have criticised the Tejas for its low internal fuel capacity. I personally cannot get their criticism. Tejas has been designed as point defence interceptor with multirole abilities which is to be based at airbases close to the border, to take off quickly when the klaxon goes off to intercept suspicious aircraft, not as a long range interdictor. It has three drop tanks and inflight refuelling to give it a boost in range. With its current range and air to air refuelling abilities, it can easily conduct Combat Air Patrols in border areas, and conduct strike missions into enemy territories.


One may wonder why then its based in the south at Sulur Airforce Station. The squadrons based there (SQ 18 and 45) are currently tasked with operationalizing the aircraft into the IAF, to help it understand the aircrafts strengths and weaknesses, far away from the prying eyes of the PAF and PLAAF. Here the IAF is developing tactics specific to it, and how it can work with the other fighters and aircraft in our arsenal. Remember, the Su-30 was first based at Pune, where they were put to their paces before being deployed in numbers elsewhere.


The biggest gamechanger for the Tejas is, that it has spurred the development of hundreds of MSME’s in India to develop world class defence products and has given us confidence to develop newer aircraft and technologies. The Tejas may very well be a steppingstone to developing India into an aerospace powerhouse. We have the talents and brains to embark on such endeavours, we just need the right policies to push them to their logical conclusion.

Disclaimer: No sensitive information has been divulged in this write-up and all information shared is from public domain.

Thank you, Dr Priyank, for an excellent subject & illustration.I had the privilege of working for 32 years in aero engine development, what a beautiful and complex technology. I had the privilege in preliminary design, prototype fabrication, testing, failures, redesign to seeing enormous testing efforts in India and the R
I am happy & proud seeing this beautiful machine work for hours of endurance testing. I know we not at destination but we have come a long way. The journey provided so much of technologies and spawned many industries and trained manpower
Regarding the LCA, it is an outstanding effort.For the lovers of this, the entire journey has been documented in a book," Tejas:Radiance in Indian Skies-The Tejas Saga
By Air Marshal Philip Rajkumar PVSM AVSM VM (Retd)".It is a book should be made available to all planners, designers, leaders, engineers.
I have the privilege of working with many minds in these spheres, who are outstanding works, widening defence research. These programs long term vision.

[ajmat]

Note from Moderator

Additional photos from Dr Priyank have been added to the main article

[AirbusCapt]

Originally Posted by fhdowntheline

Great article with a lot of technical depth to salivate the tastebuds of aviation fans like me!.

Only one point that I would like to ask- how relevant would be the need for a Tejas to be able to reach speeds above Mach 1.6 (I understand that's the current limit) ?

Fighters in the similar size/role have slightly higher speeds, for example F16 can do M2.0, the Gripen can reach M2.0, I guess the Mig-21 itself is even slightly faster than that, even a F104 was faster.

Does this put any kind of disadvantage whatsoever on the Tejas on a comparative basis ?

Speed is of little consequence in modern combat. What's more important is the climb time to altitude (rate of climb) and the time to get ready to takeoff. Anyway at over mach 1 the fuel burn is so high that most fighters will empty their tanks within minutes! As long as the Tejas can be airborne within minutes and can reach the enemy quickly, it fulfills its role as an interceptor.
The other big area the Tejas scores is availability. With over 80% rate of availability, the Tejas is by far more reliable and available for missions than the 50/55% rate of availability of say the F16!
What we need to understand is that fighter jets are more complex than F1 cars, so keeping a fighter available for over 80% of the time is miraculous. In comparison a civil transport airplane like the A320 is available for operations about 14 hours each day with over 99.7% availability.

[V.Narayan]

Originally Posted by whitewing

A query on the weight distribution and flight dynamics. I got this doubt looking at the above schematic of weapon loading pods you had posted. The non-static loads that the aircraft would carry are the fuel and armaments.

I'd read that (in commercial aircraft) fuel load imbalances are managed either manually or electronically. Since, this is a gradual reduction, I can (in a lay man's view) understand that a relative balance can be achieved via a set of sensors and pumps (ignoring the effects of fuel sloshing which would perhaps also causes imbalances?).

With regards to the weapons, say, a during a mission, a jet is armed with say, 2 bombs. On dropping a bomb, wouldn't the the weight distribution become lop sided? How do these aircraft sustain speed and maneuverability with different load distribution scenarios?

Thank you for your question and it is a very valid one. As fulcrum29 said the fly by wire system takes care of it within limits. But how does it actually happen or how is it done in aircraft without FBW.

An aircraft is designed to fly within an envelope of parameters such as speed, weight, angle of attack, etc. And the pilot aims to keep it within that envelope to avoid losing control. Of course the extent of this envelope is far greater in a fighter than a Boeing 777 but it is still very real.

The image below shows the trim tabs. These are tiny flying control surfaces that can be moved up-down or left-right to adjust the leverage forces for imbalances. These imbalances can occur due to weight distribution as you queried or due to aerodynamic forces. As far as is practical the air to ground munitions will be distributed and fired in a way that minimizes this imbalance but it cannot be wished away. Hope this helps.

Originally Posted by reppy

Aircraft speeds are now passé. What truly matters is lowest possible Radar Cross Section (RCS) and highest possible Beyond Visual Range (BVR) missile range. The simple logic is to not be detected by the enemy and launch a long range missile in the process.

In war speed will never go out of fashion be it in a fighter or a tank or a warship. But we, as arm chair warriors can differ in our opinions. Reduction of radar cross section is not new. It is something designers even of the venerable MiG-21 did what they could to stitch it in at the design stage. BVR is good. You got to have it but it isn't as simple as that. When the Sparrow and Sidewinder first came in circa 60 years ago the Americans built the F-4 without a gun and without emphasis on manoeuverability thinking all engagements will occur at several nautical miles - stand off and blast them. Unfortunately for the Americans no one told this to the North Vietnamese! In war expect the unexpected.

[driver52001]

The Tejas seems like it has taken all the good elements from oher jets to make it a jack of all trades but master of none, which is not a bad thing. Because of its short range, it can work well as a point defence jet much like the MiG 29 but a very advanced one with modern avionics. Tejas can also work as a strike aircraft for missions that are not very far away, which can only be nearby PoK areas. India seems to be very happy with the French Mirage experience. The Tejas has most of the characteristics of the Mirage, but with improved modern avionics. Even the Rafale that we got recently is a spiritual successor to Mirage.

[Arjun Bharadwaj]

So proud to see this article and what has been achieved so far. Hopefully it will inspire the brightest young minds from our country to participate and take forward the efforts invested by the scientists and engineers.

On a side note to Narayan sir and other experts - it would be super interesting to see an article that lists the "most dreaded fighters" in the market today in different categories.

[V.Narayan]

Originally Posted by Arjun Bharadwaj

it would be super interesting to see an article that lists the "most dreaded fighters" in the market today in different categories.

Ouch. Six people will have seven opinions on this!!!! I assume you mean air superiority and not attack aircraft.

I'd go with the following in alpabetical order

F.1 (Japan)
F-16V (Taiwan) & F-16I (Israel)
F-15 SE
F-18 Super Hornet
Mig-29 UPG (India)
F-22
F-35
Rafale
Typhoon Eurofighter
Su-30MKI

[himanshugoswami]

Originally Posted by V.Narayan

Ouch. Six people will have seven opinions on this!!!! I assume you mean air superiority and not attack aircraft.

I'd go with the following in alpabetical order

F.1 (Japan)
F-16V (Taiwan) & F-16I (Israel)
F-15 SE
F-18 Super Hornet
Mig-29 UPG (India)
F-22
F-35
Rafale
Typhoon Eurofighter
Su-30MKI

Like you said, six people will have seven opinions on this

Hence, exercising my opinion, allow me to list my take in order of their (perceived) lethality:

F22
Dassault Rafale
Su-35/F 35 - F35 better in BVR but the SU 35 will eat it for breakfast in WVR
F15 SE
Typhoon
F-16V/Mirage 2000-9 (even Stevens on this, esp the M2K in ITI config and MICA)
SU 30 MKI
F-18 S Hornet (not considering the growler)

Would love to know your views on this sir.

[navin]

Originally Posted by V.Narayan

Unfortunately for the Americans no one told this to the North Vietnamese! In war expect the unexpected.

Yup like the F-86 and (to a lesser extent) the F-104 vs the Folland Gnat

There is a nice book (don't know if it's still in print) called "Mig Alley" by USAF historian William Thomas Y'Blood about the effectiveness of the Mig 15 (against the F-86) in the Korean War as well.

The effectiveness of the Bayraktar drones made by Turkey in the Nagorno-Karabakh war was similarly unexpected. I hope the IAF has a plan for such drones if India ever gets into a larger conflict with Pakistan.

[narmad]

Originally Posted by fhdowntheline

Only one point that I would like to ask- how relevant would be the need for a Tejas to be able to reach speeds above Mach 1.6 (I understand that's the current limit) ?

My $0.02

Fighters in the similar size/role have slightly higher speeds, for example F16 can do M2.0, the Gripen can reach M2.0, I guess the Mig-21 itself is even slightly faster than that, even a F104 was faster.

Does this put any kind of disadvantage whatsoever on the Tejas on a comparative basis ?

The Mach numbers cannot be compared in isolation, it is more of a **** measuring contest for fanboys.
There is a lot more to it then just the number. The mentioned numbers can be probably achieved only in clean configuration and that too with afterburners at high altitudes.

There are other related numbers which are more important viz acceleration, time on station etc. Also how much the engine degrades at such speeds is also important, in fact some aircrafts are speed limited to prevent such damage.

Sustained speed [ supercruise ] is more important than peak speed IMO.

[narmad]

Originally Posted by driver52001

The Tejas seems like it has taken all the good elements from oher jets to make it a jack of all trades but master of none, which is not a bad thing. Because of its short range, it can work well as a point defence jet much like the MiG 29 but a very advanced one with modern avionics. Tejas can also work as a strike aircraft for missions that are not very far away, which can only be nearby PoK areas. India seems to be very happy with the French Mirage experience. The Tejas has most of the characteristics of the Mirage, but with improved modern avionics. Even the Rafale that we got recently is a spiritual successor to Mirage.

jack of all trades but master of none
All 4, 4+ generation fighters are multi role. The days of dedicated strike [ Jaguars ], point defense [ mig 21 ] are gone. They are remnants of prehistoric times. These are software driven, where LRU change decides the role for the mission. Rafale can change roles in air.

Tejas can do everything a Mirage 2000H can and in some cases better.
It is something like getting a Honda City in an Honda Amaze .

Tejas MK2 will outmatch and outrange Mirage 2000V.

[Alfresco]

"Made in India, flying all over the world

With global aircraft manufacturers including Boeing and Airbus looking to Indian companies for components, there is a bit of India in many commercial and defence planes crisscrossing the world."

https://www.moneycontrol.com/news/bu...d-7398771.html

The design and requirements of Tejas have been firmed up, its competency established and induction into IAF has started; isn't it high time that the core competencies of private Indian engineering firms be used, as amply demonstrated by the 100s of companies manufacturing airplane parts, and manufacturing lines be established in the private sector also?
We can speed up the replacement of the Mig-21 and , by the time the IAF has developed operational manuals and tactics for Tejas, there would be enough planes ready for building new squadrons.
When private players like Godrej and L&T can be key engineering firms in our Nuclear and Space programs, why not defence?

[navin]

Originally Posted by Alfresco

When private players like Godrej and L&T can be key engineering firms in our Nuclear and Space programs, why not defense?

I don't know about Godrej but L&T already has a pretty decent portfolio of weapons for defense. They are already building Submarines, Frigates, Destroyers, Corvettes (in partnership) and have developed the Pinaka Rocket Launcher System and K9 Vajra. L&T is also working on a light tank that will be armed with a variation of the K9.

[whitewing]

Originally Posted by AirbusCapt

That's being handled by Safran (France) who has promised to help get the Kaveri engine upto standards. This is an offset of the Rafale program which will help India become self sufficient.

Today, while reading the annual report of Mishra Dhatu Nigam Ltd.
Came across this under its achievements section -

Dispatched first consignment of high temperature alloy on March 20,2021 with 75% indigenous content for the country’s indigenous ‘Kaveri Dry Engine Program’ powering the Unmanned Combat Aerial Vehicle (UCAV). The consignment contained Nickel base Superalloy and Titanium alloy forged bars thoroughly qualified in airworthy certification requirements and are also used for various Class I and Class II components of the engine.

So, it appears the programme is still active, with a repurposed end goal.

[shortbread]

Originally Posted by whitewing

Today, while reading the annual report of Mishra Dhatu Nigam Ltd.
Came across this under its achievements section -
So, it appears the programme is still active, with a repurposed end goal.

Future fighter jet programs will be powered by a domestically made engine, I think in collaboration with Rolls Royce. Stopgap measure is to import GE engines.

Kaveri's issue was it did not generate enough thrust required for modern fighters. Kaveri engines will now power future Indian unmanned fighter drones.