ADA to Refine Air Intake and Canards Design of Tejas Mk2 After Crucial Wind Tunnel Tests in France

[Sandeep]

So the design has not been freezed yet!! But every day there is an article on time lines on roll outs!!!

The design has been frozen ages ago and we are now manufacturing the prototypes of Tejas MK2. So this is just a repeat article from years ago.

 

[avinash]

Once prototype is ready, IAF will test it rigorously in lunar conditions. It will be then taken to challengers deep and its max speed will be compared to Rafale at seal level. Subsequently, its payload carrying capacity will be judged by flying it with elephant attached at all hard points. Thereafter it will be stationed against 6th gen fighter in bvr scenario with limitation of using only GBUs against the opponent. After decades of testing, our import jeevis will declare it uncompetitive in current market scenario.

 

[Akshat]

Once prototype is ready, IAF will test it rigorously in lunar conditions. It will be then taken to challengers deep and its max speed will be compared to Rafale at seal level. Subsequently, its payload carrying capacity will be judged by flying it with elephant attached at all hard points. Thereafter it will be stationed against 6th gen fighter in bvr scenario with limitation of using only GBUs against the opponent. After decades of testing, our import jeevis will declare it uncompetitive in current market scenario.

And once again people like you came to bash our brave soldiers without knowing the truth.

These planes are to be tested and certified by DRDO. IAF has no role beyond providing the specs and any assistance required to conduct the tests.

It is indeed DRDO and HAL who seem to be import Jeevis and don’t want to make anything in India on time. Remember, original date to put Mk2 into production was 2016. 😂😂😂 And we don’t even have the prototype yet.

 

[ABHIJIT APSINGIKAR]

So its now proven that the CDR was a waste of time as even they seem to have realized that the design frozen was half-baked and needs several structural modifications to make it effective. Got to wonder what they were baying about, when they kept crying for funds.

 

[ABHIJIT APSINGIKAR]

Refinements are different from CDR/design freeze. Refinements are rolled out from one prototype to another.

Any structural changes made to the to the airframe after the CDR essentially means that the design process was flawed in the first place. Mere refinements do not require wind--tunnel tests, the structural modifications to airframe do require wind-tunnel testing. The fact that flawed structural features were carried forward even after CDR and were not eliminated during PDR and then CDR itself needs investigation.

 

[PKPRS]

Good Developments , there will b no delay in roll out & First Flight of First prototype as refine will b done in next prototype

But still too fat to Super Cruise, how about ADA didn’t know about ONERA five years ago, why are they still testing the aerodynamics when they should be rolling out the prototype.

 

[PKPRS]

Any structural changes made to the to the airframe after the CDR essentially means that the design process was flawed in the first place. Mere refinements do not require wind--tunnel tests, the structural modifications to airframe do require wind-tunnel testing. The fact that flawed structural features were carried forward even after CDR and were not eliminated during PDR and then CDR itself needs investigation.

due to GE F414 engine and recommendation from GE ADA had to make changes to the design of intake, may be that’s why this test.

 

[ABHIJIT APSINGIKAR]

due to GE F414 engine and recommendation from GE ADA had to make changes to the design of intake, may be that’s why this test.

Wasnt the MK2 always meant to incorporate the GE F-414? So it would have to be considered during PDR/CDR itself. Its not like they were changing the engine mid-way.

 

[PKPRS]

Wasnt the MK2 always meant to incorporate the GE F-414? So it would have to be considered during PDR/CDR itself. Its not like they were changing the engine mid-way.

No, it was an after thought due to marketing from GE, was initially pursuing EJ-200 which is more compact, then GE came into the picture and offered F414.

 

[ABHIJIT APSINGIKAR]

No, it was an after thought due to marketing from GE, was initially pursuing EJ-200 which is more compact, then GE came into the picture and offered F414.

Nope, u dont design a fuselage without considering the engine. Afterall the engine well has to be of optimal diameter to accomodate the engine. Engine is always considered during design phase itself. Its like designing a car body without considering the engine size and designing suspension without considering the wheel size.

 

[PKPRS]

Nope, u dont design a fuselage without considering the engine. Afterall the engine well has to be of optimal diameter to accomodate the engine. Engine is always considered during design phase itself. Its like designing a car body without considering the engine size and designing suspension without considering the wheel size.

Dimensions of F404 and F414 are near identical but the air inflow requirements are different, so the original design was based on F404 specs.

 

[ABHIJIT APSINGIKAR]

Dimensions of F404 and F414 are near identical but the air inflow requirements are different, so the original design was based on F404 specs.

Dimensions in diameter may as well be identical but the length is different. The F404 uses a 3 stage 7 axial fan compressor while F414 is 7 stage while EPE version has 6 stage.

 

[PKPRS]

Dimensions in diameter may as well be identical but the length is different. The F404 uses a 3 stage 7 axial fan compressor while F414 is 7 stage while EPE version has 6 stage.

Both engines are exact same length 154 inches and diameter 35 inches but GE F414 is heavier 1110KG VS 1035 KG and air inlet diameter is bigger 31 inch vs 28 inches hence larger intake in the fuselage that affects the aerodynamics in the overall design.

 

[ABHIJIT APSINGIKAR]

Both engines are exact same length 154 inches and diameter 35 inches but GE F414 is heavier 1110KG VS 1035 KG and air inlet diameter is bigger 31 inch vs 28 inches hence larger intake in the fuselage that affects the aerodynamics in the overall design.

Even assuming it's larger diameter, which contradicts your statement that they are same. It ought to have been considered before finalizing the design. Tgey finished CDR in 2022, and the intent to incorporate F414 was there even before that as far back as 2017-2020. So what exactly was finalized during CDR? what sort of circus we're tgey running at ADA/HAL?

Besides even if we assume that 414 was chosen later, even then they ought to have realized its greater air flow requirements. Yet they stuck with the flawed air intake design that has proven to have air flow issues in past.

 

[ABHIJIT APSINGIKAR]

Dr. Prodyut did say about canard placement but it wasn't this. Canards aren't directly in front of air intakes, where are you seeing that? He said its placement can be rectified by redesigning the front fuselage, but nowhere he said it's directly in front of air intakes.

I is not directly ahead but it sits on top. With small Y--duct intakes obscured under the wing. Where du think the turbulence generated by canrads goes?

 

[kumar]

It takes time and money. Capex defence budget has been very tight since ages.

Does not seem to apply for importing contemporary systems lock stock and barrel.

 

[PKPRS]

Even assuming it's larger diameter, which contradicts your statement that they are same. It ought to have been considered before finalizing the design. Tgey finished CDR in 2022, and the intent to incorporate F414 was there even before that as far back as 2017-2020. So what exactly was finalized during CDR? what sort of circus we're tgey running at ADA/HAL?

Besides even if we assume that 414 was chosen later, even then they ought to have realized its greater air flow requirements. Yet they stuck with the flawed air intake design that has proven to have air flow issues in past.

only the air inlet diameter is different, air inlet is a opening inside the engine that sucks air, it doesn’t affect the exterior dimension of the engine any way, that inlet in the engine needs to be connected to two larger hoses that connects to air intakes on both sides of the fuselage to suck more air, it’s only 3 inches wider compared to F404, if a part that is attached to the fuselage extends 3 inches on both sides of a jet, it affects the aero dynamics, I wonder if GE shared the specs with ADA when ADA did the initial wind tunnel testing of mK2 , so I don’t know whose fault it is.

 

[ABHIJIT APSINGIKAR]

only the air inlet diameter is different, air inlet is a opening inside the engine that sucks air, it doesn’t affect the exterior dimension of the engine any way, that inlet in the engine needs to be connected to two larger hoses that connects to air intakes on both sides of the fuselage to suck more air, it’s only 3 inches wider compared to F404, if a part that is attached to the fuselage extends 3 inches on both sides of a jet, it affects the aero dynamics, I wonder if GE shared the specs with ADA when ADA did the initial wind tunnel testing of mK2 , so I don’t know whose fault it is.

It greatly effects the Aerodynamics as the air flow changes with intake design. The fact that they retained the flaw even post CDR suggests the CDR was never done seriously. Besides The engine was almost already finalized by 2016 and plans were afloat to incorporate the F414 as far back as 2017. Why were the changes not executed during PDR/CDR?