Analysis Should India's Tejas Mk1A Switch to F-414 Engine Amidst F-404 Delays?

Delays in the supply of F-404 engines from General Electric (GE) Aerospace have cast a shadow over India's Tejas Mk1A program, raising concerns about potential setbacks in aircraft delivery.

This has ignited a debate about the feasibility of transitioning to the more powerful GE F-414 engines, currently earmarked for the Tejas Mk2. While the F-414 promises enhanced performance, integrating it into the Tejas Mk1A would necessitate significant modifications.

F404 vs. F414: A Comparative Overview​

At first glance, the F404 and F414 share similarities in length (154 inches), suggesting minimal need for alterations to the Tejas Mk1A's engine bay. However, key differences exist:

• Diameter: The F-414's slightly larger fan diameter (35.5 inches compared to F404's 35 inches) might require adjustments to the engine housing and cooling systems.
• Thrust: The F-414 delivers significantly higher thrust (98 kN) than the F404 (84 kN), promising increased speed, climb rate, and payload capacity for the Tejas Mk1A. This, however, necessitates enhanced cooling and structural reinforcements.
• Weight: The F-414 is slightly heavier (1,110 kg) than the F404 (1,036 kg), potentially impacting the aircraft's center of gravity and maneuverability.

Feasibility of Integrating the F-414 into the Tejas Mk1A​

Despite these differences, integrating the F-414 into the Tejas Mk1A appears technically feasible, albeit with modifications:

• Cooling and Heat Shielding: The F-414's higher thrust output demands improved heat shielding and potential exhaust area modifications.
• Engine Mounts: Minor adjustments to the existing engine mounts might be necessary to accommodate the F-414's weight.
• Intake Modifications: The Tejas Mk1A's intake design might require minor alterations to ensure sufficient airflow for the F-414.
• Software and Control System Integration: Engine control software updates are crucial to manage the F-414's operating characteristics.
• Structural Reinforcement: Reinforcements around engine mounts and adjacent airframe areas are likely needed to handle increased stress.

Performance Gains and Trade-offs​

Switching to the F-414 could yield significant performance gains for the Tejas Mk1A:

• Improved Thrust-to-Weight Ratio:Enhanced agility, acceleration, and shorter takeoff runs.
• Enhanced Operational Ceiling and Payload Capacity:Higher altitude capabilities and increased ordnance capacity.

However, potential trade-offs include:

• Complex Integration and Cost: Modifications, software integration, and testing would increase program costs and potentially delay induction.
• Increased Weight and Fuel Consumption: This could reduce operational range unless mitigated by additional fuel storage.

Conclusion​

While integrating the F-414 into the Tejas Mk1A is technically feasible, it requires careful consideration of the costs and benefits. Given the Tejas Mk2's existing adoption of the F-414, adapting the Mk1A might be less cost-effective unless F-404 engine delays persist.

Alternative solutions include expediting the Tejas Mk2 program, exploring domestic F-404 engine production, or stockpiling existing F-404 engines to maintain Mk1A production momentum.

Ultimately, the decision hinges on a comprehensive evaluation of technical feasibility, cost-effectiveness, and strategic considerations.

 

[Dredd]

F414 consumes more fuel hence would lower the combat radius, If they can integrate/develop the conformal fuel tank like F-16, then we should explore this option with additional 97 Tejas Mk1a order, we can also fix other shortcomings in tejas mk1a like IRST sensor, MAWS, better cockpit, F414 engine and name this version as mk1b, I am sure these changes can be taken up parallelly by HAL and would be ready in next 4-5 years.

 

[kurtwallis wallis]

I was saying this only here since last 10 years i.e., to put in GEF414 engines into Tejas MK1A jets. Using FADEC one can put "Limiters" for max. thrusts output, to peak out at 80 or else 90% of max. wet thrusts; thereby protecting engines and the airframe. Just 2 or 3 inches increase of air intakes outer dia. can increase air flow significantly for these 98KN max. thrusts engines...
Even F15 has limiters on engines and pilots cannot use full throttle as it will blow engine parts if used continuously for 10 minutes or more I believe so...

 

[kurtwallis wallis]

F414 consumes more fuel hence would lower the combat radius, If they can integrate/develop the conformal fuel tank like F-16, then we should explore this option with additional 97 Tejas Mk1a order, we can also fix other shortcomings in tejas mk1a like IRST sensor, MAWS, better cockpit, F414 engine and name this version as mk1b, I am sure these changes can be taken up parallelly by HAL and would be ready in next 4-5 years.

JF17 Blk3 is having all what u mentioned PLUS, Holographic 3D HUD same as in F35's and DSI air inlets too...

 

[PKPRS]

it will affect the PWR (Power to wait Ratio), F414 is also expensive than F404, so it is not worth it.

 

[Dredd]

JF17 Blk3 is having all what u mentioned PLUS, Holographic 3D HUD same as in F35's and DSI air inlets too...

JF17 engine pop up like a flying napalm on IRST sensors. DSI will only help in frontal IR reduction. JF Bandar don't have conformal fuel tank and their avoinics and radar is big question mark .

 

[Neal.B]

The 97 Tejas mk1a which were cleared in later phase should have F414. Inducting it in first 73 mk1a deal would cost it more time and money which we can't afford at this point of time.

 

[Mithu Roy]

Hal should have taken 414 engine for mk1a.
in fact in future they had to it.

 

[kurtwallis wallis]

it will affect the PWR (Power to wait Ratio), F414 is also expensive than F404, so it is not worth it.

Yes. Jet must be slightly elongated for extra fuel capacity and then all is okay but it means full flight testing all over once again IOC-FOC needed!!

 

[kurtwallis wallis]

F414 consumes more fuel hence would lower the combat radius, If they can integrate/develop the conformal fuel tank like F-16, then we should explore this option with additional 97 Tejas Mk1a order, we can also fix other shortcomings in tejas mk1a like IRST sensor, MAWS, better cockpit, F414 engine and name this version as mk1b, I am sure these changes can be taken up parallelly by HAL and would be ready in next 4-5 years.

Combat radius is small because MK1 is too bulky fuselage, no Whitcomb's area rule coke bottle ruling done properly, and very much broader wings. So, need to refine it for MK1B with longer sleeker fuselage and carry more fuel thereby.. So, this means it becomes new jet altogether completely.. BUT, it is worth the try especially if HAL will be making F414 engines in India next...

 

[VF VF1]

Ge F414 has many variants ..INS6 is high theust variant ..older variants wld have less thrust and dimensions as well weight ..tht can be thhought off for mk1A ...dont know if Hal-Ada has made tht study

 

[Bhishma]

F414 consumes more fuel hence would lower the combat radius, If they can integrate/develop the conformal fuel tank like F-16, then we should explore this option with additional 97 Tejas Mk1a order, we can also fix other shortcomings in tejas mk1a like IRST sensor, MAWS, better cockpit, F414 engine and name this version as mk1b, I am sure these changes can be taken up parallelly by HAL and would be ready in next 4-5 years.

For Tejas range is not a concern. Its current range is 850km. Its primarily meant for Pakistan - which is about 150km wide for the most part and Tibetan border which can be covered in segments. It wasnt envisioned as a long range strike fighter. Plus we can use drop tanks if we really really need it for long range role but we other alternatives.

 

[Bhishma]

Going with GE was a bad idea to begin with. Get an alternative - Russian, France or get Kaveri working.

 

[Dipesh Debnath]

Yes. Jet must be slightly elongated for extra fuel capacity and then all is okay but it means full flight testing all over once again IOC-FOC needed!!

We keep fuel inside wings, not in the radar and ecm pods. It could use conformal fuel tanks, there is lot of space behind the canards, though I like a bit pointed front side for an agressive look.

 

[Kira]

I believe they simple order more MK-2 instead of the additional 97 MK-1A.

 

[NSR]

Definitely not worth switching the GE F-404 engine with GE F-414 engine.
It is more like a Tejas IB and requires whole spectrum of developments, manufacturing, integrations, flight tests, qualifications, etc.

Instead, India must redouble its investments and efforts to realize a Kaveri derivative engine which can seamlessly fit in Tejas Mk IA frame with minimal changes to its configurations.

Additionally, India should accelerate the development of Tejas Mk II as it is the main fighter which will replace most of Jaguars, Mig-29s, and Mirage-2000s.
Push Tejas Mk II very hard.

 

[RG]

Good way to consolidate on single engine, the difference is structurally minor not to adopt and move away from different engine. When the fighter is suppose to carry 1000s of Kg of store, how come 100kg wait requires so much modification. Yes testing and other parameter tweeking is require, but should not be years of work. Cost may be higher, but cost optimization due to single engine in larger number should provide cost benefits here. Higher thrust can provide benefits in other areas for addition capability. Probably Naval LCA can be better off with this engine. Single production line would help streamline supply chain as well.

 

[Sandeep]

Good way to consolidate on single engine, the difference is structurally minor not to adopt and move away from different engine. When the fighter is suppose to carry 1000s of Kg of store, how come 100kg wait requires so much modification. Yes testing and other parameter tweeking is require, but should not be years of work. Cost may be higher, but cost optimization due to single engine in larger number should provide cost benefits here. Higher thrust can provide benefits in other areas for addition capability. Probably Naval LCA can be better off with this engine. Single production line would help streamline supply chain as well.

The main problem isn’t that it can’t be done as it can be done very quickly.

The issue is that it then has to go through a very long and vigorous process of tests which takes around 1-2 years as they will need to test and certify the technology, safety, capabilities and everything.

 

[Sandeep]

Changing engine won’t be a big problem and it can be done very quickly. The main issue is that any changes made will require us to go through the very long and vigorous set of tests which takes around 1-2 years but even longer if they find a problem that needs rectifying.

Right now we have to stick with this engine as we can’t afford any more delays. We can always switch the engine to the F414 when its F404 engine expires or we upgrade the jet and technology.

At the same time I think we shouldn’t order anymore than the original 84 Tejas MK1A jets. We need to quickly finalise the F414 engine deal and increase the number of Tejas MK2 jets we order because it’s more capable and advanced than Tejas MK1A.

 

[Rokuth]

If fuel consumption is a concern with the use of the F414 engine on the Mk1A, then why not detune/derate the engine? If FADEC is being used, wouldn't it be possible to reprogram the system to reduce the fuel flow rates? I am guessing that with the lower fuel rate, and lower maximum thrust from the engine, many of the issues brought up in the article would either be eliminated, or have reduced requirements.

 

[Benith Israel]

Develop Kaveri engine to replace f404 by the end of the decade. It's not like we are cranking out f414 engines like sausages.

 

[Aj]

Best to stay away from GE engines altogether. Trump is planning to hit hard at any trade partner that reduces or does not use the USD as their main currency for global trade. That's something India wants to do, in line with the recent BRICS announcement. So why get delays cause trump, through GE want to pressurise India.

 

[VedantaKiran]

If F414 can be considered, why not the Russian or French engines?

 

[Rajesh]

Seems the 414 is way to powerful to handle for mk1a better would be one among ej200 or m88-3 based on who wins the mrfa tender. Mrfa tender should also put condition of manufacturing the engine in india like a similar deal based on aravalli engines by hal and safran which is beyond assembling but complete manufacturing in india.

 

[Nathan]

Reduce MK1A production from 97 to 50 just wait for engine supply and Start MK2 as soon as possible