ADA Tejas Mark-II/Medium Weight Fighter

The idrw article talks of the afterburner adding 29kN thrust. Is 50kN dry thrust + 29kN wet thrust enough? That is about 5% less thrust than F404.

I don't know what Brahmos being 'entrusted' with afterburner development means. Is Brahmos going to start from scratch because the GTRE design was a failure or is Brahmos going to add the finishing touches to the design handed to it?
you're f404 produces less thrust in indian conditions. Infact the 84.5kn wet thrust is not rated number while kaveri's published numbers are.
To be a viable engine, acceptable weight, thrust and durability levels need to be achieved. When is that likely to happen?
God's planimages.webp
 
Can EJ200 replace F404 in MK1 A?
What would be the point? F404 works; EJ200 works .Both come with political strings. All foreign engines have political strings. EJ200 would invoke a multi-year delay in IAF getting a good light fighter just when it was finally about to get one 30 years late. Does anyone seriously want LCA to be 35-40 years late instead of just 30 years late?
 
What would be the point? F404 works; EJ200 works .Both come with political strings. All foreign engines have political strings. EJ200 would invoke a multi-year delay in IAF getting a good light fighter just when it was finally about to get one 30 years late. Does anyone seriously want LCA to be 35-40 years late instead of just 30 years late?
I know that the EJ200 was one of the engines along with the F414 for MK2, but eventually, the F414 was chosen because it was cheaper. What I am saying is can we use EJ200 as a backup plan for the F404/F414 delay?
We all know the EJ200 is a better engine, so even if it costs a bit more, it's always best to have a backup engine.
 

Latest Replies

Featured Content

Trending Threads

VPN-HSL-250-X250
Back
Top