SOURCE: AFI
The Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) Tejas Mk1A Program might not be seeking a new engine to replace the existing GE F-404. But This article compares two potential replacements, the EuroJet EJ200 and the Snecma M88, based on key performance factors crucial for a light combat aircraft.
Its not that HAL is seeking Engine Options for LCA Tejas Mk1A Program, but if Day arrives that HAL Plans to have second option then it might want to have a look at Two Western engine options that might fit the bill for the LCA-Tejas Program.
Thrust-to-Drag Ratio (TDR): EJ200 takes the lead with a superior TDR of 23.13 N/cm2 compared to M88’s 19.42 N/cm2. This translates to better fuel efficiency and overall performance for the Tejas.
Thrust-to-Weight Ratio (TWR): M88 holds a slight advantage with a TWR of 8.40:1 compared to EJ200’s 9.17:1. This might give the M88 a slight edge in initial acceleration.
Fuel consumption impacts the operational range and cost-efficiency. Here is the comparison in both dry thrust and afterburner modes:
Dry Thrust:
- EJ200: 4,536-4,968 kg/h
- M88-2: 3,904 kg/h
Afterburner:
- EJ200: 15,228-15,876 kg/h
- M88-2: 12,563 kg/h
The M88-2 is more fuel-efficient in both dry thrust and afterburner modes. This efficiency can lead to extended operational ranges and lower operational costs, making it an attractive option for missions requiring longer endurance.
Bypass Ratio: Both engines boast a low bypass ratio (EJ200: 0.4:1, M88: 0.3:1), indicating a focus on supercruise capability. However, EJ200’s slightly higher ratio could translate to a touch better maneuverability at lower speeds.
Maintainability: EJ200 shines here. With fewer compressor stages and a modular design, it promises easier and potentially less expensive maintenance compared to the M88.
Infrared Signature: The IR signature affects the aircraft’s visibility to enemy tracking systems. Although precise IR data can be challenging to quantify, engine inlet temperatures provide an approximate measure:
- EJ200: >1,800 K
- M88: 1,850 K
While the EJ200 has a slightly lower inlet temperature, the M88 incorporates additional cooling channels and nozzle designs to minimize its IR signature. This design can provide tactical advantages in reducing detection by enemy IR systems.
Choosing between the EJ200 and M88 depends on priorities. If peak fuel efficiency and maintainability are top concerns, the EJ200 emerges as the stronger candidate. However, if a slight edge in acceleration and a potentially lower IR signature are more crucial, the M88 might be a better fit.
EJ200 as a Wet Thrust of 90kN that is way more then that of the Ge’s F404 engine that generates 84kN but M88 as a Wet Thrust of 75kN which is way more less then the Ge’s F404 (84kN) that is also way more less then older F-404 engines that were used on Earlier Prototypes that generated 78kN. However,If priority is given to fuel efficiency and lower IR signature, the M88-2 is an excellent choice. However, if the emphasis is on higher thrust-to-drag and thrust-to-weight ratios, coupled with ease of maintenance and reliability, the EJ200 stands out as the preferred option.