The Indian Tejas

[Jade]

The Indian Tejas - a big dissapointment or a serious effort ?

[vikas kanitkar]

The Indian Tejas - a big dissapointment or a serious effort ?

Its a serious effort to make a fighter plane indigenously. and except engine, india got success to make a high quality plane indigenously.
India always use good quality of battle equipments from past.
Kaveri engine is not yet developed fully. so india want good quality of engine from foreign source. and i hope india will definatly going to succede in all aspect of aerospace technology in future.
Your question is may be based on news of pakistan air force JF17 Fighter aircraft.

[yess]

the question you asked "The Indian Tejas - a big dissapointment or a serious effort ?" well no offense to anybody but i desire to speak facts and my information is based on facts with reference...
http://www.geocities.com/spacetransport/aircraft-lca.html

considering the project started in mid 1980s it has been almost 25 years but still the production line has not been started..

a great attempt to indigenously produce a decent 4th generation fighter.
Their original commitment was to...
1985: LCA launched with a time frame of 10 years.
indigenously produce radar and engine which they did not quite successfully achieve.
indian avionics but now due to technical faults, to some extent it is indian and have to integrate european and isreali tech.

here is some quotes by "indian defence" analysts. you decide of how far the LCA has reached and how capable it is..

Indians have boldly claimed that the "LCA has more advanced technology than JAS- 39 Gripen and as much advanced technology as the Typhoon." And if it does, then it needs to be proved on the ground and in flight.

"Stealth is an important feature for all new combat aircraft coming up. LCA does not have any stealth charactristics like in F-117 or F-22, but considering its small size, tail-less design and simple delta wing config, a GE-404 engine(atleast for now) - which is also used in the F-117 - it should be stealthier that atleast a MiG-21 or MiG-23/27. It is also expected that LCA will get DRDO developed Radar-absorbent paint. Composites are inherently stealthier than metal."

considering the fact that in 65 indo-pak war Gnats with a Length: 28 ft 8 in Wingspan: 22 ft 1 in, could still not be stealthy and considering primitive radars of that time they were able to pick them up easily. so how in the world is it even possible for LCA with larger Length: 43 ft 4 in Wingspan: 26 ft 11 in, be some what stealthier then Gnat or even stealthier??:onfloorl:

[nero]

.

a flawed design can only go thus far.

if the basic design of the plane is not sound, then it dosen't matter how advanced avionics u get from israel.

the wing-loading & service-ceiling of the tejas is horrible.

i just hope that the tejas gets an honourary & quiet burial like the trishul programme.

.

[aaaditya]

well what you all think doesnt matter ,its what the user thinks that matters ,indian airforce is happy with the tejas ,though a bit dissatisfied with the delay in the development of the engine,they have already placed an order for the first batch of 40 aircrafts to be delivered from the year 2010,they also consider it to be comparable to the gripen but less expensive. so it does not care what nero or others think,they are still persisting with the plans to acquire upto 200 lca's even though many other aircrafts are available in the market and money is not the problem,they consider it to have superior handling qualities than even the mirage2000 of the indian airforce,the home base of the lca is to be sulur.

the initial batch is to equipped with the ge-f404-in20 engines having close to 85 kn thrust ,these will be replaced by the kaveri engine which is to be developed with the foreign assistance (safran a subsidiary of snecma of france and saturn are the front runners) ,also the first batch is to be equipped with the israeli elta el-m-2032 multi mode radar ,israel is also assisting india in developing the indigenous mmr ,the indigenous mmr is reportedly facing some problems in the air to ground mode,which is likely to be rectified by the end of this year . an indigenous aesa radar is in the early development stage ,israel has also offered its elta el-m-2052 aesa for the lca,though as of now indian airforce has not shown much interest in it.

israel is also jointly developing a self defence suite with india for the tejas,f-16i and the f-15,this suite is known as the mayavi(magician) ,the lca will have the dash helmet developed by israel.

if the indian airforce considered this project a waste of money or a failure ,they would never invest this much money and would spend it acquiring additional fighters,india has a requirement of at least 400 additional fighters of which 120 will be procured as per the mrca contract and the rest will be the lca's,indian navy is also interested in the lca and may acquire 40-60 aircrafts to arm its 2 indigenous aircraft carriers which have been sanctioned.

india has actually used the technology developed as part of the lca programme in the upgrade of the mig21bison and the mig27(project vetrivale),the su30mki and the darin jaguar.

[aaaditya]

.

a flawed design can only go thus far.

if the basic design of the plane is not sound, then it dosen't matter how advanced avionics u get from israel.

the wing-loading & service-ceiling of the tejas is horrible.

i just hope that the tejas gets an honourary & quiet burial like the trishul programme.

.

can you back up you statement about the lca's wing loading and service ceiling with the facts and figures ,we would be very intersted to know.

[aaaditya]

the question you asked "The Indian Tejas - a big dissapointment or a serious effort ?" well no offense to anybody but i desire to speak facts and my information is based on facts with reference...
http://www.geocities.com/spacetransport/aircraft-lca.html

considering the project started in mid 1980s it has been almost 25 years but still the production line has not been started..

a great attempt to indigenously produce a decent 4th generation fighter.
Their original commitment was to...
1985: LCA launched with a time frame of 10 years.
indigenously produce radar and engine which they did not quite successfully achieve.
indian avionics but now due to technical faults, to some extent it is indian and have to integrate european and isreali tech.

here is some quotes by "indian defence" analysts. you decide of how far the LCA has reached and how capable it is..

Indians have boldly claimed that the "LCA has more advanced technology than JAS- 39 Gripen and as much advanced technology as the Typhoon." And if it does, then it needs to be proved on the ground and in flight.

"Stealth is an important feature for all new combat aircraft coming up. LCA does not have any stealth charactristics like in F-117 or F-22, but considering its small size, tail-less design and simple delta wing config, a GE-404 engine(atleast for now) - which is also used in the F-117 - it should be stealthier that atleast a MiG-21 or MiG-23/27. It is also expected that LCA will get DRDO developed Radar-absorbent paint. Composites are inherently stealthier than metal."

considering the fact that in 65 indo-pak war Gnats with a Length: 28 ft 8 in Wingspan: 22 ft 1 in, could still not be stealthy and considering primitive radars of that time they were able to pick them up easily. so how in the world is it even possible for LCA with larger Length: 43 ft 4 in Wingspan: 26 ft 11 in, be some what stealthier then Gnat or even stealthier??:onfloorl:

neither does the gripen have stealth ,the lca uses the highest percentage of composites in its structure when compared to any other aircraft (maybe with exception of the f22 and the f35) and composites reflect radar waves back lesser than the coventional metal alloys,india has also developed an indigenous radar absorbent material which is capable of reducing radar beam reflection by as much as 70% this is used currently on the darin jaguars(though iam not sure about the su30mki but of the ram's use in the jaguar iam sure).

[yess]

neither does the gripen have stealth ,the lca uses the highest percentage of composites in its structure when compared to any other aircraft (maybe with exception of the f22 and the f35) and composites reflect radar waves back lesser than the coventional metal alloys,india has also developed an indigenous radar absorbent material which is capable of reducing radar beam reflection by as much as 70% this is used currently on the darin jaguars(though iam not sure about the su30mki but of the ram's use in the jaguar iam sure).

oh please give me a break aaaditya! can you please back up your unworthy statement on LCA's rcs being reduced to 70% after a paint job? reference..
even if the LCA does get some what "stealthier" it wont make any difference because the amount of armaments the LCA is gonna carry will increase its RCS..
i dough that the indian stealth tech is gonna reduce LCA rcs by 70%!

[crobato]

The basic design of the plane itself is sound, simple straightforward with the proven advantages of the single delta layout coupled with vortice generation in the forward LERX. For its weight it seems to have a high wing area which mean very low wing loading, and this should help the plane's low speed handling (given the comments vs the M2000 on this).

But composite structure can bite. Just to let you know, there already has been a series of airliner accidents involving the delamination of composite in tail rudders and so on. Composite is unpredictable in the way it lasts under long term stress environments, and it requires studious inspection and maintenance. Throwing a lot of it in the start when you don't have previous recent fighter development experience is ambitious but risky. I think a lot of time were spent validating the composite structures and members.

[Scorpius]

will this LCA be replacing the MiG family(Mig-27s,MiG-23s,MiG-21s)?

[sidewinder2006]

.

a flawed design can only go thus far.

if the basic design of the plane is not sound, then it dosen't matter how advanced avionics u get from israel.

the wing-loading & service-ceiling of the tejas is horrible.

i just hope that the tejas gets an honourary & quiet burial like the trishul programme.

.

You just wont stop scatological invective deleted ...right ????????????????

Next time you post anything in this respected forum......please for everybody's sake back up your comment with proper fact or a link to an trusty and respected article....

Otherwise stay away from this discussion !
-------------------------------------------------

Anyway,coming back to the topic, A question is lurking in my mind for last couple of days that how stealthy the tejas will be.

Obviously it wont be a f-35 or let alone f22... but still considering its very small size,streamlined design,extensive use of composites,some RAM treatment and planned heavy use of passive sensors..just how much stealthy it will be...

Say against a RDY or an APG 63 what is likely to be the detection range????

Mod edit: Text deleted due to use of scatological invectives. Members, please refrain from using foul language and/or profanity. If there is a disagreement or dislike between posters, then Ignore is an option. If there are questions on what is appropriate, please see the forum rules.

http://defencetalk.com/forums/rules.php

-Preceptor

[Titanium]

if the indian airforce considered this project a waste of money or a failure ,they would never invest this much money and would spend it acquiring additional fighters,india has a requirement of at least 400 additional fighters of which 120 will be procured as per the mrca contract and the rest will be the lca's,indian navy is also interested in the lca and may acquire 40-60 aircrafts to arm its 2 indigenous aircraft carriers which have been sanctioned.

india has actually used the technology developed as part of the lca programme in the upgrade of the mig21bison and the mig27(project vetrivale),the su30mki and the darin jaguar.

Are you sure Indian airforce is investing money........ as far as world knows Airforce is very allergic to the LCA...aka Lost chance aircraft in airforce parlance

[Titanium]

You just wont stop

Otherwise stay away from our discussion !



Could you start a thread with invitation next time, so that we can have meaningful discussion. One more advise to you( as you like giving ), why don't you stay in BR for an meaningful discussion.
-------------------------------------------------

Anyway,coming back to the topic, A question is lurking in my mind for last couple of days that how stealthy the tejas will be.

Obviously it wont be a f-35 or let alone f22... but still considering its very small size,streamlined design,extensive use of composites,some RAM treatment and planned heavy use of passive sensors..just how much stealthy it will be...

Say against a RDY or an APG 63 what is likely to be the detection range????

Well as aaditya is telling all here its RCS reduced by 70% ...that means if a fighter aircraft of 3 square meter is detected at say 70 km, then LCA is invisible in BVR range:p: . This is one of the reasan it is not bound to be visible for another 15 years:onfloorl:

[sidewinder2006]

hmmmmmmmm..it seems that either you are the same guy with a different login name or are brother in arms ...LoL ....just kidding !!!

I asked a question and I expect a real answer..not junks !
Hope you got that !!!!

[yess]

hmmmmmmmm..it seems that either you are the same guy with a different login name or are brother in arms ...LoL ....just kidding !!!

I asked a question and I expect a real answer..not junks !
Hope you got that !!!!

take a look at my previous posts on this topic, and i think you will get the answer if you are open minded.
Gnat were way smaller then todays prototype LCA and still they were detected with in the same range as any other fighter jet of that time!

[kams]

take a look at my previous posts on this topic, and i think you will get the answer if you are open minded.
Gnat were way smaller then todays prototype LCA and still they were detected with in the same range as any other fighter jet of that time!


Since when stealth is related to size only? For that matter all WWII fighters were too detected by Radars existing at the time. Tejas is not a stealth design, it was not a design objective.

[Titanium]

Since when stealth is related to size only? For that matter all WWII fighters were too detected by Radars existing at the time. Tejas is not a stealth design, it was not a design objective.

We all agree LCA is not stealth, but if we do accept that the favorite term of "45% composite by wieght and 90% by surface area" used for any situation- which also happens to decrease RCS the already small LCA by 70%. The LCA surely qualifies mention along with F-22 as stealthy.:p:

[kams]

We all agree LCA is not stealth, but if we do accept that the favorite term of "45% composite by wieght and 90% by surface area" used for any situation- which also happens to decrease RCS the already small LCA by 70%. The LCA surely qualifies mention along with F-22 as stealthy.:p:


The composite fraction figures are correct. It is done to reduce weight. An added benefit is reduced RCS to some extent, but not enough to make Tejas stealthy by any stretch of imagination.

[yess]

Since when stealth is related to size only? For that matter all WWII fighters were too detected by Radars existing at the time. Tejas is not a stealth design, it was not a design objective.

i dont get on what you are trying to clarify me on... yes all world war II planes were detected?? and..
what i am trying to say is that i dough that LCA's RCS is gonna be reduced by 70%! that mean lets say if LCA's rcs is 3 square meters then reduced by 70% its gonna be like couple of square feet?? :o

[sidewinder2006]

i dont get on what you are trying to clarify me on... yes all world war II planes were detected?? and..
what i am trying to say is that i dough that LCA's RCS is gonna be reduced by 70%! that mean lets say if LCA's rcs is 3 square meters then reduced by 70% its gonna be like couple of square feet?? :o


Well you cant compare gnta and lca simply because they are of similar size....

In fact fighter design has advanced a lot (so did the raders ...I must agree ) but since the only option available to the gnats to avoid radar detection was to fly low I doubt the figures will be the same.

And when we are talking abouts lca's stealth we are obviously not expecting it to have similar stealth characteristics as f-35 but its a fact that it will be much more difficult to detect than other similar class but bigger in size fighters like say m2000 or f16,

But the question is how much ???????

BTW...can anybody tell me about the assumed "being detected" range of a f-16/m2000/gripen against modern radars like apg63/69 or zhuk me or even the mighty Bars??

thnx in advance

[seaprince]

Its a serious effort to make a fighter plane indigenously. and except engine, india got success to make a high quality plane indigenously.
India always use good quality of battle equipments from past.
Kaveri engine is not yet developed fully. so india want good quality of engine from foreign source. and i hope india will definatly going to succede in all aspect of aerospace technology in future.
Your question is may be based on news of pakistan air force JF17 Fighter aircraft.

Please cut the crap of LCA being indigenous.Most of the Avionics of LCA are foreign built.Read the quotes belows.

ELTA Systems has stepped in to design and develop a weight-budgeted and risk-free solution of Multi Mode Radar that now calls for reconfiguring the LRDE/HAL-developed programmable signal-cum-data processor, power amplifier and the exciter/transmitter/receiver module and integrating them with ELTA’s AESA array, which will make the MMR an almost identical clone of ELTA’s EL/M-2052 radar. Fifteen such MMRs are now being jointly built by HAL and ELTA at a unit cost of Rs 70 million under a contract inked in February 2005. First deliveries are expected to take place next March, following which they will be flight-tested in Israel on board an ELTA-owned B.707-320 test bed over a four-month period. By December next year, the reconfigured MMRs will be installed on board the first three of the eight limited series production (LSP) LCAs that are now undergoing fabrication at HAL’s Bangalore facility (LSP-1 made its maiden flight last April).


Other major changes to the LCA’s avionics suite that have been finalised include the installation of the Thales-supplied Totem-200 ring laser gyro-based inertial navigation system (RLG-INS) coupled to a GPS receiver (this is already on board the upgraded MiG-21 Bisons and Su-30 MKI Mk3s) that will replace the existing Honeywell-built RLG-INS; installation of a wideband data link coupled to a joint tactical information distribution system (capable of exchanging targeting data in real-time among friendly airborne platforms and ground-based forward air controllers, and receiving targeting data from the PHALCON AEW & C aircraft as well as UAVs and other airborne battle space surveillance assets) for which Thales and Tadiran Specralink have been shortlisted as potential suppliers;

The Mayawi’s active component will (by 2012) also include active towed-jammers for which the Sky Buzzer from EADS and X-Guard from Rafael are on offer. The IAF is also likely to select by the year end the supplier for the IRST sensor, for which the IR-Otis from Sweden’s SaabTech, OSF from Thales and Pirate from Italy’s Galileo Avionica have been offered. The selected IRST sensor will be integrated with the LCA pilot’s Dash-2 helmet-mounted display, which is being supplied by Israel’s Elbit Systems.


For finalising the operational LCA’s flight control logic, ADA has sought technological assistance from abroad. To this end, requests for proposals have been sent to BAE Systems, Boeing IDS, EADS, Lockheed Martin, Saab Aircraft, and United Aerospace Corp. The winner will be required to assist ADA in reprogramming the LCA’s digital, quadruplex fly-by-wire flight control system that includes the core avionics computer, digital flight control computer (DFCC) and air data computer.

This quotes are taken from the article "On the Fast Track The ‘Tejas’ Light Combat Aircraft project gathers steam" By Prasun K. Sengupta
and this article is posted on forceindia.net

Now tell me what does word indigenous means if it is use in the context of building fighter aircraft???It means a fighter aircraft built completly by one self.In this present scenario,LCA has become most of a Joint-Venture Aircraft where several foriegn companies are helping the DRDO to make LCA a reality.So don't ever call LCA indigenous.

[kams]

[QUOTE=seaprince;111565]

If I were you, I would choose anyother source but, Mr.Sengupta. Please read about ongoing suit b/w Forceindia/Sen Gupta and ACIG/Key aviation.

Having said that I wish above report was true. I have no problem LCA with AESA, even if it is imported.:) . Almost 50% of IAF's frontline fighters will end up with AESA.

[powerslavenegi]

LCA is very much Indian, if the make of constituent components is what decides the make of the aircraft then what about the Gripen which has subsystems from manufacturers all across the globe ? as a matter of fact what about the Chinese aircraft dont they use RU engines ?

heck even the usually self sufficient French had to fall back on General Electric F404-GE-400 to power the 'Rafale' until M-88 was ready.

LCA is an ambitious project for the Indian defense industry and to be fair given the beurocratic hassles and the miniscule budget HAL,ADA and DRDO have done a good job, Kaveri GT has met the desired dry thrust levels and efforts are underway to figure out the issues with the AB thrust which seems to be the nagging issue until then G.E. F404-F2J3 would power the LCA.


As for the trolls on the forum who are taking pot shots at the LCA they as usual overlooked the fact their own country doesnt even have anything of the sorts on paper.

[sidewinder2006]

Please cut the crap of LCA being indigenous.

Now tell me what does word indigenous means if it is use in the context of building fighter aircraft???It means a fighter aircraft built completly by one self.In this present scenario,LCA has become most of a Joint-Venture Aircraft where several foriegn companies are helping the DRDO to make LCA a reality.So don't ever call LCA indigenous.

Well most of the avionics suite are now imported not because they cant be made indgnsly but because of the fact that IAF dont have the time to wait for the prototype system to become fully functional ..they are in serious need of proven avionics NOW and they gotta field the LCAs as soon as possible ...

Later block LCAs will feature more and more indigins component as they become ready !!!

[aaaditya]

Are you sure Indian airforce is investing money........ as far as world knows Airforce is very allergic to the LCA...aka Lost chance aircraft in airforce parlance

they have invested a further 2000 crore indian ruppees(1 dollar=43.5 rupees) on the production variant of the lca and a further billion dolars on the kaveri family of engines ,including a maritime engine derived from the kaveri.

[aaaditya]

take a look at my previous posts on this topic, and i think you will get the answer if you are open minded.
Gnat were way smaller then todays prototype LCA and still they were detected with in the same range as any other fighter jet of that time!

and gnats despite their small size,apparent lack of stealth were known as the sabre killers.

[10ringr]

the question you asked "The Indian Tejas - a big dissapointment or a serious effort ?" well no offense to anybody but i desire to speak facts and my information is based on facts with reference...
http://www.geocities.com/spacetransport/aircraft-lca.html

considering the project started in mid 1980s it has been almost 25 years but still the production line has not been started..

a great attempt to indigenously produce a decent 4th generation fighter.
Their original commitment was to...
1985: LCA launched with a time frame of 10 years.
indigenously produce radar and engine which they did not quite successfully achieve.
indian avionics but now due to technical faults, to some extent it is indian and have to integrate european and isreali tech.

here is some quotes by "indian defence" analysts. you decide of how far the LCA has reached and how capable it is..

Indians have boldly claimed that the "LCA has more advanced technology than JAS- 39 Gripen and as much advanced technology as the Typhoon." And if it does, then it needs to be proved on the ground and in flight.

"Stealth is an important feature for all new combat aircraft coming up. LCA does not have any stealth charactristics like in F-117 or F-22, but considering its small size, tail-less design and simple delta wing config, a GE-404 engine(atleast for now) - which is also used in the F-117 - it should be stealthier that atleast a MiG-21 or MiG-23/27. It is also expected that LCA will get DRDO developed Radar-absorbent paint. Composites are inherently stealthier than metal."

considering the fact that in 65 indo-pak war Gnats with a Length: 28 ft 8 in Wingspan: 22 ft 1 in, could still not be stealthy and considering primitive radars of that time they were able to pick them up easily. so how in the world is it even possible for LCA with larger Length: 43 ft 4 in Wingspan: 26 ft 11 in, be some what stealthier then Gnat or even stealthier??:onfloorl:

I really like this guys post and supporting information. Has anyone noticed the strange similarity of the rafale is aesthetic qualities?
Just a interesting point, but except for the tail fin the side view looks much like it. Check it out. I'm not looking for big issue, I just thought you may enjoy it and how closely it resembles the rafale even it's unique bubble canopy which isn't typical. Hutch

http://porte-avion.teria.org/images/rafale_marine.jpg

[sidewinder2006]

excellent fin 10ringr !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Wow....... I havnt ever thought that way !
just deduct the canards and you have a baby LCA ! [:)]

[10ringr]

excellent fin 10ringr !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Wow....... I havnt ever thought that way !
just deduct the canards and you have a baby LCA ! [:)]

Ya, I just thought it was uncanny, the similarities and I believe just as the Russians patterned the Mig 25 Foxbat after the Canadian Avro Arrow and the other examples of duplicating and reverse engineering like the Russians were/are known for they also have borrowed heavily from the F-14 and others. Wouldn't bother me so much except they often improved our equipment missiles especially! Not in all cases however. There are a few other cutting edge fighters out there that have often made me wonder if people are swapping spit somewhere. Like when France and many other European nations wanted to develop a new fighter France pulled out and developed their own but if you look at the Typhoon and Rafale though (I know they're different aircraft) and move those canards around a bit you'll see what I mean. They still have some striking similarities. Not to mention the JAS 39 Gripen. Changed sizes of aircraft and obviously there's many differences but look at them side by side and it's really something. I have links to show you but it's against the rules and out of respect for everyone I'll refrain. Hutch

[yess]

and gnats despite their small size,apparent lack of stealth were known as the sabre killers.

You can say things in a nice way. If you want to counter argue than do so with some maturity & try to back it up with facts, rather than using a kind of language determined to invite trouble.

[yess]

Mod edit:

Reposting something a mod has already edited out will get you banned.

Do it or breach the rules again and you will be banned.

AD

[crobato]

Ya, I just thought it was uncanny, the similarities and I believe just as the Russians patterned the Mig 25 Foxbat after the Canadian Avro Arrow and the other examples of duplicating and reverse engineering like the Russians were/are known for they also have borrowed heavily from the F-14 and others. Wouldn't bother me so much except they often improved our equipment missiles especially! Not in all cases however. There are a few other cutting edge fighters out there that have often made me wonder if people are swapping spit somewhere. Like when France and many other European nations wanted to develop a new fighter France pulled out and developed their own but if you look at the Typhoon and Rafale though (I know they're different aircraft) and move those canards around a bit you'll see what I mean. They still have some striking similarities. Not to mention the JAS 39 Gripen. Changed sizes of aircraft and obviously there's many differences but look at them side by side and it's really something. I have links to show you but it's against the rules and out of respect for everyone I'll refrain. Hutch

That's only because aerodynamics tend to force common solutions once you have defined what you are trying to do.

For example you are referring to the Tejas and the Rafale. You have both side inward canted intakes that is being fed by diverted airflow from a LERX, and in the Tejas' case, by the inner wing crank that functionally serves as the LERX. In the Rafale's case, the LERX serves as the root that leads to the canard.

This design is actually rather common, since you also see this in the F-17/F-18s, as well as the F-CK-1 and T-50s. The emphasis you have is for maneuverbility, keeping the engines fed during tighter turns or higher angles of attack.

[10ringr]

That's only because aerodynamics tend to force common solutions once you have defined what you are trying to do.

For example you are referring to the Tejas and the Rafale. You have both side inward canted intakes that is being fed by diverted airflow from a LERX, and in the Tejas' case, by the inner wing crank that functionally serves as the LERX. In the Rafale's case, the LERX serves as the root that leads to the canard.

This design is actually rather common, since you also see this in the F-17/F-18s, as well as the F-CK-1 and T-50s. The emphasis you have is for maneuverbility, keeping the engines fed during tighter turns or higher angles of attack.

Yes, there's some good information here thank you cro. This was the point I was trying to make about the US and Soviets copying German tech. after WWII. With all these next gen. fighters, it duz seem less coincidental that all of them look so similar and employ many of the same structural improvements. I believe this is probably more about countries capitalizing on the research of others, rather then doing the highly expensive R & D themselves, who's to blame them when you have fighters that cost so much. What is the figure now for the F/A 22? I read 100 million per plane a few years ago to as much as 300 million per plane now. As expensive as they are there is no replacement for numbers. When we start talking about building less then 200 fighters when we need twice that amount then I wonder where our priorities are and it reminds me of the B-2 fiasco. We have 21 bombers because the things cost 2+ billion each! I know that we're supposed to get the F-35 but that's a long ways off yet and any itiot realizes that you don't wait till your forces are holllowed out (like our navy) before realizing "oh, we aren't producing enough ships to sustain a minimal navy", by then it's to late and you'll have a couple of years of unneeded vulnerability. (Thanks Donald) Also, I understand that we're retiring the F117. Well if it's still more or less undetectable then why? Yes, I know they want more F/A 22's but duzn't it seem wise to at least keep what we have when we can't afford to buy them in the numbers needed. When we built bomber and fighters up until the end of the cold war we bought them in the thousands. Now, we pretend that technology is going to make up for material. It duz to a degree but not to the degree that will keep us safe if an all out war breaks out with a real power and there are plenty of real powers on the horizon to be concerned about. Besides, the counter to Stealth is likely to be things like better AAM, SAM missiles and better IR. I mean even a toaster has a heat signature and eventually someone will be able to nail them so if you want to fly a paltry amount of air assets to protect this huge nation then you better be prepared to nuke them because it'll be a very short fight. Hutch

Mod: What ever happened to paragraphs?

[powerslavenegi]

Ya, I just thought it was uncanny, the similarities and I believe just as the Russians patterned the Mig 25 Foxbat after the Canadian Avro Arrow and the other examples of duplicating and reverse engineering like the Russians were/are known for they also have borrowed heavily from the F-14 and others.
Wow what logic.. and shall we use the same to conclude that the much tom tomed about 2d tvc of F-22 is copied from the RU aircraft which btw have moved to all aspect TVC.Similalry should I claim that the americans who underestimated the RU IRST are now themselves building the IRST pod for the F-18 SH and even the F-35.Oh and who pioneered the HMS helmet mounted sight go figure...

Btw did you say reverse engineered could you please elaborate as to how would one reverse engineer an aircraft without possesing one ? iircs it is the US which has RU Mig-25 and even purchased 21 Mig-29's from the molodovian airforce ,infact thier most of the simulations against the supersonic targets use RU Krypton missile apart from the coyote.So shall we
say that US is reverse engineering and incorporating the technology from above mentioned stuff.

Do not try to spread false propaganda specially when you do not have facts to back your claim.

[10ringr]

Wow what logic.. and shall we use the same to conclude that the much tom tomed about 2d tvc of F-22 is copied from the RU aircraft which btw have moved to all aspect TVC.Similalry should I claim that the americans who underestimated the RU IRST are now themselves building the IRST pod for the F-18 SH and even the F-35.Oh and who pioneered the HMS helmet mounted sight go figure...

Btw did you say reverse engineered could you please elaborate as to how would one reverse engineer an aircraft without possesing one ? iircs it is the US which has RU Mig-25 and even purchased 21 Mig-29's from the molodovian airforce ,infact thier most of the simulations against the supersonic targets use RU Krypton missile apart from the coyote.So shall we
say that US is reverse engineering and incorporating the technology from above mentioned stuff.

Do not try to spread false propaganda specially when you do not have facts to back your claim.

It is common knowledge that the MIG 25 is an aircraft developed and produced by the Canadian Avro Arrow project. That the US pressured Canada to stop it because of Soviet spies. As far as possessing aircraft in order to reverse engineer it, 3 B-29's were taken by the Soviets during WWII (1943) one of many campaigns against Japan and after an unsuccessful attempt to use what they were able to learn from these aircraft they instead had to duplicate these aircraft and made the TU-4 Bull. These are facts that if you would look for you would easily find:D . Anyway, there is many excellent websites that will assist in not having embarrassing instances where you say things to people that are clearly not accurate or particularly respectful. Hutch

[Titanium]

The Indian Tejas - a big dissapointment or a serious effort ?

Are we discussing who copied whom?

Coming back to the big question above, Tejas indeed was a serious effort and turned out to be a big disaapointment for the HAL engineer. This for the simple reason that inspite of the Mirage III design provided by Dassault of france, (other being Israel and sauthafrica), india has not come up with a functional aircraft. Israel and Sauthafrica went on to built Kfir and cheetah with slight modification like canrads and few other things. India on the other hand choose the modification of now famous line pouted "45% composite and 90% surface area composite thingy along with FBW".

When Israel and sauth africa built and retiring the same design , India still struggling to comeup a aircraft, with all the help being provided from Israel, france, swededn, and ofcourse Amreca.

Hope sooner they fix the problem the better, as world is eagerly waiting for an new aerospace power. One thing they did not compromise, even though most of the indian aircraft are russians, they choose the seat from Martin baker.:nutkick

[Jade]

Are we discussing who copied whom?

Coming back to the big question above, Tejas indeed was a serious effort and turned out to be a big disaapointment for the HAL engineer. This for the simple reason that inspite of the Mirage III design provided by Dassault of france, (other being Israel and sauthafrica), india has not come up with a functional aircraft. Israel and Sauthafrica went on to built Kfir and cheetah with slight modification like canrads and few other things. India on the other hand choose the modification of now famous line pouted "45% composite and 90% surface area composite thingy along with FBW".

When Israel and sauth africa built and retiring the same design , India still struggling to comeup a aircraft, with all the help being provided from Israel, france, swededn, and ofcourse Amreca.

Hope sooner they fix the problem the better, as world is eagerly waiting for an new aerospace power. One thing they did not compromise, even though most of the indian aircraft are russians, they choose the seat from Martin baker.:nutkick


Yeah, sound analysis.

But, I hope they pesevere as they say they will to make it a worthy aircraft.

But, how will it fare against it's opponent the Chinese-Pakistani J-10 ?

That's the big question.

[Titanium]

.

But, how will it fare against it's opponent the Chinese-Pakistani J-10 ?

That's the big question.

If i were you, i would not even think about the above comparision, still some fanboys compare it with Typhoon and JSF no less.:p: .

Without getting into comparision, first we need to see it operational and achive its basic parameters. Then only we would be even able to talk about the aircraft. till now the aircraft can only fly in straight line that to without attempting to reach the stated 1.8 mach speed level after what 700 hrs?

[crobato]

Wow what logic.. and shall we use the same to conclude that the much tom tomed about 2d tvc of F-22 is copied from the RU aircraft which btw have moved to all aspect TVC.Similalry should I claim that the americans who underestimated the RU IRST are now themselves building the IRST pod for the F-18 SH and even the F-35.Oh and who pioneered the HMS helmet mounted sight go figure...

There was a prototype of an F-4 that was testing HMS. And don't forget, F-4Es and F-14s already had IRSTs on their own.

[yess]

If i were you, i would not even think about the above comparision, still some fanboys compare it with Typhoon and JSF no less.:p: .

Without getting into comparision, first we need to see it operational and achive its basic parameters. Then only we would be even able to talk about the aircraft. till now the aircraft can only fly in straight line that to without attempting to reach the stated 1.8 mach speed level after what 700 hrs?

isn't the J-10 in operational, active duty, front line fighter???52 are in service in PLAAF.. i dont know how you came to conclusion that the J-10 can only go M 1.8 and has done only 700 hrs of flying..
Even the USN analysts say that the J-10 is a huge treat to its front line fighter Super hornets in terms of maneuverability and pretty soon could be technologically comparable!

[Titanium]

Oh dear o dear, I was talking about LCA. I know very well J-10 is operational for sometime now.

Big mixup for u
Cheer up!

[yess]

ops sorry Titanium..
i thought you were talking about J-10. my bad..
and you are wright some fanboys compare it with Typhoon and JSF no less. .
as far as the Stealth in LCA goes i highly dough it!

[kams]

But composite structure can bite. Just to let you know, there already has been a series of airliner accidents involving the delamination of composite in tail rudders and so on. Composite is unpredictable in the way it lasts under long term stress environments, and it requires studious inspection and maintenance. Throwing a lot of it in the start when you don't have previous recent fighter development experience is ambitious but risky. I think a lot of time were spent validating the composite structures and members.


Are you talking about Airbus A300 incident in NY? and some other non fatal incidents (I think one over Caribbean A310)? If so, you do know the real reasons behind the incidents. If not I would be greatfull for some reference.

Crobato, Do not look at Tejas as just one platform, but as foundation to aviation research in India. Then you will understand why they chose tough road.

[sidewinder2006]

exactly............... !!!1

although LCA is still far away from being active in service..but the fruits of this project are already getting introduced in m2k,jags and even the mighty MKI !!

[Titanium]

exactly............... !!!1

although LCA is still far away from being active in service..but the fruits of this project are already getting introduced in m2k,jags and even the mighty MKI !!

Certainly the LCA did achive in some subsystems, which contributed to other aircraft. Do bear in mind the subsystems were of soft skill in nature, like mission computers, EW Etc, which India no doubt is very strong in. But building a aircraft and tank is not in India's genes.

The best is ala Israel, which abandon the aircraft development dream and concentrated on the skill set, which it is good at, radar, missile etc.

[yess]

exactly............... !!!1

although LCA is still far away from being active in service..but the fruits of this project are already getting introduced in m2k,jags and even the mighty MKI !!

what fruits are we exactly talking about here?? if LCA technology is integrated in MKIs then it be so lethal against even the PAF JF-17!

[kams]

sidewinder,

A word of caution (sorry can't PM you), DFT (think about it will ya)

You may judge the knowledge and intention of posters who think an aircraft with an RCS 70% of 3 sq. m will be invisible in BVR range.

Foolish yanks trying to make F-22 with a RCS in the range of 0.0001 (or lesser) sq.m to make it stealthy where as per our inhouse experts all it takes (at BVR ranges mind you) is to reduce RCS mere 0.9 sq.m. :unknown :unknown :onfloorl: :onfloorl:

Any way carry on trolls. Have fun.

Ohhhh BTW an IP check will be revealing, but I guess nobody cares.

[sidewinder2006]

Certainly the LCA did achive in some subsystems, which contributed to other aircraft. Do bear in mind the subsystems were of soft skill in nature, like mission computers, EW Etc, which India no doubt is very strong in. But building a aircraft and tank is not in India's genes.

The best is ala Israel, which abandon the aircraft development dream and concentrated on the skill set, which it is good at, radar, missile etc.

well my dear friend !!!!1 Aircraft development is not that GENE dpendent...its all about how much money you can pour in !!!!!

Seriously speaking....after all the delay and cost overruns do you know the till now cost of deleoping lca ??? Its a mere 3 billion USS,Although its too much for a country like INDIA...... now compare it to the F-35..Its about 40billions there(may be morethan that,i dont know the exact figuire).

And I'e heard that in some subsystem depertment India is preffering indiginous equipmet over ruskie one such as RWR,Secure communication device,Datalinks,mission computers.And after using world class equipments from europian and russian origin do you really think that IAF will settle for something inferior to that ??????? It must be of equal caliber if not better..

[Titanium]

Seriously speaking....after all the delay and cost overruns do you know the till now cost of deleoping lca ??? Its a mere 3 billion USS,Although its too much for a country like INDIA...... now compare it to the F-35..Its about 40billions there(may be morethan that,i dont know the exact figuire).
..

Man you are a reallly living in self deception. How can you even attempt to compare LCA and F-35 development effort. :onfloorl:

have you seen movie big fish?

And I'e heard that in some subsystem depertment India is preffering indiginous equipmet over ruskie one such as RWR,Secure communication device,Datalinks,mission computers.And after using world class equipments from europian and russian origin do you really think that IAF will settle for something inferior to that ??????? It must be of equal caliber if not better



I do know the subsystems you are talking , which i did mention in my previous post-read it again.

[Jade]

Certainly the LCA did achive in some subsystems, which contributed to other aircraft. Do bear in mind the subsystems were of soft skill in nature, like mission computers, EW Etc, which India no doubt is very strong in. But building a aircraft and tank is not in India's genes.

The best is ala Israel, which abandon the aircraft development dream and concentrated on the skill set, which it is good at, radar, missile etc.

Then what do u think of India's next gen combat aircraft with Russia ?

Is the collaboration on or what?

I hear mixed signals with regard to it .

[Jade]

If i were you, i would not even think about the above comparision, still some fanboys compare it with Typhoon and JSF no less.:p: .

Without getting into comparision, first we need to see it operational and achive its basic parameters. Then only we would be even able to talk about the aircraft. till now the aircraft can only fly in straight line that to without attempting to reach the stated 1.8 mach speed level after what 700 hrs?

What good is a combat aircraft that can only fly straight ??????

[Titanium]

What good is a combat aircraft that can only fly straight ??????

Well that provides, if nothing else the bragging rights that we are also aerospace power and claim to super power -however little that maybe.

Seriously, I wish LCA project managers should have followed a pragmatic approach to the development. The very premise that they can develop the aircraft in 10 years "indeginously"-the much abused and raped word, was to kill the aircraft before it can fly.

I doubt a aircraft whose desined parameters set in 1983, with all "indeginous" systems will be of any good, even "IF" it roll out in 2012.

[sidewinder2006]

Well that provides, if nothing else the bragging rights that we are also aerospace power and claim to super power -however little that maybe.

Seriously, I wish LCA project managers should have followed a pragmatic approach to the development. The very premise that they can develop the aircraft in 10 years "indeginously"-the much abused and raped word, was to kill the aircraft before it can fly.

I doubt a aircraft whose desined parameters set in 1983, with all "indeginous" systems will be of any good, even "IF" it roll out in 2012.

Well what I think that it will be good enough !
Simply because It will never have to fight a F35 or a F22 or an Eurocanards. India's threat comes from mainly Pakistan and to some extent China .And to counter F16s and alike a LCA will be more than enough.Although it is indeed 80s design but the avionics it is getting is by no mean outdated..Datalink,FBW,hotas,IRST,Planned induction of AESA,ECM,..you name it ..it has it all !

LCA is basically Point defence fighters deployable in large numbers. (maybe some light penetration strike missions also)It will always have the advantage AWACS, Friendly air defence,and they will always be stationed in numbers.

And for the biggers threats such as PLAFF Flankers or JF17s...IAF's MKI and fulcrums will take care of that.But as far as PLAAAF is conceren I dont see it happening for at leaast another 30 years as mutual relationship between India an China are improving and both the countries are too powerful to each other to indulge in a war now !



By the way...any update about the AESA MMR for LCA ????
I've heard that IAF has made it clear that it wont accept anything less than AESA for post initial batch of 40 LCAs

[yess]

Well what I think that it will be good enough !
Simply because It will never have to fight a F35 or a F22 or an Eurocanards. India's threat comes from mainly Pakistan and to some extent China .And to counter F16s and alike a LCA will be more than enough.Although it is indeed 80s design but the avionics it is getting is by no mean outdated..Datalink,FBW,hotas,IRST,Planned induction of AESA,ECM,..you name it ..it has it all !

LCA is basically Point defence fighters deployable in large numbers. (maybe some light penetration strike missions also)It will always have the advantage AWACS, Friendly air defence,and they will always be stationed in numbers.

And for the biggers threats such as PLAFF Flankers or JF17s...IAF's MKI and fulcrums will take care of that.But as far as PLAAAF is conceren I dont see it happening for at leaast another 30 years as mutual relationship between India an China are improving and both the countries are too powerful to each other to indulge in a war now !



in 3-5 years from now all 80~ PAF F-16 will be given MLU to block 52+ standard, now their is no comparison between block 52+ with LCA, more likely MKIs to some extent.

[sidewinder2006]

in 3-5 years from now all 80~ PAF F-16 will be given MLU to block 52+ standard, now their is no comparison between block 52+ with LCA, more likely MKIs to some extent.

Common MAN............give ne a break !!!!!!!!!!
Dont compare an MKI to an f16 !!!! It is outclassed to MKI in whatever block you can think of !! And where do you find 80 f 16s in PAF ??? They arent even delivered yet...Other than that they are from two completely different class of fighters

And block 52..block 60 and block 80 these words mean nothing..it just gives you an idea of the packages that went in !!!

Now tell me a single thing in block 50 or 52 (Other than some mission specific gizmos)that LCA already doesnt have ??

[kams]

Common MAN............give ne a break !!!!!!!!!!
Dont compare an MKI and an f16 !!!! It is outclassed to MKI in whatever block you can think of !! And where do you find 80 f 16s in PAF ??? They arent even delivered yet...

And block 52..block 60 and block 80 these words mean nothing..it just gives you an idea of the packages that went in !!!

Now tell me a single thing in block 50 or 52 (Other than some mission specific gizmos)that LCA already doesnt have ??

This thread is all about LCA and plz dont turn it into PAF vs IAF or LCA vs F16 trash


You don't know about the invisibility cloak, Proton Torpedo, and energy field F-16 Block 52 has.

Edited..

Sidewinder. these trolls are having fun, don't feed them. The Ignore button is for this purpose.

Don't you think it is funny that, the forum Joker Nero has suddenly disappeared and two more have appeared Jade and Titanium:D .

[yess]

Common MAN............give ne a break !!!!!!!!!!
Dont compare an MKI to an f16 !!!! It is outclassed to MKI in whatever block you can think of !! And where do you find 80 f 16s in PAF ??? They arent even delivered yet...Other than that they are from two completely different class of fighters

And block 52..block 60 and block 80 these words mean nothing..it just gives you an idea of the packages that went in !!!




:onfloorl: you are a joke! what do you mean blocks dont mean anything??in fact these blocks mean A LOT! their is no dough that PAF current block 15 is no where near to even a IAF Mirage-2000 as M-2 out classes in almost every field! but these newly upgraded PAF f-16s will in fact be very close to Israeli Sufa in terms of technology !!! PAF will be very shortly receiving 18 F-16 block 52+ and 24 block 15 plus 34 of its own will be given MLU with block 52+!

i can go in depth with f-16 details but since the topic is "Tejas" i will stick to it..

Now tell me a single thing in block 50 or 52 (Other than some mission specific gizmos)that LCA already doesnt have ??

it is funny how you chose to put LCA with F-16 block 52 and MKI with JF-17 against each other!
yes both LCA and F-16 might have same features but in terms of reliability, process, capability, performance, F-16 is way ahead of LCA..

[sidewinder2006]

:onfloorl: you are a joke! what do you mean blocks dont mean anything??in fact these blocks mean A LOT! their is no dough that PAF current block 15 is no where near to even a IAF Mirage-2000 as M-2 out classes in almost every field! but these newly upgraded PAF f-16s will in fact be very close to Israeli Sufa in terms of technology !!! PAF will be very shortly receiving 18 F-16 block 52+ and 24 block 15 plus 34 of its own will be given MLU with block 52+!

i can go in depth with f-16 details but since the topic is "Tejas" i will stick to it..



it is funny how you chose to put LCA with F-16 block 52 and MKI with JF-17 against each other!
yes both LCA and F-16 might have same features but in terms of reliability, process, capability, performance, F-16 is way ahead of LCA..


you failed to understand my point !
even if a paf f 16 is upgraded to a block 52 it doesnt necessaryly mean that it will contain everything that is available to a block 52 config.It just depends on what are you paying for,what are your needs and most important of all what is actually on offer !!!!

So you just cant argue that your f16s will be just as same as a usaf f 16 b52 with all bells and whistles simply because they are of same blocks.

So discuss upon packages it is going to have rather than just going by the block nomenclature !

And if I am joking..you are making a joke of yourself too.How can you compare reliability,capability and performance of a fighter which is in service for almost 30 years in various countries with one that is yet to enter service.Now we wont get our hands on the actual performance parameters of a LCA ,all we can do is compare the publicly available stats of LCA with a F16.And if we go by the stats LCA surely looks better after considering its role,price and capability.Just remeber that F16s are the most advanced fighter in PAF inventory whereas LCAs will fill the LOW END need of IAF.

And to compare relaibility we just night have to wait another 15-20 years before we can comment on that.
And by the way just google about the reliability of earlier block f16s...you will know why they were once called widowmaker

F 16 is indeed a very capable and mature platform,no doubt about that but upgrading to 52 doesnt mean miracle. Surely upgrading will add new capability to it but that doest necessaryly knock out a lca of centention simply because it will feature every single thing that a paf b52 is likely to have and will feature things like AESA in post initial batch of 40 LCAs which a PAF F16 will never likely to get from US in fear of getting it transfered to the chinese !

[sidewinder2006]

sidewinder,

A word of caution (sorry can't PM you), DFT (think about it will ya)

You may judge the knowledge and intention of posters who think an aircraft with an RCS 70% of 3 sq. m will be invisible in BVR range.

Foolish yanks trying to make F-22 with a RCS in the range of 0.0001 (or lesser) sq.m to make it stealthy where as per our inhouse experts all it takes (at BVR ranges mind you) is to reduce RCS mere 0.9 sq.m. :unknown :unknown :onfloorl: :onfloorl:

Any way carry on trolls. Have fun.

Ohhhh BTW an IP check will be revealing, but I guess nobody cares.

Lol....very well put Kams !
I completely overlooked your post in the clutter..sorry abt that ya !

[yess]

Actually I was under the impression sidewinder is comic relief. :onfloorl:

you have failed to know the detailed list of this potential sale of F-16s to PAF.. and perhaps you might understand lil bit of what i am talking about, so please go and visit the site f-16.net and learn the basics.

did you even know that the Israeli Sufa does not carry AESA but the same one as PAF all F-16s are going to the APG-68(V)9 radar! so is Sufa inferior to LCA?? in fact even MKI carries phased array radar!!!

[sidewinder2006]

Actually I was under the impression sidewinder is comic relief. :onfloorl:

you have failed to know the detailed list of this potential sale of F-16s to PAF.. and perhaps you might understand lil bit of what i am talking about, so please go and visit the site f-16.net and learn the basics.

did you even know that the Israeli Sufa does not carry AESA but the same one as PAF all F-16s are going to the APG-68(V)9 radar! so is Sufa inferior to LCA?? in fact even MKI carries phased array radar!!!


And I am not trying to prove who is inferior to whom..its you who are trying with all bucks in your pocket !!!!!!

I just wanted to made you clear that LCA will be very much viable option against whatever PAF currently has in inventory and will acquire in near future as its performance envelop fall in the same category as a F16 and it carries very much modern avionics which is in the same league and in some cases even better !!Thats it but you just wont understand !

....ufffffffffff and I thought it was a LCA thread !!!!

[sidewinder2006]

And by the way sufa is no f22...its just an good old f16 with some expert israeli inhouse modificattion.

[crobato]

isn't the J-10 in operational, active duty, front line fighter???52 are in service in PLAAF.. i dont know how you came to conclusion that the J-10 can only go M 1.8 and has done only 700 hrs of flying..



J-10 01---yes, the very first prototype---did over 2,500 flights alone before it was retired. The plane, identified by its while, blue and red livery, rests somewhere in the CFTC airfield in Shaanxi province, in a dilapidated condition. That's an example that shows the extent of the test flights you have to conduct before a plane is ready, and that's just one plane alone. The numbers of J-10 prototypes alone is more than enough to field a squadron.

[crobato]

Crobato, Do not look at Tejas as just one platform, but as foundation to aviation research in India. Then you will understand why they chose tough road.

We can certainly understand that. But that does not necessarily mean its the best road by going too ambitious in the first bound. Sometimes more moderate steps should be taken, so you can achieve them easier and in lesser time, and develop a base of successful experience and knowhow, then move into more ambitious projects.

[powerslavenegi]

We can certainly understand that. But that does not necessarily mean its the best road by going too ambitious in the first bound. Sometimes more moderate steps should be taken, so you can achieve them easier and in lesser time, and develop a base of successful experience and knowhow, then move into more ambitious projects.

You know what crobato if people wish to diss something they would do it anyways heck we have trolls rediculing the F-22 so its not unsual people are losing sleep over Tejas.

Your post is a classic example of the same,if tejas would have been a virtual ripp off of an existing design then people would have rediculed it for being a clone but now if one proves that the design was inhouse and the subsystems and components are contemporary then people bash it for being over ambitious .

And the height of snobbery is that people call the programme delayed while they seem to overlook the fact that even the giant powerhouses like Dassault and EF consortium envisaged the euro canards in the 80's and still in process of inducting the same into their fleet.

[powerslavenegi]

For all those who wish to indulge in a unbiased discussion and evaluate the platform then one needs to ponder over following points

1.Yes LCA was envisaged in the eighties ,and would the detractors care to figure as to when were RAFALE and EF chalked out ? and mind you the latter come from aerospace giants with decades of experience in designing and manufacturing A/C.

Wing design: High set compound delta with a CFD optimised camber and twist and unique low sweep leading edge crank (which give LCA its characteristic silhoutte).These are responsible for both control and generation of concentrated vortices during high AOA manuevres.This is functionally similar to a large strake or LERX.The two hollow spill ducts ,next to the leading edge connect to the intake splitter and acts as a suction system for the boundary layer/vortice control and reducing skin drag.

Independently actuated 3 segement slats on each wing increase wing area controlability and lifts at hihg AOA.

Control: Relaxed static stability combined with full authority QFBW controls ensures carefree amnueverability optimal recovery and reduced weight.LCA has very high degree of instability through moving the CG well aft (within elevon limits) for stronger pitching momemts.

The artificial stabilisation also helps to eliminate problems in tailess designs i.e. increased trim drag and inability to trim the additional pitching moments generated by the wing flaps.

for comparasion:
Static Thrust to Weight ratio (50% internal fuel) || Wing loading (Kg/m2)

Rafale-C* : 1.42 (2x Magic-2, 4x MICA-EM) ||272.79

Mirage-2000C : 0.99 (2x Magic-2, 4x MICA-EM) ||236.53

Eurofighter : 1:28 (2x ASRAAM, 4x AIM-120C) ||287.58

Gripen-C : 0.95 (2x AIM-9L, 4x AIM-120C) ||285.23

Tejas** : 1.17 (2x R-73E, 4x Astra) ||197.1

As for the construction using the composites it was deemed appropriate that with the advent of carbon fibre composites approaching structural strength of alloys be used to save weight ,composites being transparent to radar (ofcourse of a particular band depending on the composite used) and free from corrosive issues were other +ives.

The areas experiencing huge drag and thermal stress are fabricated using aluminium alloys and titanium.The overall part count on PV-1 is 700 lowest among all the 4th gen fighters.


As for the avionics :

1.MMR -India
2.Mission Computer-India (same being installed on upgraded Jags and the MKI)
3.HMDS-Elbit
4.LDP-Elta/Rafael
5.DFCC-India
6.HUD-India
7.RWR-India
8.Datalink-India
9.Incom-India
10.Data signal processor-India

As for those who have apprehensions about the quality of the avionics modules from Indian design house well BEL has recently bagged a deal for supplying Anti Infiltration radars to Indonasia what is noteworthy is deal was contested by likes of Raytheon and Thales.


(Info courtsey Radiance of Tejas by B harry Vayu magazine)

[crobato]

You know what crobato if people wish to diss something they would do it anyways heck we have trolls rediculing the F-22 so its not unsual people are losing sleep over Tejas.

Your post is a classic example of the same,if tejas would have been a virtual ripp off of an existing design then people would have rediculed it for being a clone but now if one proves that the design was inhouse and the subsystems and components are contemporary then people bash it for being over ambitious .


I think no one is complaining about the soft side of the project. Though I am reasonably surprised why the MMR is delayed when the design is actually not too ambitious, quite contemporary in fact, and when it actually plays to their national strengths in software development.


And the height of snobbery is that people call the programme delayed while they seem to overlook the fact that even the giant powerhouses like Dassault and EF consortium envisaged the euro canards in the 80's and still in process of inducting the same into their fleet.

Except that the Eurocanards have already started being inducted, sold to countries, and have already begun the next level of systems integration. The Rafale has already seen some action in Afghanistan years ago.

[kams]

I think no one is complaining about the soft side of the project. Though I am reasonably surprised why the MMR is delayed when the design is actually not too ambitious, quite contemporary in fact, and when it actually plays to their national strengths in software development.



Except that the Eurocanards have already started being inducted, sold to countries, and have already begun the next level of systems integration. The Rafale has already seen some action in Afghanistan years ago.

AFAIK trouble is in A2G mode, with no prior experience in Air borne radars, it appears that DRDO will opt for ELTA's help.

[swerve]

...Except that the Eurocanards have already started being inducted, sold to countries, and have already begun the next level of systems integration. The Rafale has already seen some action in Afghanistan years ago.

Rather more than "started being inducted". Gipen has been in service 10 years, Rafale entered limited service 5 years ago, Typhoon "started being inducted" in 2003, with first CAPs flown by the Italians in winter 2005/6. The 100th production (i.e. excluding prototypes & test aircraft) Typhoon was delivered 10 months ago.

[crobato]

AFAIK trouble is in A2G mode, with no prior experience in Air borne radars, it appears that DRDO will opt for ELTA's help.

A2G gives you the most problems in terms of development and integration, and is often the last part of the radar and fire control systems to be "fixed" and integrated, and it remains so even with the most experienced of institutions. So no surprise there. Nothing however, that time, effort and money cannot fix.

Once you have developed a "core"---a working design and experience---this "core" can be expanded with increased capabilities, adapted to new array forms, and diversified into different other radars. So its the first step that is the hardest, the rest becomes easier.

[powerslavenegi]

I think no one is complaining about the soft side of the project. Though I am reasonably surprised why the MMR is delayed when the design is actually not too ambitious, quite contemporary in fact, and when it actually plays to their national strengths in software development.
Yes S/W is not an issue however I am surprised that no one on the forum ever took into consideration the effect of US sanctions on India post 1998,the LCA prgramme was adversly affected by the denial of technology by the US in form i960 processors (yes MMR is designed around the military grade i960) the powerplant GEf404.It is only in the past couple of years that US has slowly started to lift the embargo and the Programme has caught pace.MMR is now on track as BARC hsa delivered the mech steered antenna for the same .


Except that the Eurocanards have already started being inducted, sold to countries, and have already begun the next level of systems integration. The Rafale has already seen some action in Afghanistan years ago.
I concede having said that please consider the following

1.Experience and history of A/C making of the likes of Dassault,BAE,EADS and Thales,Selex,marconi vis a vis Indian defense industry .Oh btw the technical assistance and the regular supply of the off shelf components from the United States was not a problem for the Euro-canards unlike the sanction hit
Tejas.

2.Compare the budget allocated for the whole programme for LCA ,mind you while the design and specs demanded are very much upto world standards the money allocated for the same was not even worth mentioning (complete programme cost was 1.2 Billion USD compare that with similar programmes in EU and US)

3.Programme inception: There is lot of misconception about the actual time when LCA was envisaged. In the year 1984 the Aeronautical Development Agency was established to develop the LCA. The ADA is effectively a "national consortium" for which HAL is the principal partner. HAL serves as the prime contractor and has leading responsibility for LCA design, systems integration, airframe manufacturing, aircraft final assembly, flight testing, and service support.

*The IAF's Air Staff Requirement for the LCA was finalised only until October 1985.

*Design was freezed only by 1990.

[powerslavenegi]

I think no one is complaining about the soft side of the project. Though I am reasonably surprised why the MMR is delayed when the design is actually not too ambitious, quite contemporary in fact, and when it actually plays to their national strengths in software development.
Yes S/W is not an issue however I am surprised that no one on the forum ever took into consideration the effect of US sanctions on India post 1998,the LCA prgramme was adversly affected by the denial of technology by the US in form i960 processors (yes MMR is designed around the military grade i960) the powerplant GEf404.It is only in the past couple of years that US has slowly started to lift the embargo and the Programme has caught pace.MMR is now on track as BARC hsa delivered the mech steered antenna for the same .


Except that the Eurocanards have already started being inducted, sold to countries, and have already begun the next level of systems integration. The Rafale has already seen some action in Afghanistan years ago.
I concede having said that please consider the following

1.Experience and history of A/C making of the likes of Dassault,BAE,EADS and Thales,Selex,marconi vis a vis Indian defense industry .Oh btw the technical assistance and the regular supply of the off shelf components from the United States was not a problem for the Euro-canards unlike the sanction hit
Tejas.

2.Compare the budget allocated for the whole programme for LCA ,mind you while the design and specs demanded are very much upto world standards the money allocated for the same was not even worth mentioning (complete programme cost was 1.2 Billion USD compare that with similar programmes in EU and US)

3.Programme inception: There is lot of misconception about the actual time when LCA was envisaged. In the year 1984 the Aeronautical Development Agency was established to develop the LCA. The ADA is effectively a "national consortium" for which HAL is the principal partner. HAL serves as the prime contractor and has leading responsibility for LCA design, systems integration, airframe manufacturing, aircraft final assembly, flight testing, and service support.

*The IAF's Air Staff Requirement for the LCA was finalised only until October 1985.

*Design was freezed only by 1990.

[crobato]

Yes S/W is not an issue however I am surprised that no one on the forum ever took into consideration the effect of US sanctions on India post 1998,the LCA prgramme was adversly affected by the denial of technology by the US in form i960 processors (yes MMR is designed around the military grade i960) the powerplant GEf404.It is only in the past couple of years that US has slowly started to lift the embargo and the Programme has caught pace.MMR is now on track as BARC hsa delivered the mech steered antenna for the same .

You only need the military or to be more precise, radiation hardened processors if your radar is already up and flying and into serial production. For prototyping purposes, for software development, bench and static testing, where the radar is in a lab, you don't need the radiation hardened stuff. The i960 is a common microprocessor at that time you can even find in cheap laserjet printers.

What can make you more vulnerable to sanctions is the TWTs or Travelling Wave Tubes. Its the same category of tubes like klystrons and magnetrons that are used to generate microwaves. The commercial stuff are those you see in microwave ovens. But the military grade ones, which has much more higher power, multi-frequency, frequency agility and reliability, that is much more harder to come by and is strictly controlled. If you had a contract with Raytheon to supply the TWTs, an embargo would surely hurt you.

And of course, the ultimate way to go around this issue is to go AESA. Since there are a lot more foundries in the world producing MMICs than factories producing TWTs, going AESA reduces dependencies and vulnerability to sanctions,while offering a lot of other aligning technological advantages.

[JP Vieira]

Hello
I believe that the decising factor to how good this aircraft will be is the avionics; with a good avionics base this could be a great airplane.
Best regards
JP Vieira

[wp2000]

Although I am not an Indian, I have been observing LCA for a long time (close to 2 decades). As an ordinary military plane fan, here's my 2 cents casual review of LCA project. A bit lengthy because I do feel that it's not fair to judge any plane with a one-liner:
To examine the whole project in a more detailed level (rather than throwing claims around about small bits and pieces of technical achievments or difficulties), I split the project development into 4 phases: Initiation, R&D and Test Build, Production&Operation, Upgrade&Finalization
1. Initiation phase.
This phase started from the 70s. IA and India's Aero industtry worked together from initial informal queries to a formal agreed and detailed requirement. It ends sometime in the mid 80s.

For this phase, I put IAF as the main responsible entity.

My Verdict: Not bad at all. Compared to China, as far as I know, India followed a more formal and standard process. whereas most of China's 50-70s projects were started in very adhoc ways and lack proper project management procedures.
The only thing negative I can see is that, similar to many other Indian defence projects, India thinks too much and spends too much time thinking. There are many things that can only be find out or sort out when you move to the next step. Keep on thinking just waste your time and resources.

2. R&D and Test Build phase.
I split this phase into Research, Design and Test sub phases. I know many indian forumites argue that LCA only started in 1993 when the governemnt sanctioned the money to make test planes. But I don't want to struggle on the definition of a project's beginning. In my view, all projects have similar phases starting from Initiation. We need to examine all of them to have a complete view.

I put the Indian Aero industry as the main responsible entity for this phase.

A. Research sub-phase
This is roughly between 1983 to late 80s.
Verdict: not too bad. I don't see many negative news or evidences in this phase. Most modern plane projects take this amount of time or event longer to finish this stage. But, problems and delays showed up in the later stages indicate that this step's works may not be deep enough to reveal all the uncertainties and critical difficulties.

B. Design sub-phase
This is from late 80s to 1993 (when the design was freezed).
Verdict: Good, even compared to any other countries' projects. The project progressed relatively smooth and fast, although arguablely people may say afterwards that it'd better to spend longer time to review the design and the required technical preparations.

C. Test build and trial sub-phase
This is from 1993 till now.
Verdict: Delayed significantly, Problems and grey areas hidden in the previous stages starting to be exposed but not managed very well.
This is the stage that got most critics for:

a. Maiden Flight took 5 years (1996-2001) to happen after the first planse rolled off the assembly line in 1996. I put US sanction as the main reason behind it. But it still highlights management problems, because the santion was triggered by India's own nuke test action. LCA was not prepared for it.

b. Then since 2001's maiden flight, the test flight process is progressing very slow, comparing to most other similar projects. I put the project management as the main reason for these problems. The most quoted arguements are:

1) IAF changes requirments. But sorry, this is normal in any projects' development and happens a lot. That's exactly the management team's job to negotiate and to reach a new agreed plan. Then once the IAF's new requirements are accepted, you only got yourself to be blamed for any unplanned delays.

2) "You fans don't konw how difficult it is to do this or do that in LCA". This question should really be raised to the LCA management rather than to fans, especially Indian tax payers. The management are the ones who really need to know the answer. But unfortunetely they seem to have a problem here, otherwise they wouldn't come up with all the unrealistic deadlines repeatedly. Seriously, I believe the management team do know the challenges, if not 100%. But the worring thing is, (only to Indians), they still keep on giving out deadlines that can not be met. Has anyone cross checked the new "To happen" list in the AFM's March or April issue?

3) IAF does not drive, push or support the project enough. This is a typical excuse. ADA or DRDO are not 5-year old boys who needs somebody to kick tail to do things. This R&D phase is mainly in their court. Also, frankly speaking, compared to many other countries's project, IAF and Indian government's support have been very strong if not among the strongest. It would've been cancelled in many other countries;On the contrary, IAF has ordered 20 LCAs when LCA only clocked 700 flights and no radar and weapon in flights yet. That's really a huge show of support. It's really up to the whole project team to return the favour with a speedy progress.

4) Not enough fund. This is an understandable excuse for delays in the 90s. But it's not a good one for the repeated delays in the recent years. At the end of the day, you need to give the governement a realistic figure for the required fund, if you know what you are doing. That's exactly the management's job.

Now, in the last 1 or 2 years, I start to see good signs of improvements, e.g. collaberation with external helps, decisions on using mature foreign critial sub components (e.g. engine, radar and weapons) to get block 0 ready ASAP, eventhough they should've been done 10 years ago.

Unless new deadlines are declared, I am waiting to see when the full flight envelop is tested, when the basic radar and weapon integrated tests finish, when the first LCA is handed to IAF's airbase AND when the first squadron of LCA is formed, which I believe is 2010. That will mark the complettion of the R&D phase.

C. Production and Operation phase
This phase is scheduled to start in 2010 and will last to the final days of LCA.
Obviously no verdict yet, especially this is mostly an unknown stage. But looking at any other projects, the first 5-10 years can be quite a hectic period: LCA will be built and used by average joe blokes. The LCA team needs to have a very very proactive and "never say die" attitude because LCA may be the most critisied plane in IAF intitially. Strong nerve, will and attitude are needed to pass that stage.

D. Upgrade and Finalisation phase
No date lines. No Verdicts.

A relevant question is that whether LCA will be obsolete in the next decade. I really don't think so.
1) Techinically speaking LCA has most of the 4th gen features comparable to others, when it's finished. 2) 4th gen fighters will be in service with all countries beyond 2030 baring USA.

So generally speaking, LCA won't be obsolete in the next decade at least. The ideas of jumping directly to UACV because LCA is not on time and obsolete is too naive. You don't use an even more unerealistic idea to replace something you think is not realistic.

Having said that, there's quite a chance that LCA will be the last 4th gen fighter entering service. That will put extra burden on the upgrade works planned for LCA. This will be especially true after 2020 when early 4th gen fighters are comfortabely going into retirement. LCA's upgrade plans will be under lots of spotlights again after 2025-2030 because most other planes may be either retired or on final life caring support.

So, LCA's upgrade needs to be planned and started very early, otherwise last runner of a marathon usually recieves special attensions.

To summarise, From India's aero industry's point of view, what India has achieved in the LCA project is quite impressive, especially when you consider from where they started the development. But from IAF's point of view or just looking at the project itself, it has many problems and it's yet to prove the project's success.

Put it this way, a project is like a soccer match, if you can't reach your goal in 90 mins, you failed no matter how much individual briliance you showed up here or there during the match. of course, if LCA can't be inducted in 2010, I'd say there's still a 30 min extra time. After 2015, it will be penalty shoot out if no sudden death allowed:)

Anyway, just some thoughts. I do welcome comments and critics, but no simple one liners please.

[aaaditya]

some of the sanctions imposed on the lca during the 90's were realy crucial in delaying the project,the lca flight software which was being tested on an f-16 vista in the usa and ws being developed with lockheed martin's assistance was confisticated ,the indian scientists had to return empty handed and had to start the project from a scratch,that also resulted in the 5 year delay from the rollout to the first test flight,moog failed to supply the hydraulic actuators ,though thay have started to supply them now,india is currently in the process of indiginising them,and the ge refused to supply the engines after the initial order of 20 ge-f-404 engines ,however the original order itself was delayed. these are enough to put a project back by 5-10 years ,particularly when the country involved is india which has relatively limited experience in aircraft engineering field when compared to western nations.

[wp2000]

I know and understand all these things. That's why I go into the trouble to comment on each phase of LCA's development.

I was trying to point out that up until mid 90s, LCA was doing relatively well. Then mainly because of the US sanction, LCA was delayed to 2001 to do the maiden flight. This is still understandable although debatable.

But after 2001 till now is the period that is relevant. For this period, you really can't use 1999's US sanctions to explain why the LCA project management still can't setup doable timelines, even just several months ago.

I am pretty sure LCA's tech engineers have been and are working to their best towards the setup timelines. But scatological invective deleted happens; Every plane project suffers from all sorts of problems. This is the every management team's job to prepare for whatifs and implement the corresponding plan when problems do occur. That's what MANAGEMENT means.

[Titanium]

LCA-Tejas is again going to the drawing board, so expect to see only after 15 years or so according to this report (http://www.hindu.com/2007/08/15/stories/2007081558470100.htm).


Bangalore: Sea-level flights of Tejas, the indigenous light combat aircraft (LCA), have thrown up questions relating to its installed thrust. If these are not resolved, it is possible that India’s fourth generation fighter aircraft programme, launched in 1983, could get further delayed. :onfloorl:

Prototype vehicles PV2 and PV3 were put through 24 flights over two weeks at INS Rajali at Arakkonam in Tamil Nadu recently. Being at sea level Arakkonam offered a dramatically different environment from that of Bangalore, which is 3,018 feet above sea level. It was in Bangalore that all the LCA flying was until then done. With the longest runway of its kind in India, INS Rajali enabled Tejas to undertake extensive low-level flying, something that is not possible in Bangalore.

The sea-level tests, basically meant to test the reliability of Tejas’ systems in dense (hot and humid) atmospheric conditions and its low-level flight characteristics, were “largely successful.” But it also became clear that the performance at sea level did not meet some key points in its flight envelope: notably in terms of maximum speed and take-off. Here the aircraft was not able to meet its targeted maximum speed of Mach 1.05, although it had been touching Mach 1.6 at higher altitudes.

Informed sources attribute this to insufficient installed thrust from the power plant after its integration with the air frame. Engineers working with the programme say modifications including to the aircraft’s air intakes will have to be made or a new engine installed. Both solutions will be time-consuming:nutkick

[aaaditya]

LCA-Tejas is again going to the drawing board, so expect to see only after 15 years or so according to this report (http://www.hindu.com/2007/08/15/stories/2007081558470100.htm).


Bangalore: Sea-level flights of Tejas, the indigenous light combat aircraft (LCA), have thrown up questions relating to its installed thrust. If these are not resolved, it is possible that India’s fourth generation fighter aircraft programme, launched in 1983, could get further delayed. :onfloorl:

Prototype vehicles PV2 and PV3 were put through 24 flights over two weeks at INS Rajali at Arakkonam in Tamil Nadu recently. Being at sea level Arakkonam offered a dramatically different environment from that of Bangalore, which is 3,018 feet above sea level. It was in Bangalore that all the LCA flying was until then done. With the longest runway of its kind in India, INS Rajali enabled Tejas to undertake extensive low-level flying, something that is not possible in Bangalore.

The sea-level tests, basically meant to test the reliability of Tejas’ systems in dense (hot and humid) atmospheric conditions and its low-level flight characteristics, were “largely successful.” But it also became clear that the performance at sea level did not meet some key points in its flight envelope: notably in terms of maximum speed and take-off. Here the aircraft was not able to meet its targeted maximum speed of Mach 1.05, although it had been touching Mach 1.6 at higher altitudes.

Informed sources attribute this to insufficient installed thrust from the power plant after its integration with the air frame. Engineers working with the programme say modifications including to the aircraft’s air intakes will have to be made or a new engine installed. Both solutions will be time-consuming:nutkick

obviously ,there have been plans to install new engines ,thats why safran of snecma and saturn have been shortlisted as the possible co-developers of the new engine,by the way ,why didnt you post the full article?

[aaaditya]

LCA-Tejas is again going to the drawing board, so expect to see only after 15 years or so according to this report (http://www.hindu.com/2007/08/15/stories/2007081558470100.htm).


Bangalore: Sea-level flights of Tejas, the indigenous light combat aircraft (LCA), have thrown up questions relating to its installed thrust. If these are not resolved, it is possible that India’s fourth generation fighter aircraft programme, launched in 1983, could get further delayed. :onfloorl:

Prototype vehicles PV2 and PV3 were put through 24 flights over two weeks at INS Rajali at Arakkonam in Tamil Nadu recently. Being at sea level Arakkonam offered a dramatically different environment from that of Bangalore, which is 3,018 feet above sea level. It was in Bangalore that all the LCA flying was until then done. With the longest runway of its kind in India, INS Rajali enabled Tejas to undertake extensive low-level flying, something that is not possible in Bangalore.

The sea-level tests, basically meant to test the reliability of Tejas’ systems in dense (hot and humid) atmospheric conditions and its low-level flight characteristics, were “largely successful.” But it also became clear that the performance at sea level did not meet some key points in its flight envelope: notably in terms of maximum speed and take-off. Here the aircraft was not able to meet its targeted maximum speed of Mach 1.05, although it had been touching Mach 1.6 at higher altitudes.

Informed sources attribute this to insufficient installed thrust from the power plant after its integration with the air frame. Engineers working with the programme say modifications including to the aircraft’s air intakes will have to be made or a new engine installed. Both solutions will be time-consuming:nutkick

here , let me post the rest of the article ,that you have so conveniently ignored:

here is the link:

http://www.hindu.com/2007/08/15/stories/2007081558470100.htm

The LCA programme’s limited series production and the 20 aircraft the IAF has ordered will fly with specially modified GE 404 IN20 engines. But informed sources say that though these engines have Full Authority Digital Engine Control, longer life and hot-end components, they may not be able to generate at sea level the needed installed thrust.
The LCA programme’s limited series production and the 20 aircraft the IAF has ordered will fly with specially modified GE 404 IN20 engines. But informed sources say that though these engines have Full Authority Digital Engine Control, longer life and hot-end components, they may not be able to generate at sea level the needed installed thrust. A new, more powerful engine such as the GE 414 (which powers the F-16 Super Hornet), whose core is the same as the GE 404 but is heavier or a similar engine, may have to be tried.
The genesis of the current issues relating to the engine can be traced to the non-availability of the Kaveri engine that was expected to fly the Tejas, but which is still nowhere in sight. The non-availability of the Kaveri has meant that the Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA), which is designing the LCA, is forced to look elsewhere for an alternative.
The ADA, though, is not too perturbed with the lack of installed thrust at low levels. Says P.S. Subramanyam, its Programme Director (Combat Aircraft): “The programme is on the fast track. We are planning to fit drop tanks and mid port bombs very shortly. Missile firing is also being planned. The present engines (F 404) will see me through IOC and FOC.”
The LCA, which has so far undertaken 725 flights, is scheduled to get initial operational clearance in late-2010 and FOC in 2011-12.


well you can see for yourself,the poor research done by the reporter, this casts doubt on the credibility of the reporter and on his knowledge of the project ,he has also not given a clear indication as to who his sources are and i think only some people i know will give premature credibility to this article ,and act like fools.

i would give moe credibility to this article if the indian defence minister or a member of the indian airforce,or a leading defence magazine like jane's confirms this report.

it is agreed that the current engine of the lca is underpowred ,that is the reason why the kaveri is being developed and that is the reason why indian airforce is acquiring the ge-f404-in20 engines,but i dont think it will delay the project any further.

also this article has given no indication that the indian airforce does not want this aircraft ,but only highlights the indian airforce's commitment towards this project.

[kams]

LCA-Tejas is again going to the drawing board, so expect to see only after 15 years or so according to this report (http://www.hindu.com/2007/08/15/stories/2007081558470100.htm).
Blah
Blah
Blah
...
......
[/B]:nutkick

Lets take a look at some facts before we jump with joy, shall we?

1. Which two Tejas flew in Arakkonam? - PV-2 and PV-3

2. Which version of GE404 engine is installed in these two? - F2J3.

3. Which version of GE engine will be installed in all LSP (limited Series Production)? - GE404 IN20.

4. GE404IN20 has higher thrust than F2J3.

5. What was the purpose of Arakkonam test flights - To test the aircraft and subsystems under high humidity and high temperatire condition.



With the indigenous Kaveri engine not to be ready till at least 2014, the LCA will shortly get a more powerful power plant. HAL has started integrating the first of the General Electric manufactured GE 404 IN20 engines. The LSP2 will be the first to be powered with the new engine.




Now think about what will more powerfull IN20 version will do?

Coming to GE414 story, apparently just before Arakkonam tests, GE made a presentation to ADA on integrating GE414 to LCA.

Now you know..

[Ryttare]

Informed sources attribute this to insufficient installed thrust from the power plant after its integration with the air frame. Engineers working with the programme say modifications including to the aircraft’s air intakes will have to be made or a new engine installed. Both solutions will be time-consuming:nutkick

If the problem would be that installed thrust is lower than expected, a stronger engine probably wont help, it might even make it worse. If the air flow prevents the engine from reaching desired thrust air intakes has to be redesigned.

It would be logical as the plane isn't meant to use that engine from the beginning. I think they have to decide wether they belive Kaveri will work in time or not. Designing Tejas for two different engines seems very difficult.

[wp2000]

It's good to share and discuss these technical issues. But no need to maginify these issues and jump to any conclusion about the whole project.

During the test phase, there will be lots of problems found. That's normal. The important thing is how these problems are handled and how long and how much do they spend. Only the accumulated failures of handling problems will stall a project and may lead to cancellation.

So, if anyone generally agrees with my ananlysis, we can then go into more detailed level of the current test phase, and later on we may be able to see how significant these technical issues are comparing the whole test process.

[crobato]

Modifying the intake, and subsequently, the intake tunnel and part of the airframe can delay but it can be done an it can be done fast enough so the delay can be momentarily, not one that you can consider a serious delay. And there is a precedent for that. I like to remind you, that in fact, that one certain fighter, whose name I won't mention to avoid plane vs. plane comparisons, had similar problems with its installed thrust, and in a matter of less than a year, the plane changed from side splitter intakes to fixed DSI inlets in the next prototype, along with aerodynamic and airframe changes.

So in view of the precedents it can be done if you put your money and mind to it promptly.

[Ryttare]

Yes, I belive it's possible to redesign the intakes pretty quick, as soon as engine has been finally chosen. Indian engineers seems as quite innovative, it's really impressive they have been able to get this far considering they have made it really difficult for themselfs. The problem seems to be on the political and management leadership level. But soon some decision has to be made on that level to make the project able to carry on. Such as what engine to use, usage of composites and radar.

But one way of solving this specific problem would be to just let it be. India will have many other fighters in their inventory that can carry out low level work.

[crobato]

In my opinion its better to solve the problem in the bud rather than to have it hang on and haunt you later in the long run.

Sometimes it is said that the bureaucracy presents a more daunting problem than the engineering solution itself. It maybe, that the time spent debating and getting through the byzantine channels to get the authorization can cost more time than designing and implementing the new changes. I don't see the redesign as the problem, I see getting the "okay" for it as the problem.

[wp2000]

Yes, very true.

LCA does not involve any ground breaking technology, given India's position, any technical issue can be solved by at least one way, either locally or foreign.

That's why I think project management is the main source of problems in LCA.

But recently, signs of improvment is showing up, but not good enough to make any conclusions.

I mean even the new targets revealed by AFM's April issue are forgotten. There must be a new set of exciting goals released recently that I am not aware of. This gives me the impression that the management are still not down to the earth: know your men and resources then come up with an achievable goal first, evneif that goal looks disappointing; Gradually you will be closer and closer to what IAF wants.

[aaaditya]

Modifying the intake, and subsequently, the intake tunnel and part of the airframe can delay but it can be done an it can be done fast enough so the delay can be momentarily, not one that you can consider a serious delay. And there is a precedent for that. I like to remind you, that in fact, that one certain fighter, whose name I won't mention to avoid plane vs. plane comparisons, had similar problems with its installed thrust, and in a matter of less than a year, the plane changed from side splitter intakes to fixed DSI inlets in the next prototype, along with aerodynamic and airframe changes.

So in view of the precedents it can be done if you put your money and mind to it promptly.

i believe the aircraft which you are referring to also had problems regarding smoke from the exhaust ,which was rectified by the use of a modified design of air intake.

[Titanium]

Modifying the intake, and subsequently, the intake tunnel and part of the airframe can delay but it can be done an it can be done fast enough so the delay can be momentarily, not one that you can consider a serious delay. And there is a precedent for that.
...
So in view of the precedents it can be done if you put your money and mind to it promptly.

Yes corbato you are right it can be done and there are previuos precedent of it. Now, the question is who is gonna do it? the design is frozen in consultation with Dassault and BAe.. any changes at this point again needs consultation and all the flight test data again computed- looking at the past history it is not reassuring this can be done in a year or two. so the precedent you mentioned can not resonably applied here.

LCA does not involve any ground breaking technology, given India's position, any technical issue can be solved by at least one way, either locally or foreign.


Am afraid not many will agree to you as LCA has many first to its credit compound delta, "40% composite by weight and 90% by surface area, FBW "Indeginous etc.. to name a few.

If the problem would be that installed thrust is lower than expected, a stronger engine probably wont help, it might even make it worse. If the air flow prevents the engine from reaching desired thrust air intakes has to be redesigned

Honestly don't you people think, the engine is more than enough for such a light plane? The issue here is that of poor design, either it is airintake or most probably I assume it is the excessive drag, from poor aerodynamic design.

[Ryttare]

Honestly don't you people think, the engine is more than enough for such a light plane? The issue here is that of poor design, either it is airintake or most probably I assume it is the excessive drag, from poor aerodynamic design.

The uninstalled thrust of the engine is probably enough to get decent performance. The article speaks about the installed thrust being to low, and that implies problems with the things like the air intakes. Tejas is a delta and deltas has inheratly low drag.

As I said before, the present engine was introduced as a temporary solution and it's not strange if that would cause some problems. If they decide to make it a more long term solution it would probably not be an overwhelming job to redesign the intakes. What is needed is a decision from politicians and project management.

[kams]

The air intake was redesigned once in 2001. TD-2 has redesigned air intakes as compared to TD-1.

There has been continuous improvement from TD-1 (technology demonstrator) to PV-2. Avionics, Cockpit instrumentation, Air frame composition, total number of parts (almost 30% reduction), weight reduction (5%) etc. I will posr bit more on these changes later.

wp2000, my complements on good compilation. Will try to post some comments later. Some points to consider,
- FBW program was most hard hit by US sanctions, with almost all of Indian made equipment at LM seized. With no test beds at home, a task force was constituted to crack this critical technology.
- TD-1 after roll out in 96, flew only in 2001. Mainly due to FBW and also due to problem in Composites, fuselage-wing integration (which had to be done more than once). After some flights (till Sep-Oct 2001), it was grounded to make extensive modifications to fuel system, Cockpit instrumentation, Airframe (leading edge slats, Air brakes) etc. There was big delay in this phase. The delay was due to HAL getting involved with IJT (bad project management).
- More LSP series are supposed to be flying now, including Trainer version. These are to be ingetrated with newer 404 IN20 engines.

[Jade]

The air intake was redesigned once in 2001. TD-2 has redesigned air intakes as compared to TD-1.

There has been continuous improvement from TD-1 (technology demonstrator) to PV-2. Avionics, Cockpit instrumentation, Air frame composition, total number of parts (almost 30% reduction), weight reduction (5%) etc. I will posr bit more on these changes later.

wp2000, my complements on good compilation. Will try to post some comments later. Some points to consider,
- FBW program was most hard hit by US sanctions, with almost all of Indian made equipment at LM seized. With no test beds at home, a task force was constituted to crack this critical technology.
- TD-1 after roll out in 96, flew only in 2001. Mainly due to FBW and also due to problem in Composites, fuselage-wing integration (which had to be done more than once). After some flights (till Sep-Oct 2001), it was grounded to make extensive modifications to fuel system, Cockpit instrumentation, Airframe (leading edge slats, Air brakes) etc. There was big delay in this phase. The delay was due to HAL getting involved with IJT (bad project management).
- More LSP series are supposed to be flying now, including Trainer version. These are to be ingetrated with newer 404 IN20 engines.

Kams, would you mind if we also discussed the next gen Indian combat aircrat here?

Have they picked the Russians as partners for this ?

What is the design like ?

Sometimes, they say yes and then they say yet to decide !!!!

What's your knowledge of this ?

Mod: I would suggest sticking to the topic, which is "LCA Tejas." If you want to discuss MCA than there should be an old thread some where around here. Find that thread & discuss it there, if it is no there than make one.

[aaaditya]

Kams, would you mind if we also discussed the next gen Indian combat aircrat here?

Have they picked the Russians as partners for this ?

What is the design like ?

Sometimes, they say yes and then they say yet to decide !!!!

What's your knowledge of this ?

india is inetersted in the joint development with the russians of a fifth generation multirole combat aircraft ,they also have an indigenous project known as the mca,which is meant to utilise the lca design and technology and will incorporate a high degree of stealth and super cruise capability,the project design and the preliminary design stage of the project is completed ,the launch of this project is expected to be in 2010.

[Titanium]

india is inetersted in the joint development with the russians of a fifth generation multirole combat aircraft ,they also have an indigenous project known as the mca,which is meant to utilise the lca design and technology and will incorporate a high degree of stealth and super cruise capability,the project design and the preliminary design stage of the project is completed ,the launch of this project is expected to be in 2010.

What? Technology I can understand, they will utiliaze the same LCA design for MCA? Great to know supercruise has been incorporated in the design stage itself, I hope kaveri live upto it.

[sidewinder2006]

What? Technology I can understand, they will utiliaze the same LCA design for MCA? Great to know supercruise has been incorporated in the design stage itself, I hope kaveri live upto it.

Design doesn't necessarily means the airframe design itself but it can also indicate various subsystems that go with it

[Jade]

india is inetersted in the joint development with the russians of a fifth generation multirole combat aircraft ,they also have an indigenous project known as the mca,which is meant to utilise the lca design and technology and will incorporate a high degree of stealth and super cruise capability,the project design and the preliminary design stage of the project is completed ,the launch of this project is expected to be in 2010.

You mean India has 2 combat aircraft's on the drawing board ?????

[aaaditya]

You mean India has 2 combat aircraft's on the drawing board ?????

india has only one aircraft(mca) on the drawing board ,the other one is the the russian,for which the indian airforce is finalising its specifications.

[aaaditya]

here is