@ersakthivel
For Tejas to attract the " public " attention and attain public confidence ; will be a long and tedious affair
At least five more years till IAF deploys Tejas MK 1 at a frontline base ; Sulur is not a frontline air base
By the way even BR people have lost interest in Tejas MK 1 ; they are also waiting for MK 1A
"All the so called drag for not following Whitcomb's rule more rigidly comes into play only in super sonic flight regime, not in subsonic flight regime of WVR combat speeds.
So no drag issues here also."
This is Indranil Roy's comment at BR about CEMILAC report.
SO area rule of Whitcomb has no relationship with STR, ITR, AOA, max Gs etc,
Indranil ROy is a very credible authentic source,
Not like our forum Eggspurts,
So rest assured, that there is no confidence issues on tejas,
indian hot & humid weather conditions sap significant wing lift & engine thrust from ISDA conditions(for which MNC fighters give their specs)
Add to that during flutter tests in Goa tejas had 400 Kg of flight testing equipment still on board
Effective combat range with effective weapon load will depend upon the criteria called fuel fraction, i.e weight of internal fuel/empty operational weight of the fighter.
In this area even tejas mk1 better than gripen C.
Then a question arises why range of tejas was often quoted less, it may be due to the reason that new super sonic center line fuel tank was not validated till IOC-2, Even without that The press information beruau release clearly stated that the combat radius of tejas is 500 Km.
But other fighter makers give misleading combat range figures with minimum weapon config and high altitude(less fuel consuming flight path) with no allocation for close combat and AB thrust and low penetration mode.
Roughly the fuel fraction above will give us effective combat utilization of the fighter.
Su-30MK: 34.9%（Empty weight: 17,700 kg，Internal fuel: 9,500 kg）
Rafale: 31.4% ~ 33.6%（Empty weight: 9,500 ~ 10,220 kg，Internal fuel: 4,680 ~ 4,800 kg）
JAS-39NG: 30.6%（Empty weight: 7,100 kg，Internal fuel: 3,130 kg）
MIG-35: 28.6%（Empty weight: 12,000 kg，Internal fuel: 4,800 kg）
Tejas: 27.0%（Empty weight: 6,500 kg，Internal fuel: 2,400 kg）
JF-17: 26.3%（Empty weight: 6,450 kg，Internal fuel: 2,300 kg）
JAS-39C: 25.0%（Empty weight: 6,800 kg，Internal fuel: 2,268 kg）
This is a fair comparison of fuel fractions with just internal fuel , and the same percentage will more or less reflect with external fuels also,
So Tejas mk-1(which still has 400 KG of flight test equipment on board, removal of them will lead to even better fuel fraction) itself has much better fuel fractions than grippen C/D with more TW ratio and lower wing loading,
There are many "
AERODYNAMIC EGGSPURTS WHO SCHOOL IN THE "AERODYNAMIC OF con art", WHICH EXPOUNDS A SIMPLE RULE, THAT WING LOADING IS INSIGNIFICANT STUFF
bELOW IS THE GREEK AIRFORCE PILOT COMMENTS WHICH WILL LEAVE YOU IN NO DOUBT ABOUT WHAT WING LOADING IS & WHY LOW WING LOADING DELTAS RULE.
Remeber tejas mk1 itself has lower wing loading than Mirage 2000 & better TWR than mirage 2000,
http://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1872
"As far as the M2000 vs F-16 comparison is concerned, I should add something totally practical which comes from daily usage of both types in HAF. What I want to say is generally that when a HAF M2000 wants to engage a Viper, it leads the Viper at low altitude where the M2000 connot be beaten in any way.
I haven't seen yet any aircraft-apart from Su-27 family,which is, for me, the best aircraft ever built-that can achieve "Kill Hour" on a M2000 below 6-7,000 ft no matter the aspect between them.
Ok? I have nothing else to add,as Fantasma337 -ask him about F-4E, I think no one else knows more about this aircraft- and the other Greek friends covered me and gave you a very clear picture about the M2000.
PS: I should mention that this is not a thread talking about HAF and TuAF or Greeks' and Turks' politics.
I served in an M2K fighter squadron in HAF. We analyzed tactics and combat scores against HAF F-16 squadrons all the time.
The M2Ks higher INSTANTANEOUS turn rate gives it an advantage during the first pass. The F-16 cannot outturn the Mirage. It has to climb in hopes of avoiding the lock.
A good M2K pilot will end it right there (the Magic 2 is a better IR weapon than the AIM-9L/M).
THIS IS DUE TO LOWER WING LOADING RSS delta airframe of Mirage 2000, even though higher wing loading F16 enjoys thrust to weight ratio advantage over Mirage 2000
A rookie in the M2K, however, will probably lose the F-16's climb. The more powerful viper will escape and will then gain the advantage because of 1) Altitude 2) Higher SUSTAINABLE turn rate.
As for turn rates, altitude differences are purely theoretical and in practice make no difference EXCEPT for sea level manuevers where the more powerful Viper starts gaining the advantage.
Would you agree with the statement that F-16 is a better choice for multi role missions than Mirage 2000 ?
ALL FIGHTER MAKES GIVE THEIR STR, ITR, AOA MAX g SPECS AT SEA LEVEL ISDA CONDITIONS,
Absolutely. The M2K is a multi-role fighter also, but its performance varies greatly among roles - whereas the Viper performs almost all missions at a very satisfactory level.
HAF M2Ks are specialized. 331's (where I served) primary role is now TASMO (naval strike with AM-39 Exocet) and 332's primary role will become Deep Strike (with SCALP EG). CAP & Air Supremacy are their secondary roles.
The F-16 sqdns OTOH undertake a number of roles such as SEAD, CAP, CAS, and numerous specialized strike missions (enemy AFBs, enemy C&C centers etc). The Viper is a much more volatile weapons system".
http://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=30&t=1872&sid=9792b3c0fa2ea774a3b775e8d457200d&start=30
"Read an article in the magazine "Illustrated Aircraft" from March 2005 where a HAF MIRA 330 squadron commander states the following:
"I'm very satisfied with the F-16 - in fact, I love it. In particular I love the Block 30."
He also states about the Mirage 2000 used mainly for Air to Air:
"It's an effective fighter, which the f-16 can't beat in a dogfight."
He ends by saying:
"The F-16 is much better multi-roll combat jet... it really is the complete package..."
To me this captures it in a nutshell."
