Imported Single Engine Fighter Jet Contest

[roma]

(1) people seems to be afraid of the viper's reputation too much without rationalizing,
So why is that LCA is inferior to F-16 without any discussion.capability will decide the winner , not just reputations and legends.

(2) And even more important is the possibility of huge numbers of LCAs that can be deployed in IAf that can make a huge difference in any engagements making up for any small disparities between platforms.

i liked your full post above and have made two extracted point of it without changing the context ( i hope u agree )

I particularly like you point (1) - we should be swayed by "legends"

but i am also particularly worried about your (2) - the induction seems to be taking almost as long ( ) as the production .- why i that - especially if it is indeed such a solid aircraft - i mean seriously - not sarcastically

 

[p2prada]

We don't know even basic specs for LCA Mk2. Need to wait for information like fuel capacity and hardpoints before we can start discussing the pros and cons.

F-16 B60 is a medium class aircraft, LCA Mk2 is of a light class. So there will be big differences in range, payload, weapons load out etc.

Sensors capabilities should be very similar though, radar RWR etc. So, it really depends on the quality of the pilot and the missile if we are talking about air to air capability.

 

[manishhot]

Lca neither take on viper nor j10. If Lca is that good, why iaf is not retiring mig21. When the world is developing. 5th Geni. Fighter we are talking about 3rd Gen fighter like lca

 

[ersakthivel]

Lets not take claims by the ADA chief as hard facts please. He might be right, but it must be first proved in a verifiable manner. (Not to us, but to the IAF).


As regards your comment that the rcs of f16 has increased with induction of newer blocks, I tried but couldn't find a link to confirm your claim.

Finally about the rcs of tejas compensating for power difference of onboard radars..... For the APG80, the radar range is 110km+ for a 1m2 rcs target. It is very likely that the lca will have rcs around 1m2, that too in clean configuration.

I don't see any reason to doubt ADA's claim considering the RcS figure being talked about for much bigger RAFALE and eurofighter both of which employed the same RCS reduction method.

Rcs figure for Tejas being talked about is below 0.3 sq meter in clean config(some comparision with Mirage seems to be the basis of this claim), however there is no official confirmation of this

 

[ersakthivel]

i liked your full post above and have made two extracted point of it without changing the context ( i hope u agree )

I particularly like you point (1) - we should be swayed by "legends"

but i am also particularly worried about your (2) - the induction seems to be taking almost as long ( ) as the production .- why i that - especially if it is indeed such a solid aircraft - i mean seriously - not sarcastically

According to HAl chief a separate production line for tejas has been set up and the first serial production aircraft is about to join IAF in the third quarter of the current year. So 8 aircraft per year is the minimum production level and there need not be any undue suspicion on this count as tejas has already done it's IOC and all test pilots of Tejas are from IAF only.

If you still have any doubt ,according to A.MUTHANNA the new chief of NTSE from IAf ,"Tejas deserves to be in squadron service and it is a fine fighting machine".

And naval Tejas test pilot says the mk-2 upgrade is primarily meant for naval requirement due to the excessive weight required for landing gear and the much higher strengthening of the airframe to withstand the carrier landing.

As for as IAf is concerned the present mk-1 itself meets all it's needs.Any way since the Navy is going in for higher engined mk-2 IAf thought it prudent to have the excess engine capacity to cater for much higher specs that's why they are ordering mk-2s more in number.

Since IAf tejas MK-2s won't need those heavy landing gears and excessive strengthening of air frame to meet carrier landing ,So the excess engine thrust will lead to higher pay load and higher ITR, STR and TWR and top speed for IAf tejas mk-2.

SO even with IAF -Tejas mk-1 there is nothing basically wrong according to Naval test pilots views expressed to BR poster named KARTHIK in Aeroindia. You can see KUNAL's post in Tejas threads and follow the link to BR forum to read the whole inter view.

These are not my sooth sayong words. The above view is from Test pilots who have flown Tejas mk-1 for years.

Since PAF has F-16 by the time TEJAS entered design phase with ADA , IAF surely would have demanded an LCA with matching specs to take them on.

Also Mirages were present in IAf from the 80s. SO there is no way that IAf would have accepted a fighter from ADA with specs lower than both Mirage and F-16 in fighting performance, Range and payloads may be less for LCA, but flight profile should be close enough to both Mirage and F-16 if Tejas has any relevance in IAF.

All fly by wire fighters like RAFALE, TYPHOON have similar long gestation period and introduction by trnches, because the fly by wire software needs to be carefully evaluated for each particular flight profile. SO from full funding for two TDs in 1993 to IOC in 2013 is the norm for any fly by wire dynamically unstable fighter.
Even the Air Marshal Woolen who was the HAL chief in the 90s when Tejas was designed said that there is noway TEJAS is going to be inducted before 2010, considering the time frame of development for other fly by wire fighters abroad,

 

[Defcon 1]

According to an interview given by ADA chief LCA will have one of the lowest RCS for any non stealth fighter, It has been posted in TEJAS thread many times.And RCS reduction efforts were carried out at it's design phase itself.

But the F-16 has grown bigger from it's inroduction into service in 1970,with many upgrades and it's RCS would have increased as well

The F-16 has a bigger nose cone and radar than LCA, no arguments,
The more powerful radar of the viper vs the lesser Rcs of Tejas makes things somewhat equal is my assumption.

Ofcourse only when Tejas is deployed and all its specs are demonstrated to be accepted by others can we come to any meaningful conclusion.

Do you have anything to support your so called assumptions? How does lesser RCS equates powerful radar? Where in the world have you seen any fighter being built under the assumption that its smaller size will compensate for lesser power? Why are F15 and Su27 still the air superiority fighters of choice in spite of having RCS of an elephant? On an unrelated topic, Mig 21 also has much lesser RCS than Su30MKI? Does that make Mig21 our air superiority fighter of choice?

Apart from that, you forgot to talk about:
1. Role of F16 blk 60's RWR.
2. The probability that the falcon will choose to never switch on its radar.
3. Role of ECM
4. Better maneuverability of F16 will aid it in breaking the BVR lock.
5. When was meteor announced for LCA?

If lower RCS was all it takes, no one would be designing heavy fighters anymore. Both US and Russia closed down light fighter projects years ago. Light fighters like F16 and Mig29 were developed due to their performance in dogfights, not because they had lesser RCS.

 

[ersakthivel]

Do you have anything to support your so called assumptions? How does lesser RCS equates powerful radar? Where in the world have you seen any fighter being built under the assumption that its smaller size will compensate for lesser power? Why are F15 and Su27 still the air superiority fighters of choice in spite of having RCS of an elephant? On an unrelated topic, Mig 21 also has much lesser RCS than Su30MKI? Does that make Mig21 our air superiority fighter of choice?

Apart from that, you forgot to talk about:
1. Role of F16 blk 60's RWR.
2. The probability that the falcon will choose to never switch on its radar.
3. Role of ECM
4. Better maneuverability of F16 will aid it in breaking the BVR lock.
5. When was meteor announced for LCA?

If lower RCS was all it takes, no one would be designing heavy fighters anymore. Both US and Russia closed down light fighter projects years ago. Light fighters like F16 and Mig29 were developed due to their performance in dogfights, not because they had lesser RCS.

See it is just common sense,

The lower RCS fighter needs more powerful radar to detect it at the same range than a higher RCS fighter. If you have any doubts please contact some other experts and clarify whether I said is true or not?

WHY?

RCS is the cross sectional area displayed to the opposing fighter's Radar. When this area is less the opposing fighter needs to paint the same area with much more powerful beam than that of a higher RCS fighter.

So in theory the higher power RADAR of F-16 wont hold any advantage over lower powered asea radar of mk-2 because the Lower RCS tejas mk-2 will easily pick up the higher RCS F-16 at the same range even with less powerful Radar.

1. Role of F16 blk 60's RWR.
2. The probability that the falcon will choose to never switch on its radar.
3. Role of ECM
4. Better maneuverability of F16 will aid it in breaking the BVR lock.

Tejas too can use all the above points to it's advantage as the F-16 does. These things are same for both the fighters.

If lower RCS was all it takes, no one would be designing heavy fighters anymore. Both US and Russia closed down light fighter projects years ago. Light fighters like F16 and Mig29 were developed due to their performance in dogfights, not because they had lesser RCS.

All fighters regardless of heavy or light are designed with lower RCS these days.So according to you the lesser RCS of Mig-29 and F-16 have no combat relevance.
I don't think so. In the BVR era who gets seen first is more important is my humble opinion regardless of the fighter being heavy or light.

If you have any doubts go and read TOAN's post in many key publishing forums and why people are discussing RCS all the time.

 

[DivineHeretic]

I don't see any reason to doubt ADA's claim considering the RcS figure being talked about for much bigger RAFALE and eurofighter both of which employed the same RCS reduction method.

Rcs figure for Tejas being talked about is below 0.3 sq meter in clean config(some comparision with Mirage seems to be the basis of this claim), however there is no official confirmation of this

0.3m2 would be more than an ambitious figure for the LCA, escpecially when that for the PAK-FA is being touted to be 0.5 to 0.01m2. So the lca, being designed as a 4th gen aircraft, beat an aircraft designed for stealth,that too made by an organisation making its first aircraft? First time I heard that one.

And even if the LCS did have a clean rcs of 0.3m2, it wouldn't be used as as a missile would it? The munitions carried by it would easily take its rcs above 2m2, enough for the f16 to make 1st detection.

 

[ersakthivel]

0.3m2 would be more than an ambitious figure for the LCA, escpecially when that for the PAK-FA is being touted to be 0.5 to 0.01m2. So the lca, being designed as a 4th gen aircraft, beat an aircraft designed for stealth,that too made by an organisation making its first aircraft? First time I heard that one.

And even if the LCS did have a clean rcs of 0.3m2, it wouldn't be used as as a missile would it? The munitions carried by it would easily take its rcs above 2m2, enough for the f16 to make 1st detection.

What is the RCS of TYPHOON and RAFALE?

 

[Shirman]

Speaking of AESAs n looking at that Gorgeous IAI 2052 AESA meant for Hal Tejas n Jaguars displayed this aero india '13..... one thing is for sure Israeli stuff will be something 2 reckon for since the developers r the same who upgraded the F-16I Sufa.....For me I can't personally differentiate between UAE F-16 blk-60 n Israeli Sufas as they both look bloody same.....IF F-16 Blk 60 is against let say Tejas mk.1 with aesa n Mig-29 Upg interconnected with IAI made SDLs then Gentlemen we will have a true match..:thumb:

 

[ADITYA MAYUKH]

Its not only about planes its pilots skill and the condition in which it is filded.lca mk 2 will be filded in big nos. And will get awacs and mki or mig 29 support. It is the most smallest fighter in the world and this leads to low rcs of lca mk2 and with meator and mica missile it is going to be potent fighter

 

[Defcon 1]

See it is just common sense,

The lower RCS fighter needs more powerful radar to detect it at the same range than a higher RCS fighter.

I understand the role RCS plays in detection. What I am asking is how do you know that Tejas will detect F16 before itself being detected by F16? Have you calculated any detection ranges for them? If yes, post them, otherwise stop making such a stupid claim.

If you have any doubts please contact some other experts and clarify whether I said is true or not?

All the experts on this forum unanimously agree that you are a moron.

So in theory the higher power RADAR of F-16 wont hold any advantage over lower powered asea radar of mk-2 because the Lower RCS tejas mk-2 will easily pick up the higher RCS F-16 at the same range even with less powerful Radar.

How do you know that? Did you read it anywhere or performed any calculations yourself?

Tejas too can use all the above points to it's advantage as the F-16 does. These things are same for both the fighters.

No they are not. EW suite of blk 60 is one of the best around.

But not going into that. What i meant was, just detection and shooting isn't the game, there is no guarentee that the missile will hit the target. F16 is better in Missile CM than HAL Tejas.

I don't think so. In the BVR era who gets seen first is more important is my humble opinion regardless of the fighter being heavy or light.

Utter BS
BVR was available in the days F16 was designed. Why did its designers go for maneuverability over RCS then? Why did Russians sacrificed stealth for maneuverability in PAK FA?
why are fighters still made to be extra maneuverable? What is the significance of ITR and STR and Wing loading and TWR?

Also you didn't my other question, when was meteor announced for Tejas?

 

[pankaj nema]

We can match the LCA mk 2 against the UPGRADED Mig 29 and Mirage 2000 of the IAF
and get the answer

The expensive Mirage upgradation especially was justified as creating an equivalent of F 16 Block 60

 

[Shirman]

well guys i came out with some info which could end this debate with a single article.....
Here's the link :-
SINGAPORE: Lockheed Martin announces F-16V development

In the above article F-16V upgrade package offered 2 South Korea in 2012 edition of Singapore airshow clearly says that it is "equivalent" to F-16 Blk 60
quote "During a presentation at the Singapore Airshow, Standridge noted that most legacy F-16s can be upgraded to the F-16V standard, which is roughly equivalent to the F-16 Block 60." un quote......

also @ pankaj nema Sir mirage-2000-5Mk2 upgrades n Mig-29 Upgs r more in the catagory of F-16 Blk-50 respectively.....

 

[pankaj nema]

well guys i came out with some info which could end this debate with a single article.....
Here's the link :-
SINGAPORE: Lockheed Martin announces F-16V development

In the above article F-16V upgrade package offered 2 South Korea in 2012 edition of Singapore airshow clearly says that it is "equivalent" to F-16 Blk 60
quote "During a presentation at the Singapore Airshow, Standridge noted that most legacy F-16s can be upgraded to the F-16V standard, which is roughly equivalent to the F-16 Block 60." un quote......

also @ pankaj nema Sir mirage-2000-5Mk2 upgrades n Mig-29 Upgs r more in the catagory of F-16 Blk-50 respectively.....

IAF's Mirage-2000 upgrade: A bitter pill to swallow | Angle of Attack | Defence Aviation

Here it is clearly written that Mirage upgraded aircraft will be equal to F16 block 60

 

[DivineHeretic]

We can match the LCA mk 2 against the UPGRADED Mig 29 and Mirage 2000 of the IAF
and get the answer

The expensive Mirage upgradation especially was justified as creating an equivalent of F 16 Block 60

Correct but dont expect the comparison before 2015-17, when the mk2 should enter service.

The IAF will have the mig29 UPG and the Mirage as the equivalents of the block50-52, totalling among them 107 aircraft (hoping no more crashes in meantime), almost 3 times the number of f16 b52s with pak or 1.5 times the number of j10b+f16 b52 available with them.

And thats the cutting edge of their fleet, JF17 block 1, and indeed block2, by their own admission, is as capable as the f16 c/d currently, and with no available funds for development of block3, future is not so bright.

 

[pankaj nema]

IAF Mirage UPG will have the following goodies which will make it
the most advanced Mirage 2000 ever developed even more advanced than the UAE Mirage 2000-9.

1) India will have the ICMS mk4 EW suite even more advanced than the UAE and the greek and which was already regarded as very effective.

2) It will also have the RDY-3 which is improved radar compared to UAE and greek mirages.

3) Last but not least it will share the same MDPU (processor) than with the rafale and many common electronic subsystems. (a feature common to UAE mirage 2000-9)

 

[Shirman]

Yes so i wanted 2 continue in my earlier post that Tejas Mk.2 with Aesa n all mentioned configuration will be in blk-60 range....

@pankaj nema sir thanks for that post i was referring 2 the U.A.E. competition held in 1999 in which F-16 Blk 60 was in competition with EF-2000 aka later called as Typhoon n rafale respectively......in which blk-60 won........

 

[DivineHeretic]

Double post

 

[Defcon 1]

Correct but dont expect the comparison before 2015-17, when the mk2 should enter service.

The IAF will have the mig29 UPG and the Mirage as the equivalents of the block50-52, totalling among them 107 aircraft (hoping no more crashes in meantime), almost 3 times the number of f16 b52s with pak or 1.5 times the number of j10b+f16 b52 available with them.

And thats the cutting edge of their fleet, JF17 block 1, and indeed block2, by their own admission, is as capable as the f16 c/d currently, and with no available funds for development of block3, future is not so bright.

Number of blk 52 originally available with pakistan was 18. Soon all of their F16s will be upgraded to this standard. So by 2015-17, they will have over 60 F16 Blk 52. J10 deal is in dire straits, due to budget constraints, possibly J10s will be not brought at all and pakistan will wait for J21