ADA Tejas (LCA) News and Discussions

[p2prada]

And people ranting about the sustained angle of attack of Gripen to be greater than 20 deg...you must think again I did my research and it shows that the sustained AoA is 20.4 deg/second and 30 deg/sec instantaneous.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/row/gripen.htm

Satish ji, if you are talking about me then Gripen's AoA is over 50degrees. F-22 does 60degrees, SH at 45degrees, MKIs and Mig35s AoA is 180degrees.

The figures you have given for are not enabled by lift. Whenever lift coefficient exceeds the magical figure of 1, the aircraft nose starts pitching up. After a certain point the lift coefficient stabilizes and the aircraft goes out of control. This point is the highest possible Angle of Attack(AoA). The LCA's FOC model will give it 24degrees with active fly by wire. Mirage-2000's AoA is 26degrees and the other models are as given above. M2000 exceeds 35 degrees without fly by wire.

The figures you mentioned are sustained and instantaneous turn rates. They are calculated along a horizontal plane while Angle of Attack is calculated along a vertical plane. Look at the units, turn rates are measured in deg/second while AoA is only degrees.

@Nitesh

http://livefist.blogspot.com/2010/12/lca-navy-not-what-we-want-but-its-ours.html

These are actual quotes;

It may not be what we want, but it is our own aircraft," says the Indian Navy's Flag Officer Naval Aviation (FONA) Rear Admiral Sudhir Pillai

 

[p2prada]

@Vijay

Development of LCA as a plane itself is very important to India. This is our first step in one of the hardest possible engineering fields, Aeronautics. So, LCA Mk2 will take 4 or 5 years more before it flies and a few more before it becomes fully operational. LCA Mk1, Mk2 and then FGFA and AMCA will give us a very good grip on designing aircraft for the future, so these projects must not be stopped at any rate.

AMCA is indeed far away, but this will be our first step towards 5ht and perhaps 6th generation technology and entering the big league. Until then these small steps are enough.

For the next 10 years the IAF will be preoccupied with MKI as well as MRCA. That's nearly 500 aircraft along with Mirage-2000 and Mig-29smt. So, there is nothing for us to fear about. It's what comes after that counts. After 2020, ADA and HAL may have grasped enough in aircraft design and manufacturing to enter the big league and deliver anything IAF requires.

I don't care about wasting tax payers money as long as it is independent and does not interfere with the operational preparedness of the services.

 

[p2prada]

2% of tax payers and 60% of people who cannot make 2 ends meet care. Inducting mark 1 interferes with operational preparedness of the airforce. It takes away force personnel and resources not to mention a bid chunk of IAF budget. I say stop this mindless doctrine and start work on Mark 2 right now and get it going by end of 2012.

That's too much of a jump without having the LCA Mk1 reach FOC. LCA still needs to integrate avionics and other systems. LCA may be late, very late, but IAF has its hands full with MRCA and MKI. So, I have no issues. My only problem is the ordering of a second MK1 squadron and the ACM's clear remarks and body language.

 

[vijay jagannathan]

That's too much of a jump without having the LCA Mk1 reach FOC. LCA still needs to integrate avionics and other systems. LCA may be late, very late, but IAF has its hands full with MRCA and MKI. So, I have no issues. My only problem is the ordering of a second MK1 squadron and the ACM's clear remarks and body language.

If this ACM or any ACM had a singular say in this matter they would have clapped their hands but would have laughed at the prospect of inducting Mark 1. It does not meet most basic airstaff requirements of thrust. The body language signifies exterme disinterest and perhaps contempt eminating from his inability to do much to stop a sub par platform from being inducted. What a sad fate! I say don't make the IAF accept mark 1 when they don't want it. Sit and work on mark 2 from today and get it up by 2012.

 

[SATISH]

Satish ji, if you are talking about me then Gripen's AoA is over 50degrees. F-22 does 60degrees, SH at 45degrees, MKIs and Mig35s AoA is 180degrees.

The figures you have given for are not enabled by lift. Whenever lift coefficient exceeds the magical figure of 1, the aircraft nose starts pitching up. After a certain point the lift coefficient stabilizes and the aircraft goes out of control. This point is the highest possible Angle of Attack(AoA). The LCA's FOC model will give it 24degrees with active fly by wire. Mirage-2000's AoA is 26degrees and the other models are as given above. M2000 exceeds 35 degrees without fly by wire.

The figures you mentioned are sustained and instantaneous turn rates. They are calculated along a horizontal plane while Angle of Attack is calculated along a vertical plane. Look at the units, turn rates are measured in deg/second while AoA is only degrees.

@Nitesh

http://livefist.blogspot.com/2010/12/lca-navy-not-what-we-want-but-its-ours.html

These are actual quotes;

Can you give me the source of AoA I kinda find it hard to search for Gripen. Actually There is another way of achieving it...that is by shifting the CG of the aircraft towards the tail. Thus helping the Aircraft to Pitch up. This is compensated by the Canards. But even with high AoA the delta does not get into a turning fight as it will be suicidal. The main mission profile of LCA is point defence which is based on hit and run.

Well P2P you must actually read what the navy chief meant...he told that he would like to have developed a Rafale in the first go...but as it was not possible the LCA was developed. In fact the LCA will give the CBG nice flexibility.

 

[nitesh]

Guys I have seen the AoA figures of different planes. but mostly brochure figures, does any body has reference to what is the operational AoA actually used in the plane. Correct me if I am wrong but F 18 has AoA of 45 degree but it is not allowed to do in operational planes (I don't remember the exact number but I guess it is 24 degree)

 

[Kunal Biswas]

 

[p2prada]

Can you give me the source of AoA I kinda find it hard to search for Gripen. Actually There is another way of achieving it...that is by shifting the CG of the aircraft towards the tail. Thus helping the Aircraft to Pitch up. This is compensated by the Canards. But even with high AoA the delta does not get into a turning fight as it will be suicidal. The main mission profile of LCA is point defence which is based on hit and run.

Yes. LCA's main profile would be hit and run. That tactic would have been good in the 80s and 90s but with strike aircraft getting capabilities in inflicting huge damage, it no longer applies. The F-35 is also meant for hit and run, but they ran back to the drawing board to fit a gun in. Some one was talking about making massive changes to the current models F-35 after 2012(rumours).

Even I tried looking for Gripen AoA but it was a pilot's post I remember from 4 or 5 years ago. It's not official but it will do. The figures are for fly by wire turned off.

There are many forums with real pilots in them, speak to them, they rate Mirage-2000's dog fighting capabilities highly. The Rafale and EF-2000 with Delta are even highly rated. The Delta EF-2000 is said to be the best 4.5th generation non TVC equipped dog fighter today.

During Cope India 2004 it wasn't the Su-30k that did well against the F-15s, it was the Mirage-2000 in dog fights.

Well P2P you must actually read what the navy chief meant...he told that he would like to have developed a Rafale in the first go...but as it was not possible the LCA was developed. In fact the LCA will give the CBG nice flexibility.

He clearly says the LCA is not what they want. It is very very clear. Look at the very first sentence.

"It may not be what we want,"

There is no hidden meaning in that. A Crystal Clear statement.

Guys I have seen the AoA figures of different planes. but mostly brochure figures, does any body has reference to what is the operational AoA actually used in the plane. Correct me if I am wrong but F 18 has AoA of 45 degree but it is not allowed to do in operational planes (I don't remember the exact number but I guess it is 24 degree)

The other way round. The fly by wire stops the plane from pitching too high and is restricted to between 22 degrees and 28 degrees. But pilots can manually override the FBW to achieve extremely high AoA during turning fights. The Mirage-2000 handles greater than 35degrees/second turn rates during such times and have roll rates of 270deg/second at 11G. With more powerful engines and lighter bodies like Gripen the figures are higher(except Gs). The LCAs figures are unknown but are said to be lower.

I really hope LCA Mk2 comes with figures that matches or exceeds other fighters. If Mk2 matches Gripen then we have a hell of a deal.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

 

[gogbot]

Is't this LCA navy ?

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Yes..



............................................

 

[shaka]

^^^ Its a photoshop. original

 

[black eagle]

FAKE:

Original:

 

[SATISH]

Yes. LCA's main profile would be hit and run. That tactic would have been good in the 80s and 90s but with strike aircraft getting capabilities in inflicting huge damage, it no longer applies. The F-35 is also meant for hit and run, but they ran back to the drawing board to fit a gun in. Some one was talking about making massive changes to the current models F-35 after 2012(rumours).

Even I tried looking for Gripen AoA but it was a pilot's post I remember from 4 or 5 years ago. It's not official but it will do. The figures are for fly by wire turned off.

There are many forums with real pilots in them, speak to them, they rate Mirage-2000's dog fighting capabilities highly. The Rafale and EF-2000 with Delta are even highly rated. The Delta EF-2000 is said to be the best 4.5th generation non TVC equipped dog fighter today.

During Cope India 2004 it wasn't the Su-30k that did well against the F-15s, it was the Mirage-2000 in dog fights.



He clearly says the LCA is not what they want. It is very very clear. Look at the very first sentence.

"It may not be what we want,"

There is no hidden meaning in that. A Crystal Clear statement.



The other way round. The fly by wire stops the plane from pitching too high and is restricted to between 22 degrees and 28 degrees. But pilots can manually override the FBW to achieve extremely high AoA during turning fights. The Mirage-2000 handles greater than 35degrees/second turn rates during such times and have roll rates of 270deg/second at 11G. With more powerful engines and lighter bodies like Gripen the figures are higher(except Gs). The LCAs figures are unknown but are said to be lower.

I really hope LCA Mk2 comes with figures that matches or exceeds other fighters. If Mk2 matches Gripen then we have a hell of a deal.

Well I was there in F 16.net for a brief period and the Viper pilots claim that the F 16s have smaller turning radius but the Mirage 2000 has a better climb performance and a decent turn radius. When you see the F 16 vs the Mirage 2000 battle over the Aegean sea the Mirage 2000 managed to score a kill on the F 16 not in the horizontal plane but during the dive.

I am saying that the LCA MK1 is not the aircraft that the air force wants but all these will be fixed in MK2. I am certain about it because of the heavier GE 414 shifting the CG of the aircraft towards the tail making it tail heavy and hence making it achieve better Vmax. It is all based on the engine right now. The LERX will be mandatory in the MK2 version so as to stop the aircraft from pitching easily and drooping the nose also helps more in both visibility and flight characteristics.

He meant to say that We cant develop something like the Rafale in the beginning but this LCA will be a starting point for the Naval aviation fighters which are Indigenous.

 

[p2prada]

Well I was there in F 16.net for a brief period and the Viper pilots claim that the F 16s have smaller turning radius but the Mirage 2000 has a better climb performance and a decent turn radius. When you see the F 16 vs the Mirage 2000 battle over the Aegean sea the Mirage 2000 managed to score a kill on the F 16 not in the horizontal plane but during the dive.

Mirage-2000 is dead and gone. Look at the newer delta wings. EF without the Canards is said to have a sustained turn rate over 23deg/second compared to F-16s 21deg/sec. Gripen is a newer delta wing and LCA too. So, LCA is expected to match Gripen, not be inferior to Mirage-2000.

I am saying that the LCA MK1 is not the aircraft that the air force wants but all these will be fixed in MK2. I am certain about it because of the heavier GE 414 shifting the CG of the aircraft towards the tail making it tail heavy and hence making it achieve better Vmax. It is all based on the engine right now. The LERX will be mandatory in the MK2 version so as to stop the aircraft from pitching easily and drooping the nose also helps more in both visibility and flight characteristics.

Yes. I am sure Mk2 will make a better platform. My problem isn't Mk2, my problem is the extra 20 fighters we are going to induct for Mk1.

He meant to say that We cant develop something like the Rafale in the beginning but this LCA will be a starting point for the Naval aviation fighters which are Indigenous.

If LCA wasn't indigenous then IN wouldn't even have looked at the fighter.

Simply because LCA is indigenous, logic takes back seat. But, IN is not meant to win wars, so it's safe for them to experiment.

 

[p2prada]

Look at Saab,

They made their first turbojet in 1947 called the Saab 21R. The first production series was retired in 1953 and the second in 1956. Only 50 were built and it saw only 6 years of service. This was their first aircraft in the jet age. Do you see the Swedes jumping up and down with anger because of that? No.

It was their first attempt, it sucked and they made it walk the plank. They were making fighters for WAR not for show and tell.

But here we are with the LCA Mk1, inducting 2 whole squadrons of junk even if the air force does not want it. The swedes inducted 50 only because of the precarious times after building an aircraft that was right in the forefront of the jet age. Their most advanced aircraft was junked without a second thought because they knew it cannot win. Here, we are re-inventing the wheel and forcing it down on an air force which is already inducting aircraft generations ahead of the LCA.

The Swedes then quickly built up on the experience and designed their first proper jet aircraft the Saab 29. Over 600 were built and saw service for 25 years. That's what I want us to do.

Blinded Patriotism cannot beat Cold, Hard Facts.

 

[shaka]

Simply because LCA is indigenous, logic takes back seat.

It is indigenous, thats most "logical" thing to do.

IAF has to support LCA and make it a better fighter according to their needs instead of hair-splitting, otherwise India will be stuck in this cycle of importing and relying on good will of foreign powers in terms of fighter aircraft.

I think now India has reached a certain stage, where another organization can be opened (PSU or private) which competes with DRDO. and there should be a law where armed forces have to buy certain percentage of their equipment in India.

 

[SATISH]

Mirage-2000 is dead and gone. Look at the newer delta wings. EF without the Canards is said to have a sustained turn rate over 23deg/second compared to F-16s 21deg/sec. Gripen is a newer delta wing and LCA too. So, LCA is expected to match Gripen, not be inferior to Mirage-2000.



Yes. I am sure Mk2 will make a better platform. My problem isn't Mk2, my problem is the extra 20 fighters we are going to induct for Mk1.



If LCA wasn't indigenous then IN wouldn't even have looked at the fighter.

Simply because LCA is indigenous, logic takes back seat. But, IN is not meant to win wars, so it's safe for them to experiment.

Te extra 20 aircrafts are for the immediate gap fillers for the fast retiring MiG 21s. and having 2 squadrons helps in familiarizing more pilots for the LCA. There is not going to be any drastic changes in the cockpit of the LCA MK1 and MK2 and this helps in pilot orientation and training.

IN is also supposed to win wars. I dont agree with your logic of "IN is not meant to win wars".

 

[shaka]

forcing it down on an air force which is already inducting aircraft generations ahead of the LCA.

Thats strange I think it is not forced. It will be forced if MRCA is cancelled for LCA MK2.

You cant compare Sweden with India, different geo-politics, different threats, different culture etc. etc. etc. India has to do what is best for India.

 

[vijay jagannathan]

Thanks Kunal. definitely looks good. The testing of the N-LCA however hasn't been reported in depth unlike its brother though there are some differnces in the specifications. I wonder why. And I hope this design is adopted for the Af-Lca. If not anything at least it looks good.