ADA Tejas (LCA) News and Discussions

[icecoolben]

The ej200 is a smaller, lighter, good thrust to weight ratio 9.8:1, technologically advanced with features like singe-crystal blades and 3-d thrust vectoring capability, one that is specified in the proposal . It is a relatively new technology and hence has the potential to improve mani-fold, while the ge engine may be more powerful, matches thrust to weight, cheaper spare compatable with mk-1 tejas engine. But is bigger, heavier, and without 3-d thrust vectoring. Both are proven engines. When the tejas requires an engine upgrade after 20 years of service, the ej200 would be in a better position to provide a more powerful engine than ge. In term of long term prospects, the ej200 beats f414.

 

[natarajan]

Never trust the Americans........... It does'nt matter if the fighter has a bit lesser thrust but atleast it wont have any bugs ........I say we need to go for European engine which is being offered with 3D TVC as well..

yes,this cunning fellows may design in such a manner so that it will switch off when we enter pakistan territory or when it fires a a2a missile on pakist a/c(

 

[icecoolben]

That is the most dumb thing i've ever heard.

 

[natarajan]

oh dont take it in serious manner just to convey that americans cannot be trusted and example is one of the vip aircraft in china bought from usa has some bugs and they found it(i think someone can put that article here:blum3

 

[icecoolben]

US laws are the constrain

The most important, But what the united states would certainly be unwilling to part off would be source codes for radar configuration. Hope we get that in tot, as it would compromise mission secrecy and operational preparedness. I don't have anything against american engines, but in the process of buying v should be able to learn as well about engine integration, control system functioning etc. But the US laws forbid there companies to offer them. So i say v would rather prefer the ej200 engine.

 

[Pintu]

GE F414 which powers F/A-18 , is a afterburning turbofan engine , in view of the context of the report aforementioned , I would like to shade some information of GE F414 with help from Wikipedia:

GE F414 (Image : Wikipedia)

General characteristics

* Type: Afterburning turbofan
* Length: 154 in (3,912 mm)
* Diameter: 35 in (889 mm)

Components

* Compressor: Axial compressor with 3 fan and 7 compressor stages
* Turbine: 1 low-pressure and 1 high-pressure stage

Performance

* Maximum Thrust: 22,000 lbf (98 kN)
* Overall pressure ratio: 30:1

(Source : Wikipedia)

 

[Dark Sorrow]

The ej200 is a smaller, lighter, good thrust to weight ratio 9.8:1, technologically advanced with features like singe-crystal blades and 3-d thrust vectoring capability, one that is specified in the proposal . It is a relatively new technology and hence has the potential to improve mani-fold, while the ge engine may be more powerful, matches thrust to weight, cheaper spare compatable with mk-1 tejas engine. But is bigger, heavier, and without 3-d thrust vectoring. Both are proven engines.

TV nozzles were supposed to be developed by DRDO for Tejas.

When the tejas requires an engine upgrade after 20 years of service, the ej200 would be in a better position to provide a more powerful engine than ge. In term of long term prospects, the ej200 beats f414.

This re-engine contest is just an interm option untill Kaveri is not operational.

 

[anoop_mig25]

LM prime help was needed for Fly-by-Wire control laws, aircraft skin and equiptment integration. By the time the sanction were lifted all this jobs were done.
Remaining problem like Afterburing turbofan engine, Multi-Mode Radar and to some extent IRST can't be solved by LM. Their are seperate companies for each item eg Genral Electric for engine, Northrop Grumnen for radar,etc.
Ada is right in issuing tenders to complete the project.

i totally agree with drak sarrow on this

 

[nitesh]

read full
“I hope she’ll last 30 years and more”

We’re very hopeful that if not at the beginning of the IAC, it should come through a couple of years later. Obviously, it’ll not be ready at the start of the IAC, which we hope will embark the MiG-29 K. In fact, we’ve planned a mix of both the aircraft for the IAC as each has a definitive role to play. As for the LCA programme, the Navy has thrown its weight behind it from the beginning. I was personally responsible for the programme not being dumped midway. I had stated on file that the Navy would like to have this kind of an aircraft. What had initially begun as a naval project turned out to be an Air Force affair along the course.

The naval variant would be quite different from the land variant, with a strong undercarriage, more thrust, an arrester hook, and the like. There would be a droop in the cockpit for enhanced visibility during landing on carrier deck. The Air Force trainer version [two-seater] will take off from the naval version, as both will have lots in common.

 

[Dark Sorrow]

But hasn't it taken way too long already. There has been something fundamentally wrong with our approach toward tejas.

Problem with Kaveri is that our metallurgy sucks, on the other hand american have the best metallurgy. Amount of reasearch done in US universities is more than the total research done rest of world. American are leaders in micro-processors based system giving them an edge. We have started to build planes now while american make form 1904.
The thing is we are still in learning phase. We started from 0 and directly went to build a 4.5 genertaion plane on the other hand americans have made thousands of plane before making a F-16.
Last but not the least most of western countries and russian spent billions of dolars in military R&D during cold war like mad people and are now benefiting from that.

 

[ppgj]

the fact that tejas is a reality with fair amount of inhouse avionics is an acievement cosidering we started from zero.it would be nice to have our own kaveri and mmr on it. but even gripen flies with american engine and they are asking selex for radar!!

 

[ppgj]

p2p a question to you.may be a novice one so you may excuse.
US has many awacs platforms still have growlers.obvious that there is a need.
india needs many awacs but has only one presently.though they may come over many years from now.i know su 30mki partly do that
why can't LCA's be converted to mini growlers which can escort the strike missions?also because of
its size and build will have a small RCS.any thoughts?

 

[p2prada]

p2p a question to you.may be a novice one so you may excuse.
US has many awacs platforms still have growlers.obvious that there is a need.
india needs many awacs but has only one presently.though they may come over many years from now.i know su 30mki partly do that
why can't LCA's be converted to mini growlers which can escort the strike missions?also because of
its size and build will have a small RCS.any thoughts?

The Growlers used have 2 engines and the jammers used will need atleast 50KW for power. The LCA is single engined and can generate only about 15KW of power as compared to 75KW on the Growler. The LCA also has a very small range and payload which are also a major drawback.

The MKI can be turned into a Growler. But, I doubt the IAF or IN may invest in such a venture. We may go for a Gulfstream or Embraer platform for EW attack, maybe in the future. Our avionics R&D is not as mature as required.

You can bet we will have an EW version of the PAKFA or FGFA in the future.

Edit: AWACS are not capable of electronic Attack. They don't carry any EW equipment as of now except for ESM(support measures like protection from infrared missiles) and SIGINT(signal intelligence).

 

[BLACK_COBRA]

Some Pakistani Sites Claim that Their JF-17 is better than our LCA tejas. can somebody answer the question.
Do we realy have technological edge over JF-17 OR Is LCA is better than JF-17???

 

[SATISH]

Originally posted by nitesh

We’re very hopeful that if not at the beginning of the IAC, it should come through a couple of years later. Obviously, it’ll not be ready at the start of the IAC, which we hope will embark the MiG-29 K. In fact, we’ve planned a mix of both the aircraft for the IAC as each has a definitive role to play. As for the LCA programme, the Navy has thrown its weight behind it from the beginning. I was personally responsible for the programme not being dumped midway. I had stated on file that the Navy would like to have this kind of an aircraft. What had initially begun as a naval project turned out to be an Air Force affair along the course.

The naval variant would be quite different from the land variant, with a strong undercarriage, more thrust, an arrester hook, and the like. There would be a droop in the cockpit for enhanced visibility during landing on carrier deck. The Air Force trainer version [two-seater] will take off from the naval version, as both will have lots in common.

Then is the two seat version actually a naval one?

 

[ppgj]

Some Pakistani Sites Claim that Their JF-17 is better than our LCA tejas. can somebody answer the question.
Do we realy have technological edge over JF-17 OR Is LCA is better than JF-17???

check this video-
domain-b.com : Indian business : Videos : Aviation & aerospace videos
i don't think jf-17 is anyway near.

 

[Dark Sorrow]

Some Pakistani Sites Claim that Their JF-17 is better than our LCA tejas. can somebody answer the question.
Do we realy have technological edge over JF-17 OR Is LCA is better than JF-17???

LCA has better flight control laws compaired to JF-17, LCA uses quadruplex flght control laws i.e. for both pitch and yaw axis while the JF-17 use flight control law for yaw axis.
JF-17 is said to have sensor fusion(data fusion) a capability. Any such capability in Tejas is currently unknown.
JF-17 uses C++ as the programming language so that they could use commercially aviable software while LCA uses a subset of Ada language. Ada is used as the programming language for aerospace. application.
Landing gear for LCA was indiginously developed. After doing so india became the sixth country to achieved the technology.
Link
Mayavi EW suite is jointly developed by india and isreal. Once developed Mayavi would be the standard EW Suite for InAF and IsAF. Isreal would use it in their F-35 and india will use it in LCA, MCA, FGFA(citation needed). I expect it to be Mayavi EW suite to be better compaired to that of JF-17.
Not much information is about multi-mode radar and KLJ-10 radar so i would not comment on them.
Many technologies for LCA are developed inhouse thus india benifited from them but same can't said for Pakistan in case JF-17.

 

[BLACK_COBRA]

Answer seems sound...

But Why this project was too much delayed??
Due to our politicians or low political will-power??
Sanctioned imposed after nuclear test??
Technical reasons ??

Pakistan claims to complete this project within 4 years..

Any comment...

 

[nitesh]

Answer seems sound...

But Why this project was too much delayed??
Due to our politicians or low political will-power??
Sanctioned imposed after nuclear test??
Technical reasons ??

Pakistan claims to complete this project within 4 years..

Any comment...

Go through the thread first and I suggest you read the book "The Tejas Story" by retd Air Marshal Mr. Rajkumar to understand the issues

 

[Sabir]

Some Pakistani Sites Claim that Their JF-17 is better than our LCA tejas. can somebody answer the question.
Do we realy have technological edge over JF-17 OR Is LCA is better than JF-17???

You are worried about Pakistani claim that J-17 is better than our LCA-Tejas. One small fact for you.....J-17 is not build by Pakistan alone. It's a China-Pak joint venture. Surprisingly China has no plan to induct these aircrafts in their Air-force. Why? Simply because these cheap air-crafts are meant to export to third world countries and not capable enough to be inducted in PLAAF.