ADA Tejas (LCA) News and Discussions

Which role suits LCA 'Tejas' more than others from following options?

  • Interceptor-Defend Skies from Intruders.

    Votes: 342 51.3%
  • Airsuperiority-Complete control of the skies.

    Votes: 17 2.5%
  • Strike-Attack deep into enemy zone.

    Votes: 24 3.6%
  • Multirole-Perform multiple roles.

    Votes: 284 42.6%

  • Total voters
    667
Status
Not open for further replies.

pankaj nema

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2009
Messages
10,308
Likes
38,743
Country flag
Re: Lack of Improvised Ideas regarding LCA program..

Russia was ALREADY helping India very liberally in the Cold war with ALL
types of defence equipment and that too at friendship prices

And licence production was also allowed by them

SInce the Russians were already so kind to us I dont think they would have
helped us at all with our LCA programme
 

Kunal Biswas

Member of the Year 2011
Ambassador
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
31,122
Likes
41,041
Re: Lack of Improvised Ideas regarding LCA program..

Kunal Sir

Forget about RD 33 series 3 engine which powers our Mig 29 even
AL 31 was rejected by IAF/ DRDO /ADA
RD-33-3 was not available back those days, And AL-31 is not for a light fighter..

A Single RD-33 was light enough to power a LCA its thrust to power ratio is good enough..

SInce the Russians were already so kind to us I dont think they would have
helped us at all with our LCA programme
I dont think they would have cause problem for engine and radar..

Keeping in mind about good relations..
 

balai_c

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2011
Messages
420
Likes
462
Re: Lack of Improvised Ideas regarding LCA program..

IMHO, LCA was conceived in the early 80's keeping in mind the requirements of a light fighter for the IAF, a replacement of mig 21. The role model the stakeholders (in this case IAF) had was the mirage 2000, then barely inducted in service. We must not forget that the proposal of LCA might be conceived in the early 80's , but the design specs and other parameters were conceived in the late 80's and early 90's-only after funds being sanctioned by the Rajiv Gandhi administration(I believe! Do point out if any mistake is found! I do not mind being corrected). Soviet Union was in it's death throws. This, coupled with new-found bonhomie with the victorious Americans after the cold war sealed the fate of any co-operation with the Soviet Union.

There is of course another explanation to the course of action undertaken by our leaders. Soviet Union had long discontinued production of single engined fighters of the class the LCA was supposed to replace. Russian engines had poor fuel efficiency, frequent burnouts (one of the reasons behind soviet establishments backing of double engined fighters). Mig-29, meant to counter the newly inducted f-16, was exactly in the same class as the former. The engine RD-33 ,at least the ones IAF operated had poor MTBF, along with a bad problem of smokiness, something every Mig 29 take off showed in the recent past. This plane had two engines, which means that in case of engine failure, it has a higher chance of survival. But can you take that chance in a single engined fighter?

On the other hand, the engine chosen for LCA mk-1 was ge-404, chosen on many jets of Tejas's class - like Gripen, and south korean TA-50. That makes it a better choice, since it has been used in other single engined fighter of it's class. This could have been the line of logic behind people backing the American engines. Just my Rs. 0.02. Do correct me if you something wrong!
 

Rahul Singh

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
3,652
Likes
5,790
Country flag
Re: Lack of Improvised Ideas regarding LCA program..

Regarding Russian imports ? & Indeed LCA was very modern deign but putting Russian Radar and Engine wont make it inferior ?

This move could have done a duel job of Inducting LCA within Air-force and Saving Pilots lives at same time..

------------------------------------------------------

The same aircraft can be updated later..
LCA was ambitious as it could be at time of initiation. And there were various non technical issues apart from vested interests working towards killing the thought. Moreover, IAF was not too keen on program and government was not very optimistic. Funding was also a problem. As a matter of fact, program was sanctioned only on condition of successful completion of TD phase and funding to this phase was as fragmented as it could get. Even worse, there was a set people(including those in IAF) at that time who used say LCA will never fly. In nut shell, only few actually cared about LCA until 4th of January 2001.

RD-33, the only suitable Russian engine for LCA was not safe enough for single engine operation. Even today its variant RD-93 has reliability problems. Radar was never issue because even after MMR problem a hybrid version somehow managed aboard before completion of aerodynamic characteristic tests.

However if an experienced house would have joined the program right at start then timeline would have been shorter. But as i said nobody except few actually cared about LCA until 4th of January 2001.
 

Kunal Biswas

Member of the Year 2011
Ambassador
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
31,122
Likes
41,041
Re: Lack of Improvised Ideas regarding LCA program..

he engine RD-33 ,at least the ones IAF operated had poor MTBF, along with a bad problem of smokiness, something every Mig 29 take off showed in the recent past. This plane had two engines, which means that in case of engine failure, it has a higher chance of survival. But can you take that chance in a single engined fighter? RD-33, the only suitable Russian engine for LCA was not safe enough for single engine operation. Even today its variant RD-93 has reliability problems
RD-33 indeed have smoke but have lot better reliability than those on MIG-21bison, LCA was mainly to replace MIG-21..

If people indeed have will to replace Mig-21 i am sure they could have been gone for this idea, She could have done that by now ..
 

ant80

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2009
Messages
141
Likes
22
Re: Lack of Improvised Ideas regarding LCA program..

LCA was ambitious as it could be at time of initiation. And there were various non technical issues apart from vested interests working towards killing the thought. Moreover, IAF was not too keen on program and government was not very optimistic. Funding was also a problem. As a matter of fact, program was sanctioned only on condition of successful completion of TD phase and funding to this phase was as fragmented as it could get. Even worse, there was a set people(including those in IAF) at that time who used say LCA will never fly. In nut shell, only few actually cared about LCA until 4th of January 2001.
Mr. Rahul Singh, why that particular date sir? What happened that date?
 

balai_c

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2011
Messages
420
Likes
462
Re: Lack of Improvised Ideas regarding LCA program..

Mr. Rahul Singh, why that particular date sir? What happened that date?
Buddy, that was the date of LCA's first flight, the tag of aircraft being kh-2001, flown by wing commander kothiyal, a truly historic event!
 

pankaj nema

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2009
Messages
10,308
Likes
38,743
Country flag
Re: Lack of Improvised Ideas regarding LCA program..

If india had selected AL 31 just like J 10 has done then LCA could have been ready by now

The higher TWR would have taken care of the weight issues

J 10 has succeeded only because of AL 31
 

Blackwater

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2012
Messages
21,156
Likes
12,211
Re: Lack of Improvised Ideas regarding LCA program..

india should scrape LCA project now. no need to waste more money
 

Kunal Biswas

Member of the Year 2011
Ambassador
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
31,122
Likes
41,041
Re: Lack of Improvised Ideas regarding LCA program..

If india had selected AL 31 just like J 10 has done then LCA could have been ready by now

The higher TWR would have taken care of the weight issues

J 10 has succeeded only because of AL 31
@PN,

AL-31 is not for light fighter, Its huge..

J-10 dont fall in light category either..
 

Kunal Biswas

Member of the Year 2011
Ambassador
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
31,122
Likes
41,041
RECOVERY PARACHUTE SYSTEM FOR LIGHT COMBAT AIRCRAFT

It is mandatory for a combat aircraft to demonstrate its spin recovery capability during flight test programme. The purpose of this system is to provide emergency recovery of aircraft from an inadvertent spin in case the aircraft controls are ineffective and are unable to pull it out of spin. The recovery is achieved by deployment of a parachute, which applies an anti-moment force at the rear of the out of control aircraft bringing its nose down further. This brings the aircraft into a controlled stabilized dive and helps it to come out of spin/deep stall.DRDO has developed such parachutes for the flight test of LCA. The test altitude envelope for LCA (9500 kg weight) is 2 km to 12 km. The sequence of operation is as follows:



When a drogue gun is fired, the slug mass of the drogue gun moves rearwards and sequentially deploys the pilot chute at an aircraft wake distance of 23 m. When the pilot chute is stretched, snapping of the weak tie (48 kg) separates the slug mass of the drogue gun along with deployment bag of pilot chute. The chute then inflates and consequently pulls the packed main parachute. As the pilot chute moves rearwards the main parachute deploys sequentially. As soon as the main parachute is stretched, snapping of the weak tie (100 kg) separates the pilot chute and the deployment bag of main parachute. This allows the main parachute to inflate and produce necessary drag force of 32 kN, resulting in a yawing movement of aircraft. It then steepens the flight path angle (a-angle) of the aircraft. The aircraft can then be pulled out of spin by increasing its speed. The total operational time of the system is 3 s. When the aircraft comes out of spin, pilot jettisons the parachute by operating the release mechanism. The system has various redundancy/safety devices. When the release system fails, parachute can be separated through failure of weak link by accelerating the aircraft by 30 per cent.Development work at sub-system level has been successfully completed and final qualification tests are under progress.

Recovery Parachute System

----------------------------

To my Knowledge no other jet fighter have this feature..
 

p2prada

Senior Member
Joined
May 25, 2009
Messages
10,234
Likes
4,017
Re: Lack of Improvised Ideas regarding LCA program..

india should scrape LCA project now. no need to waste more money
While I am a critic against the program. I still support it's continuation since this is our first attempt and a lot of jobs and experience are at stake.

LCA Mk1 is of little use to the IAF. LCA Mk2 is of some use to the IAF. But this experience is required to help ADA/HAL finish AMCA properly and in time. So, that's where the infrastructure and experience for LCA will help.

A lot of new 5th gen specific infrastructure is coming up in different places in India along with 3 RCS research centers by HAL and IAF.
 
Last edited:

agentperry

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2010
Messages
3,022
Likes
690
i think detailed policy should be framed by defense ministry on innovations and R&D to continuously allow R&D to improve the product. they should be asked to come up with improvements every 3 years or so and armed forces not allowed to change the 1) specifications and requirement before 5 years of issue or they can only in those areas in which work have not been started by drdo.
2) testing procedure and tests involved including environmental conditions of duty should be specified first and not changed in the end or in between.

then only efficient and feasible equipment will come out of the drdo. the forces will get something indian and this will make a huge impact in case of war. 1000 arjun or 500 lca will surely have a good impact on the force moral and just the opposite on enemy. just imagine current fleet with around 300-400 serving tejas. enough to shut mouth of all. ( dont reject tejas even the koreans are now thinking of replacing f-4 with something desi and that too be pitted against china back communist korea. in that way our tejas is pretty good)
 

p2prada

Senior Member
Joined
May 25, 2009
Messages
10,234
Likes
4,017
1000 arjun or 500 lca will surely have a good impact on the force moral and just the opposite on enemy.
No it won't. The enemy thinks practically. 1000 Arjun and 500 LCA would mean 1000 tanks inferior to the T-90 and 500 aircraft inferior to the F-16/J-11. The enemy will be happy. The current Arjun regiments are not very happy nowadays due to quality issues and lack of supplies.

The users will only be happy with advanced systems which work, not ornaments.

just imagine current fleet with around 300-400 serving tejas. enough to shut mouth of all.
Rather it would only shut the mouths of Pakis on other forums. Nothing to do with national security, all to do with chest beating by kids.

~300 MKIs followed by ~300 PAKFA/FGFA is the way to go.

What do you think the enemy will be intimidated by, 600 heavy class fighters or 600 LCAs? The same with 1000 Arjuns or 1000 FMBTs?

( dont reject tejas even the koreans are now thinking of replacing f-4 with something desi and that too be pitted against china back communist korea. in that way our tejas is pretty good)
No they are not. The Koreans are not even sure about the FA-50 let alone an indigenous replacement for the F-4s. They have already announced a tender for new aircraft. F-35/F-15SE is going to win it and will replace the F-4s. Quite like LCA the Koreans have placed orders for only 20 FA-50s. The FA-50s will replace F-5s. Further orders are yet to come.

Indonesia is not yet willing to start work on KF-X, so this plan is on the back burner too. Eventually someday they will build it, and these will replace the light F-5s, not the F-4s. But not right now. Turkey is mostly not interested either because Korea is not looking at equal partners like the Russia/India PAKFA. So, while S Korea is ready to invest 60%, Indonesia can manage only 20%. So, they don't even have a development partner as of today which can cover the other 20%.

The Koreans want 120 aircraft for $13Billion, which is pretty much the same as how much the LCA or Gripen cost for that many aircraft. Funny that. They want an aircraft superior to EF/Rafale and inferior to F-35 at the same cost as the LCA. :dude:

The supposed numbers required for KF-X is 200-250 aircraft in order to make it cheap enough for export. So, with Korea asking for 120 followed by Indonesia looking at 50, that will make 170. They still need a partner willing to take another 50 to make the program a no profit/loss venture. And they say that should be less than $50Million a copy. So, they want an aircraft superior to EF/Rafale and still cost as much as the LCA. :dude:
 

natarajan

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2009
Messages
2,592
Likes
762
Still pakistan has lots of obsolete aircrafts and chinese has 500 mig 21 type aircrafts .So nothing is useless we cant put su-30mki or rafale for pakistan inferior
aircrafts so that time lca in large number would be usefull to face pakistan obsolete aircrafts as well as -----s mig 21s .4.5th gen fighters can be used mainly for
countering chinese sukhoi and jf versions
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top