ADA Tejas (LCA) News and Discussions

[ersakthivel]

Originally Posted by ersakthivel
The thrust to weight ratio is given as per international norms .Not from some one's imagination.When people give TWR for fighters they follow international norms.So the LCA twr figures follow the same international figures as f-16 norms.

The T/W isn't from an authentic source. It is manually calculated and Wikipedia is not one bit official. It is an editable library. I can edit it right now and say it has a T/W of 0.7 and wiki will agree with it.

Thrust divided by Empty weight+ fuel+ payload+pilot load gives T/W. Very simple.

I can divide Thrust by MTOW and even that T/W is acceptable.

But all along what I am saying was that with the midlife upgrade of the proposed kaveri-snecma k-10 this thrust to weight ratio of LCA mk-1 can be addressed.The lack of thrust is due to the lack of single crystal tech not due to the engines outer dimension which will be more or less same as that of K-9 kaveri. So these 40 mk-1s are not gonna be thrown into dust bin or combat unwothy.The K-10 will be developed as it is the heart of AMCA you must know. So there wont be any uncertinities on that count

 

[p2prada]

what is this cropped delta wing ?

if you can call flanker a cropped delta wing why not f 16 ? or every fighter out there can be called a cropped delta wing .

Delta is basically a Triangle and came from the Greek letter Delta.

----
Cropped means cut. So, here the tips are cut.

Images will help you understand it.

This is cropped. F-16 is the same. That and some of the other aircraft I mentioned.

Aircraft which are expected to perform well at all altitudes have cropped deltas and canards. That's why the Eurocanards(EF, Rafale and Gripen) have this design.

----
Compound Delta. Both J-10 and IAI Lavi have compound deltas and so does Mirage-2000.
LCA is quite like this, but the leading edge is cranked.

Here, LCA should have had canards or LERX. But there was the issue of complexity in the FBW system. Also, a small aircraft with an extra large wing meant the lift vortex could be generated by only cranking the wing which was much simpler. Extra moving surfaces like canards was deemed not necessary. However at the time this was thought of the LCA was only supposed to be an interceptor. It was much later that a more multirole feature was needed. You can say the requirement came 2 decades later. N-LCA was fitted with LERX because of the requirement for higher Angle of Attack in order to land or take off from carriers.

Mirage-2000 come with canards too, but they are not as pronounced as the other Eurocanards. Also, unlike the other aircraft, Mirage-2000 has a low set wing which means the wing starts from the bottom of the fuselage. Google front views of the Mirage-2000 and LCA and you will notice the points where both wings begin from the fuselage.

----
Mig-21,
Tailed Delta

MKI is a cross between the tailed delta and cropped delta, So, you can call it a tailed cropped delta.

There are other delta designs like the one on F-22 and F-16XL.

 

[ersakthivel]

F-16
 Empty weight: 18,900 lb (8,570 kg)
 Loaded weight: 26,500 lb (12,000 kg)
 Max takeoff weight: 42,300 lb (19,200 kg)
 Powerplant: 1× F110-GE-100 afterburning turbofan
 Dry thrust: 17,155 lbf (76.3 kN)
 Thrust with afterburner: 28,600 lbf (127 kN)
TWr -1.095

The TWR given is for 11 600 kgs.just half a ton less than the loaded weight. A total of 3 tons over it's empty weight.

 

[Agnostic_Indian]

Delta is basically a Triangle and came from the Greek letter Delta.

----
Cropped means cut. So, here the tips are cut.

Images will help you understand it.

This is cropped. F-16 is the same. That and some of the other aircraft I mentioned.

Aircraft which are expected to perform well at all altitudes have cropped deltas and canards. That's why the Eurocanards(EF, Rafale and Gripen) have this design.

----
Compound Delta. Both J-10 and IAI Lavi have compound deltas and so does Mirage-2000.
LCA is quite like this, but the leading edge is cranked.

Here, LCA should have had canards or LERX. But there was the issue of complexity in the FBW system. Also, a small aircraft with an extra large wing meant the lift vortex could be generated by only cranking the wing which was much simpler. Extra moving surfaces like canards was deemed not necessary. However at the time this was thought of the LCA was only supposed to be an interceptor. It was much later that a more multirole feature was needed. You can say the requirement came 2 decades later. N-LCA was fitted with LERX because of the requirement for higher Angle of Attack in order to land or take off from carriers.

Mirage-2000 come with canards too, but they are not as pronounced as the other Eurocanards. Also, unlike the other aircraft, Mirage-2000 has a low set wing which means the wing starts from the bottom of the fuselage. Google front views of the Mirage-2000 and LCA and you will notice the points where both wings begin from the fuselage.

----
Mig-21,
Tailed Delta

MKI is a cross between the tailed delta and cropped delta, So, you can call it a tailed cropped delta.

There are other delta designs like the one on F-22 and F-16XL.

I understand that. my question was almost every fighter out there can be called a cropped delta wing ? because the main wing always forms cropped delta like shape . so in my opinion that will be a very over simplified and generalized observation.

 

[ersakthivel]

 for LCA
Empty weight: 6,560 kg (14,460 lb)
 Loaded weight: 9,500 kg (20,944 lb)
 Max. takeoff weight: 13,300 kg (29,100 lb)
 Powerplant: 1 × F404-GE-IN20 turbofan
 Dry thrust: 53.9 kN[86] (12,100 lbf)
 Thrust with afterburner: 85 kN[86][87] (19,100 lbf)
 Internal fuel capacity: 2,458 kg

the TWR 1.07 I quoted is at 8 tons for(85 kns/7.95 tons)That is 1.5 tons over it's empty weight
If you add half a ton of fuel (85 kn/8.5tons )then Twr is almost 1 ,So why are you jumping over it. certainly not bad. You yourself have said that LCA neednot fly for more than 300 kms to meet its enemy. So half a ton of fuel and 1.5 ton of weapon load just gives you a TWR of 1,which is more than the mirage-2000's 0.89.
That was what I hinted it.I acknowledge a small error of overstating the TWR by 0.07 . But still it doesnot take anything away from my argument, that even at IOC level LCA can match F-16. Because at any fuel fraction you cannot ignore f-16's high empty weight in TWR calculation.

 

[p2prada]

I understand that. my question was almost every fighter out there can be called a cropped delta wing ? because the main wing always forms cropped delta like shape . so in my opinion that will be a very over simplified and generalized observation.

Not all aircraft have delta wings. And some which do are not cropped like LCA/J-10.

 

[Agnostic_Indian]

^^^can you name one or two fighters with out delta ?

 

[ersakthivel]

F-16
 Empty weight: 18,900 lb (8,570 kg)
 Loaded weight: 26,500 lb (12,000 kg)
 Max takeoff weight: 42,300 lb (19,200 kg)
 Powerplant: 1× F110-GE-100 afterburning turbofan
 Dry thrust: 17,155 lbf (76.3 kN)
 Thrust with afterburner: 28,600 lbf (127 kN)
TWr -1.095
The TWR given is for 11 600 kgs.just half a ton less than the loaded weight. A total of 3 tons over it's empty weight. lets break it as 2 tons of weapons and 1 ton of fuel since it is a heavy invading aircraft and it needs to go home deep into pakistan travel more distance when you take note of the scenario that F-16 is the attacker and LCA is the defender with lesser distance travelled

 for LCA
Empty weight: 6,560 kg (14,460 lb)
 Loaded weight: 9,500 kg (20,944 lb)
 Max. takeoff weight: 13,300 kg (29,100 lb)
 Powerplant: 1 × F404-GE-IN20 turbofan
 Dry thrust: 53.9 kN[86] (12,100 lbf)
 Thrust with afterburner: 85 kN[86][87] (19,100 lbf)
 Internal fuel capacity: 2,458 kg
the TWR 1.07 I quoted is at 8 tons for(85 kns/7.95 tons)That is 1.5 tons over it's empty weight
If you add half a ton of fuel (85 kn/8.5tons )then Twr is almost 1 ,So why are you jumping over it. certainly not bad. You yourself have said that LCA neednot fly for more than 300 kms to meet its enemy. So half a ton of fuel and 1.5 ton of weapon load just gives you a TWR of 1,which is more than the mirage-2000's 0.89.
That was what I hinted it.I acknowledge a small error of overstating the TWR by 0.07 . But still it doesnot take anything away from my argument, that even at IOC level LCA can match F-16. Because at any fuel fraction you cannot ignore f-16's high empty weight in TWR calculation.

So not any huge gap to suggest it is mig-21 ++ or obsolete aircraft. especially a 95 kn MLU engine upgrade is a near certainity within 7 or 10 years time even if GTRE works alone without co op from snecma

 

[p2prada]

^^^can you name one or two fighters with out delta ?

From operational fighters or near operational there is F-15, F-18, PAKFA, F-CK-1 Ching-kuo, Mig-29 and Tornado.

Apart from that there is the F-14, YF-23 and Su-47.

Edit: F-22's wing form is called Diamond wings.

YF-22 had Delta wings while FB-22 was supposed to be a Delta wing. Too bad Gates decided to shut down all F-22 related programs.

 

[Agnostic_Indian]

but you only said flanker is cropped delta ?

what I am asking is fighters which is not delta or not cropped delta.. because for my eyes all fighter's front/main wing is cropped delta shape. f15,f35, mig 29,...

 

[ersakthivel]

Cropped means cut. So, here the tips are cut.

Images will help you understand it.

This is cropped. F-16 is the same. That and some of the other aircraft I mentioned.

THE ONLY POINT IS THAT THE WING AREA YOU HAVE SHOWN FOR F-16'S CROPPED DELTA IS TWICE ITS TRUE SIZE.
That is why we all call it a high wing loading aircraft. because it has a higher weight to carry for the smaller surface area of wing. So it can never win a climbing dogfight with high wing area deltas that can generate more lift from their wing for the same load to lug. So that's why they are called low wing loading.

IT IS THIS FEATURE WHICH CONFERS GOOD HIGH ALTITUDE PERFORMANCE AND HIGH itr TO TAKE ON THE F-16'S HIGH str

. tHAT IS WHY IT IS A COMPROMISE BETWEEN CRUCIFX AND A TRUE DELTA. tHIS IS TO HAVE A GOOD LOW LEVEL str SPECS. bECAUSE IN THOSE DAYS There was no proliferation awacs and ground radar evading low altitude flyin was considered the best survival tactics. With awacs and high flying deltas with long range dual seeking missiles it is no longer a big bonus. But at the same time F-16's high altitude performance is not state of art and almost obsolete

 

[Agnostic_Indian]

ok I think I got it now.

 

[p2prada]

but you only said flanker is cropped delta ?

what I am asking is fighters which is not delta or not cropped delta.. because for my eyes all fighter's front/main wing is cropped delta shape. f15,f35, mig 29,...

The wing shape need to resemble a Triangle.

F-15, Mig-29 and F-35 do not have this Triangle, they have a fourth side at the edge which does not align itself properly in the form of a Triangle like a cropped delta does. None of these aircraft can hold a weapon or pod at the wing tip like a cropped delta can.

Flanker is a cropped delta, but it also has a tail. So, it's basic wing form is the same as a F-16, but it has an extra tail like the Mig-21. These are just small variations but are of the same form. It is not a big deal if we are only trying to prove a point. Comparatively the Mig-21 has a tail, but the wing is not cropped.

 

[shiphone]

1.I'm afraid that F15 is a typical cropped delta wing plane as well...but the Su27 is not that typical (I thought 'ladder shaped' might be better than DELTA)

...and if Su27 is a so called delta wing ,so is the Mig29

2.J10's wing is pure delta...although in some angle, it looks like a compound delta(or double delta wing) . the only Active compound delta wing fighter in PLAAF is J7E/G

J10

this twisted installation angle is the reason why some times it looks like a compound Delta.

J7PG

3.

Flanker is a cropped delta, but it also has a tail. So, it's basic wing form is the same as a F-16, but it has an extra tail like the Mig-21.

-----a little strange statement here, coz F16 has a tail too...
--------------------------------

and back to the T/W topic.

ersakthivel quoted the TWR data of F16 and M2K...

so I'm afraid the TWR data of these 2 jets were calculated in this way.

T= afterburner Thrust
W=standand status fighter with half internal fuel + 2 short range AAM............no drop tanks and any other external payload

 

[SATISH]

The flanker is a triplane arrangement with the swept wing and the Fulcrum is also swept wing. THe F 15 is also a swept wing arrangement with the body acting as a lift surface. The F 16 on the other hand is more like a cropped tailed delta like the Mig 21 arrangement.

 

[shiphone]

maybe OT...

but this pic from the former McDonnell Douglas might be helpful to understand the configure evolution of the F-15 project. obviously the shape of current wing was modified from the delta wing.

it's NASA which suggested McDouglas to have the wing tip cropped after wind tunnel tests.

 

[ersakthivel]

from wikipedia
Development

[edit]Previous projects
The Mirage 2000 evolved from a series of Dassault projects performed from 1965 to 1975. The first in this series was a project known as the "Anglo-French Variable Geometry" (AFVG) swing-wing aircraft, begun in 1965. The collaboration was a fiasco, with the French pulling out in 1967. The British stayed with the concept and formed another collaboration with the Germans and Italians, which eventually produced the Panavia Tornado multirole combat aircraft.[citation needed]
Dassault then worked on several new concepts evolved from the "Mirage G" variable-geometry experimental prototype, resulting in a sophisticated design with the designation "Avion de Combat Futur (ACF / Future Combat Aircraft)". The French Air Force developed a requirement for developing the Avion de Combat Futur (ACF) (French: "Future combat aircraft") in the early 1970s.[4] Dassault offered its twin-engine Super Mirage for the ACF requirement. However, the Super Mirage was to be too costly and was canceled in 1975.[5]
[edit]Mirage 2000 project


Mirage 2000 C/B/D/N/5F
Dassault had been working on other fighter options in the meantime, partly because the export potential of the ACF was not promising. These alternatives were smaller, simpler, and cheaper than the ACF, and took the form of a number of "Mini-Mirage (Mimi)" concepts. These concepts congealed into an aircraft known at first as the "Super Mirage III", then the "Delta 1000", "Delta 2000", "Super Mirage 2000", and finally just "Mirage 2000".[citation needed]
The ACF was a strike aircraft first and an interceptor second, while the Mirage 2000 was exactly the reverse, but the Mirage 2000 was much more affordable. So When the ACF was cancelled, Dassault offered the single-engine Mirage 2000 as an alternative and was given approval to proceed by the French government on 18 December 1975.[4] This was a return to the first generation Mirages, but with several important innovations that tried to solve their shortcomings. Project chiefs were B.C. Valliéres, J.Cabrière, J.C. Veber and B.Revellin-Falcoz.[6][volume & issue needed]
There was another important reason for Dassault to push the Mirage 2000. Development of this small aircraft would also give the company a competitor to the General Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falcon, which had defeated the Dassault Mirage F1 in a contest for a new fighter for the air forces of Belgium, Denmark, Netherlands and Norway. Small single-engined fighters were clearly the most appreciated by foreign customers, as experience with the larger, twin-engined Mirage 4000 would show.[citation needed]
[edit]Design phase
Radar development was critical in the Mirage 2000 project. Despite many obstacles, Marcel Dassault felt that a prototype could be flying in a year and a half, with operational introduction in 1982. In fact, the program was delayed, but by the standards of modern defense programs it was not all that big a schedule slip.[citation needed]
The prototype made its first flight in 10 March 1978[1] with test pilot Jean Coreau at the controls. Despite all the new technologies applied, basing the new aircraft on the Mirage III allowed the development of a prototype in only 27 months from the program start to the first flight.[citation needed]
In that summer, at the Farnborough Airshow, this machine displayed not only excellent handling capabilities, but also a full control at 204 km/h and 26 degree angle of attack. This was totally unexpected in a delta-wing fighter, and proved how CCD controls were capable of overcoming the delta wing shortcomings related to poor low-speed control, while retaining the advantages, such as low-drag, low radar cross section, ideal high speed aerodynamics and simplicity, provided by the absence of horizontal tail surfaces.[citation needed] The Mirage 2000 was one of the stars of that airshow and became the direct adversary for the F-16, which shared the CCD control and relaxed stability.[7] The 02 Prototype followed in 18 September 1978 and 03 in 26 September 1979. After 400 hours of flight, they were sent to CEV (Centre d'Essais en Vol). The 04 Prototype was a demonstrator made by Dassault for its own purposes, and finally the first dual-seat Mirage 2000B flew in 11 October 1980.[citation needed]
The first production example flew on 20 November 1982,[4] and the aircraft went into operational service in November 1982.[2] They were practically pre-production aircraft, because they had no SARH missiles (RDM-1 radar) and the first model of SNECMA 'Super Atar' M-53-2 engine.[citation needed]

So please note that the mirage 2000 which was based on mirage-III took almost twenty years to perfect, despite all the operational expertise gainned by dassasult in operating mirage-III for years.

Compared to that the LCA whose funding commenced in 1993 with 2182 crores and for an initial mig-21 payload of 2 tons ended up 20 years later with 4 ton payload.I am not justifying anything you can make your own comparisons. The IAF started showing interest only in 1993 after the dissolution of USSR and then only funding was released

 

[p2prada]

Actually I used to think the same. But a LM official pointed it out to me, like a decade back.

That the MKI is a typical Delta-canard configuration like the Eurocanards. When I asked him the reason for it, he pointed out the wing tip station.

I don't really mind if I am wrong with this though. But this was told to me by someone reliable.

Sorry for not noticing the tail on the 6teen. Completely forgot. The same for JF-17.

@Satish
All modern aircraft have swept wings, most have backward sweep while Su-47 has forward sweep. Wing Sweep is just the angle between the fuselage and wing when you look from the top. Also, Triplane means canards+wing+tail.

@Shiphone
About the TWR...

If we take F-16's empty weight to be 8.5 tons, internal fuel at 1.5 tons and 2 100Kg missiles. With a thrust of 12.9tons(127KN) we will get T/W of 1.26. If we take empty weight of 8.5t, full internal fuel at 3 tons and 200Kg of missiles we get 1.1. More realistic and much closer to the wiki figure even after taking full internal fuel.

With the same config, LCA will give a T/W of 0.91.

Half internal fuel on such small aircraft is utterly useless. Let's not forget that during CAP, they will "ALWAYS" carry drop tanks. So before engagements, tanks are dropped and the small fighters always try to get into fights with full fuel. Without full fuel the fight won't go in their favour, especially with heavier aircraft around like the Flanker. It is the same for J-10/Mirage-2000/Rafale/EF etc and the reason for some of them lugging around heavy drop tanks for extra fuel.

Mirage-2000 has the disadvantage of being underpowered, but I guess there are other aspects like drag and lift which were better managed. So, it will have to rely on extra AB time and burn more fuel as compared to 6teen and 29. 2000 isn't as good as the Mig-29 in the same flight envelope. 29 vs 6teen in dog fights was one sided whenever Archer was used. Otherwise, 6teen had the energy advantage as usual. With the Aim-9x even that advantage is gone, but the 29's design improved in other ways. All 3 aircraft have reduced thrust in our conditions, but the Mirage-2000 will perform the best over the Himalayas with F-16 being the worst.

Half fuel load almost always applies to heavier aircraft like Flankers, Eagles and Raptors.

 

[p2prada]

Wouldn't it be right if we consider the F-15 is also a Delta because the ACTIVE program saw the addition of canards and I have only seen Deltas with control canards to date.

 

[ersakthivel]

p2 prada
The mirage that flew first in 1980s is still being upgraded by IAF. Why haven't they junked it and gone for the latest sukhois. The IAF first proposed to buy the same old mirage 2000s in place of the MRCA tender. Despite having twin engined migs why did IAF wanted to buy these small crafts contrary to your logic. As per your logic no single engine plane can ever equal a big twin engine .

Then why was IAF thinking otherwise. It is the same IAF chief who denigrated the LCA during its IOC who hasnt raised as whimper of protest when the GOI is thrusting the old mirages in an upgraded form.


this is quoted in wiki about india's mirage-2000s

IAF purchased 49 Mirage 2000s, including 42 single-seaters and 7 two-seaters in the 1990s. In 2004, the Indian government approved purchase of ten more Mirage 2000Hs, featuring improved avionics, particularly an upgraded RDM 7 radar. The IAF named the Mirage the "Vajra" (Sanskrit: वज्र, for Thunderbolt). India also purchased appropriate stores along with the fighters, including ATLIS II pods and laser-guided weapons.[18]
In 2006 it was reported that the Indian Air Force was close to finalizing a EUR 1.5 billion (about $2 billion) deal to upgrade its fleet of 51 Mirage-2000 'Vajra' fighter jets. The aim was to give the aircraft more capabilities, bringing them to Mirage 2000-5 Mk 2 standard, and extending its useful life for another 20–25 years. The contract has been signed in 2011. India has assigned the nuclear strike role to its Mirage 2000 squadrons in service with the Indian Air Force (IAF) since 1985. In 1999 when the Kargil conflict broke out, the Mirage 2000 performed remarkably well during the whole conflict in the high Himalayas, even though the Mirages supplied to India had limited air interdiction capability and had to be heavily modified to drop laser-guided bombs as well as conventional unguided bombs. Two Mirage squadrons flew a total of 515 sorties, and in 240 strike missions dropped 55,000 kg (120,000 lb) of ordnance. Easy maintenance and a very high sortie rate made the Mirage 2000 one of the most efficient fighters of the IAF in the conflict. There are reports that the IAF qualified Soviet-designed missiles with the Mirage 2000, such as the R-27 (NATO AA-10 Alamo) AAM.[19] In July 2011, India approved an $3 billion upgrade to its entire Mirage 2000 fleet and for over 400 MICA missiles.One of the two seat trainer versions crashed on 25 February 2012, another two seat version crashed on 5 March 2012.[20] The plane was on a routine sortie.[21]


Mirage 2000H (India)

So please note that LCA mk-1 now inducted can also be replaced with uprated engines as INDIAN bought mirages with M53-5 engine is uprated with M53-P2 engines at MLU.

The same can be done with Lca tejas please note

This is what wiki says further


Indian Air Force Mirage 2000H.
India has acquired a total of 51 Mirages, which include 41 single-seater Mirage 2000Hs and 10 two-seater Mirage 2000TH trainers. Since India wanted the fighter quickly, the first part of an initial batch of 26 single-seaters and 4 two-seaters was shipped to the IAF beginning in 1985 with the older M53-5 engines. These aircraft were given the designations of Mirage 2000H5 and Mirage 2000TH5. The second part of this initial batch consisted of 10 more single-seaters with the M53-P2 engine, with these aircraft designated Mirage 2000H. All the first batch was reengined with the M53-P2, with the single-seaters re-designated "Mirage 2000H" and the two-seaters re-designated Mirage 2000TH. A second batch of six Mirage 2000H single-seaters and three Mirage 2000TH two-seaters was shipped in 1987–1988. A Total of 49 fighters were received.
In 2004, the Indian government (during NDA tenure), approved purchase of ten more Mirage 2000Hs, with improved avionics. The Mirage 2000-5 was a contender for a planned Indian Air Force 126 fighter aircraft procurement in which it was competing with the Mikoyan MiG-35, F-16 Fighting Falcon and JAS 39 Gripen. However, Dassault replaced the Mirage 2000 with the Rafale as its contender since the Mirage 2000 production line was to be closed. India received all 10 around 2007 during UPA tenure. The total purchase went up to 59.
India has announced a $1.9 billion program to arm 51 of its Mirage 2000 aircraft with the MBDA AIM-132 ASRAAM dogfighting missile beginning in 2007. Installation will require new radar, electronic warfare equipment, and updates to the cockpit and data bus. Pilot helmets will require addition of a helmet-mounted sight. These will be the first Mirage aircraft to carry the British missile and Dassault, Thales, and MBDA are to participate in the effort.[30]
In March 2010, India and France finalized the long delayed deal to upgrade all of India's Mirage-2000H to Mirage-2000-5 Mk 2 variant with new radar systems, a new weapon suite, missiles, electronic warfare system etc., at the cost of 43.9 million dollars per plane.[31] The first four to six Mirages will be upgraded in France, with the rest 50 or so being upgraded in India by Hindustan Aeronautics under transfer of technology. Under the upgrade, the entire airframe will be stripped down to be re-wired and re-equipped with new avionics, mission computers, glass cockpits, helmet-mounted displays, electronic warfare suites and of course weapon systems to extend and enhance the operational life of the multi-role fighters by around 20 years.[32] In July 2011, India approved an upgrade to the avionics and other systems on its Mirage 2000s.[21]



These are the general charecteristics of mirage-2000-c as per wiki . Note that even now the LCA's TWR is better than the mirage-2000-c

with the Twr of 0.91 Mirage-2000 can achieve speeds of upto 1190 km/hr with at sea level with 95 tons of thrust and 7500 kgs of empty weight. Incidently like all other airforces IAf bought this to counter pakistani F-16s.The IAF is supremely happy to keep this craft in its rolls. Then why are the top brass showing bee stung face to LCA?

The LCA with 6500 kg empty weight with and a TWr of close or more than 1(The wiki quote is 1.07 for LCA mk-1 with 85 kn thrust. Since p2prada and shipone raised some queries , I did some calculation by myself and pared it down to 1 to satisfy P2PRADA,otherwise the I can trumpet here that LCA is miles ahead of MIRAGE-2000-c),doing sea leve hot air trails in goa with a topsped of over 1350 km/hr with 85 kns is cursed by so called experts?

And even more incredulously it is slated to get a snecma-GTRE- k-10 as mid life upgrade with 95 kn in a few years, Still people call it obsolete.

As I already explained in my previuos post even though MIRAGE-2000 has a AOA of 26 degrees ,it's lower TWR makes it to utilise it fully. Because lower thrust cannot counteract the loss of speed due to higherdrag on the huge wing area,during those tight turns.

But with superio thrust to weigth ratio of 1+ The LCA can do much tighter tuns than mirage-2000-c exploiting fully its 24 degree AOA. Note the AOA limit of 24 degree is only limited by the engine power available. Future uprated engines with same external dimensions will translate to even more superlative performance.

Thie following is from wiki the,specs for mirage-2000 .It says

General characteristics
Crew: 1
Length: 14.36 m (47 ft 1 in)
Wingspan: 9.13 m (29 ft)
Height: 5.20 m (17 ft)
Wing area: 41 m (441.3 ft)
Empty weight: 7,500 kg (16,350 lb)
Loaded weight: 13,800 kg (30,420 lb)
Max. takeoff weight: 17,000 kg (37,500 lb)
Powerplant: 1 SNECMA M53-P2 afterburning turbofan
Dry thrust: 64.3 kN (14,500 lbf)
Thrust with afterburner: 95.1 kN (21,400 lbf)
Performance
Maximum speed: Mach 2.2 (2,530+ km/h, 1,500+ mph) at high altitude/ 1,110 km/h (690 mph) at low altitude
Range: 1,550 km (837 nmi, 963 mi) with drop tanks
Ferry range: 3,335 km (1,800 nmi, 2,073 mi) with auxiliary fuel
Service ceiling: 17,060 m (59,000 ft)
Rate of climb: 285 m/s (56,000 ft/min)
Wing loading: 337 kg/m (69 lb/ft)
Thrust/weight: 0.91
Armament
Guns: 2 30 mm (1.18 in) DEFA 554 revolver cannon, 125 rounds per gun
Hardpoints: 9 total (4 under-wing, 5 under-fuselage) with a capacity of 6,300 kg (13,900 lb) external fuel and ordnance
Rockets: Matra 68 mm unguided rocket pods, 18 rockets per pod
Missiles:
Air-to-air missiles:
6 MBDA MICA IR/RF
2 Matra R550 Magic-II and 2 Matra Super 530D
Air-to-surface missiles:
2 AM.39 Exocet
2 AS-30L laser guided missile
1 ASMP tactical nuclear cruise missile
Bombs: 9 Mk.82