On March 31, 1990, the new fighter project
was officially approved. At the end of the year a
LCA prototype construction was to be launched.
Note that the maiden flight of the new Indian
fighter was initially and optimistically planned for
1991, but later postponed until 1992. In 1990,
the Indian Defense Ministry announced that the
construction of the "demonstration" aircraft was
delayed until 1993 citing technical reasons so that
the wheeling-out was to take place in 1994 with
the maiden flight to follow no sooner than 1995.
All that meant that the beginning of series production
of the Indian fourth generation fighter would
start most optimistically in 1997 with the first
batch-produced jets to enter service not in 1996
as it was planned, but in the XXI century
the
supersonic F-16 and JAS 39 jets are considered by
the Indians as the LCA "gap fillers" in the frames
of the MMRCA program in 2009, 20 years after
the described events. It is really true that unlike
Europeans, who are always in a hurry, the sons of
the most ancient Indian civilization don't take two
or three decades for a long period of time even in
the dynamic field of military aircraft building.
The author can add civilizational experise to his CV besides his aeronautical expertise.How can a progarm whose main funding was approved in 1993 with restricted 2 tech demos only condition (?!!!) whose first TD flew in 2001 become two decades late
LCA was supposed
to start. Besides, a number of squadrons
initially planned to be fitted with LCA aircraft
were then to receive advanced MiG-21.21. Looking
ahead, it is noteworthy that we can see today this
scenario implemented: 125 MiG-21UPG entered
service of the Indian Air Force partly filling the
LCA "gap", the LCA Ðœk.1, which "do not entirely
meet the requirements of the Air Force" are being
batch-produced and the work on "full-fledged"
LCA Mk.2 completely satisfying the customer
demands have started.
How does MIG-21 becomes advanced than lca?? How come IAF order 20 initial lca MK-Is and later adding 20 more to it's initial order ,if it had a solid belief in the advanced MLG_21s?The author starts quoting partially opened flight envelope specs of LCA with a sole intention of discrediting ADA.Note he never got a single quote form ADA to publish along with his creative writing piece.Because as per global journalistic norms it is mandatory to approach the ADA to get clarifications regarding the shortfalls and why design insufficiensies arose in first place? and .get them published along with the article. But if one follows tabloid standards these are not needed ,of course.
In 1993, the Indian government finally sanctioned
the construction of a flight-demonstration
(experimental) LCA item. In the May of 1995,
the fuselage was launched into production, and
in December that year the coal-plastic wing followed.
The ceremonial wheeling-out of the LCA
TD1 (technological demonstrator, first) took place
on November 17, 1996 lagging nine months
behind the schedule. But the customizing of the jet
proved to be longer than expected and no sooner
than April 1997, test-pilot Rakesh Sharma, the
first Indian spaceman, who visited the Mir Soviet
Orbital Station, started the ground tests of the jet.
On January 4, 2001 the LCA fighter made
its maiden flight and was later named Tejas
(Radiance). On August 1, 2003 the jet exceeded
So where is the two decades delay?he conveniently omits that due to trenchant opposition from IAF chief KIRSHNAMOORTHY in his letter to PM the LCA program got truncated to two TDs only and only after all the technologies are proven there should be further funding for LSPs. SO till the TDs demonstrated all the techs till 2003 no LSP construction started.This delay is due to IAF's disbelief with ADA and not due to anything else by not allowing 7 or 8 prototypes construction along with TDs to speed up the flight testing regime.SO ADA has to wait till 2003 to receive it's LSPs.
The
Indian printed media said later that the LCA TD
"has a rate of climb exceeding that of MiG-29,"
which has the initial rate of climb of 300-330 mps
depending on the variant. But these claims are
likely to be invented by the authors.
The author of this article alone has the rights to invent claims.No one else in the world is even allowed to claim their fighters have more climb rate than mig-29s,because it is a glorious soviet product you see.
Foreign
composite materials were used to build the LCA TD
and PV aircraft to make 30-34% of the airframe,
which resulted in reduced weight and bearable
g-loads of between +8 and -3G
But lca airframe is tested upto 13 Gs in ground tests in structural rigs.
According to the Indian media reports, the
R&D works on the LCA program and construction
of TD1 and TD2 pilot aircraft cost India 21,880
Another bogus claim.The author could have asked the ada regarding the budget.Why should he go by indian nedia even without naming one?Is he writing a proper article or just debating in the forum?
The opinion of the U.S. experts about the LCA
aircraft is also of some interest. Having studied the
features of the aircraft, they said it was "the next
generation of F-5 type aircraft." They mentioned
that the design features of the fighter were high
enough with the small size and relatively low cost,
which would provide a good demand for it on the
world market. The Americans said, though, that
"the fighter has a relatively small specified life,
which will make it operational within 14 years,
whereas the advanced western fighters had the
same feature was much better." The ADA chiefs
said to clarify the point that the LCA operating life
was calculated based on heavy climate conditions
and if the aircraft is used in countries with a milder
climate, the specified life could be extended
This is another selfgoal by the author. The composites used normally have longer life under indian environs than the all metal russian fighters.BTW who are these all knowing US experts?He could have named them.
Due to the fast tempo of mastering the latest
technology in aircraft building showed by the
Indians, the LCA design specifications looked
impressive. So, while at the initial stage of the
program the design empty weigh was estimated
at 6,000 kg, then due to optimism in wide coalplastic
use the Indians decreased the weight to
the record low for a fighter of the class – to 5,500
kg, which seamed rather possible. The composite
materials were supposed to be used in the wing,
empennage and control surface design.
The present weight is 6.5 kg.(This statement by ADA surprised the great p2 prada so much and he admitted it in his post in a startling manner.I dont know ,why?)It is still possible according to CEILMAC ,HAL and ADA, with replacement of display mountings ,door panels ,engine mountings,LRU mountings and pylons with composites(coal plastic as per author!!!!!)
The percent of the composite materials used
in the LCA roughly twice exceeded that of the U.S.
F-22A Raptor fifth generation fighter and its Soviet
analogue MiG-MFI jet. For a comparison, the Saab
JAS 39 Gripen with a structure close to that of
the LCA and a similar engine (Svenska Flygmotor
RM12 based on the same F404) and a radar was
6,620 kg, that is 1,120 kg more. At the same
time, the internal fuel tanks of the Indian aircraft,
according to advertizing brochures, was to accommodate
2,400 kg of fuel compared to 2,270 kg of
the Saab aircraft. The LCA fuel efficiency was 0.44
compared to 0.34 of the Jas 39. The LCA predecessor
in the Indian Air Force, MiG-21bis (empty
weight – 5,350 kg), was fitted with the R-25-300
augmented turbojet engine with the thrust of 7,100
kgf and had only 1,790 kg of fuel in internal tanks
(fuel efficiency also 0.34). It is little surprise that
the LCA practical range of 2,000 km was to be
close to that of heavier fourth generation foreign
fighters (F-15 and F-16) and be much better than
that of not only MiG-21bis (1,250 km), but also of
Gripen (1,700-1,800) km.
The LCA thrust-to-weight ratio with the F404
with a normal takeoff weight was to be 0.91
compared to 0.81 of JAS 39 and 0.87 of MiG-
21bis, which would in theory give the Indian
aircraft acceleration and maneuverability features
exceeding foreign aircraft of the same class.
LOOK HOW AUTHOR USES PROPER WORD COMPOSITES WHEN IT COMES TO COMPARISION WITH f-22!!!!!!!!AND MIG 1.44,WHY DOESN'T HE USES THE WORDS COAL PLASTIC???? Btw all these design specs are nearly achievable in mk_II and future MK-I upgrades.
PV1 took off on November 25, 2005, and
the PV2 followed on December 1, 2005. Exactly
a year later, on December 1, 2006, flight tests of
the PV3 started.
The reason PV-1 took off in 2005 is due to MOD's insistence that PVs should be built only after the TDs demonstrated all design performance.The MOD was forced into this position after trenchant criticism from IAF that the program is not possible and ADA has no expertise in this field through letters by ACN Kirshnamoorthy to PN and RM ..It continues to this day.It took ABDUL KALAM to broker a compromise so that TWO TDs are built at first to demonstrate the tech and then the program should be allowed to go ahead. MOD agreed and that's why the PV took off in 2005.But the author completely ignores these facts.
It should be mentioned that the takeoff weight
of empty demonstrator aircraft LCA TD was far
from the announced record low figure for the
series aircraft and totaled according to the Indian
media 6,800 kg. The pre-series LCA PV1 had more
carbon-plastic and the weight reduced to 6,300 kg.
The LCA PV2 had the design composite material
figure of 43%. But this fighter was also fitted with
some organic electronic equipment, armament,
as well as some onboard systems, which were
not installed on previous versionsThe exceeding weight
became one of the crucial problems for the Tejas
makers"¦
So he effectively concedes that once test equipment is removed the PV-2s weight will reduce further from 6300 kg.The excess weight is due to the payload increase design specs incorporated after the successful flight of TDs.According to CEILMAC it can be further reduced.It is further reducable according to CEILMAC ,HAL and ADA, with replacement of display mountings ,door panels ,engine mountings,LRU mountings and pylons with composites(coal plastic as per author!!!!!)
On April 12, 2007, the first series Tejas Mk.1
fighter LSP1 made its maiden test flight. On June
16, 2008 it was followed by LSP2 (former PV4).
Another six series aircraft (LSÐ -3 – LSÐ -8) were
supposed to be tested until the end of 2008, but
when the article was being written the information
on LSÐ -3 – LSÐ -8 flights was not available
The LSP-7 already in the air.The delay is due to the fuel leak issue and reworking of fuel and hydraulic lines of all the LSPs,That's why almost an year is lost.
Unlike the fighters of other developing nations,
which are powered by engines made in Russia, the
U.S., France, or the U.K., a decision was made to
develop a specific engine for the Indian fighter,
which would compete with fourth generation
bypass turbofan engines with afterburner
But a fall back option is provided incase of kaveri not upto the mark,as usual author blithely ignores this.
The light single-engine multipurpose fighter
has the tailless aerodynamic structure with a high
delta wing variable-swept on the fore edge, singlefin
tail unit and one bypass turbofan engine with
afterburner installed at the fuselage rear. The static
stability of the aircraft is reduced. The Tejas features,
the designers claim, are to be as follows:
– high maneuverability;
– multifunctionality;
– all-weather day and night capability;
– compatibility of cockpit instrumental equipment
with night vision goggles;
– low radar echo, which is one third of that of
similar size fighters (that is about 2 m2).
How does he arrives at 2sq meter RCS figure,of course by imagination as usual.Because it can never have a lesser RCS than the all time great MIG-21 Bison UPG.It would be blasphemous if it has lower rcs than the MIGs.
The aerodynamic structure of the aircraft is
claimed to provide minimal wind resistance, little
specific wing load, high rate of turn for bank, yaw and
pitch, as well as good takeoff and landing features.
About 43% of the series-produced LCA airframe
is made of composite materials. The fighter
skin is 90% composite materials.
The fighter's wing has reduced sweep in the
root which is made in order to provide the pilot
with forward and downward lookout as it is stated.
A three-piece wing-slat is situated on the wing
leading edge and the wing trailing edge is occupied
with two-piece elevons
This is how he denigrates the compound delta design of LCA.JUST TO PROVIDE A BETTER VIEW FOR THE PILOT. I AM YET TO COME ACROSS A MORE MISCHEVIOUS STATEMENT ON LCA ON THE NET.The job of reduced sweep it is to provide delaying of flow separation in high AOA manuevers and improve low speed handling chareceteristics ,not to provide a better view for the pilot's picnic.
Though dimensions of «Ajita» are brought to a
minimum that together with the use of composite
materials provides it with small optical and radartracking
signature. In the aircraft design a number
of additional measures on decrease of radar crosssection
are implemented. Such measures are:
– Giving to channels of the air intake of the
bent Y-shaped form, aimed to shield compressor
blades from direct radar tracking;
– Rather wide application of radio absorbing
materials and coverings;
– Use of passive sensors
But it will still have 2 sq meter MIG-21 RCS.Howls that possible?
The plane having reduced static stability is
equipped with the Martin Marietta four-channel
digital electronic remote control system with the
higher level of protection against external electromagnetic
influences. There are no duplicating
analogue or mechanical systems onboard
The plane has RELAXED STATIC STABILITY not reduced static stability ,If people write like this with out even using proper wordswhy are they publishing this garbage? The term reduced points to deficiency in design for general readers..
As a result the "Tejas" Mk.1
aircrafts as it turns out, possess underestimated
(in comparison with the estimated) flight characteristics
and do not correspond even to «minimal
requirements of the customer for combat load».
It was reported, that the weight of empty
"Tejas" MK.1 aircraft exceeds the estimated one
by 1500 kg, i.e. makes not less than 7000 kg (and
probably more). It is necessary to say, that the
growth of the craft's weight during its designing
is quite usual. For example Mig-29 became 1.13
times heavier during the period between the initial
project and the first serial fighter (from 9,670 to
10,900 kg) that however didn't make any remarkable
consequences for the program. Probably
the weight of the US F-35 grew even more significantly
but also did not result in any troubles
for the designers.
He starts his excess 1500 kg weight drivel again!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.cleverly concealing that weight increase despite increased usage of composites is dus to the weapon load increase to 3.5 ton from the original Mig spec of 2 tons. From this point onwards he repeatedly denigrates the plane without any single clarification from ADA regarding why the weight increase? Can it be reduced with more usage of composites,despite the availability of CEILMAC reports.
However the increase of this
major characteristic by 1.27-1.30 times nevertheless
forced the Air Forces of India reject further
purchases of this "overweight" fighter
As usual his own genious self.
