ADA Tejas (LCA) News and Discussions

[ersakthivel]

The GE F-414 EPE does not exist. It will be developed only after some country, like India or Brazil, buys the Block 3 Super Hornet. As of today only the EDE will be made for the USN. LCA will have a similar engine, not the EPE. EPE won't come for $700Million, the deal we have currently signed. It is supposed to be a 5th gen engine and will cost $2-3Billion because they need someone else to fund the development program where everything on the engine will be changed.

Lets see which engine gets on board the LCA tejas naval version? you can also reply whether the report that EPE is being considered for grippen NG is true or not?EPE is not tied to FA-18 alone. UNDERSTAND THAT.There is a boeing official' s interview quoting that EPE will form the baseline of TEJAS engine.90 kn is enough for tejas, what i said was even further powerful engine is available for LCA.

Rafale and EF were not chosen for having low wing loading. There are various other parameters in the play here.

Once again there is no point in typing stuff like this.The most important parameter is the low wing loading delta which is the basic idea of their design.You need not invent stuff that doesn't exist.Once again you are craftily avoiding why all high wing loading fighters bit dust? Various other parameters I suppose.

The basis of your discussion has been that the LCA with low wingloading will not only survive other fighters, which is subjective but can be agreed upon, but will take the fight to the point where even $100Million+ fighters like J-20/PAKFa and F-22 will be entirely obsolete against LCA. So, you see what I have a problem with?

A low wing loading LCAA is as world class as any other fighter thats all I said. How many millions you put in a fighter doesn't matter one BVr takes it down regardless of the platform from which it is fired.

The core of your discussion was centered around how IAF can induct 400-500 LCAs to beat 400+ J-11s and J-20s simply because of AWACS support. When I pointed out every single factor is against LCA even with AWACS and tanker support, you still stubbornly believe that the LCA's "low wingloading" will beat the J-20 and J-11 every time. Check back on your previous posts.

See tejas production line will keep chugging and IAF does not need to depend on russian fighters forever for every thing. By the time mk-1 is induction finishes with 40 planes mk-2 will be ready , by the time 80 plus mk-2 are inducted we can have the steakth mk-3 version ready if sensible approach is adopted. So no need for 400 mk-2 LCAs.

What is the role of FA-18 ew aircraft? Do you explain that? what prevents rafales sukhois and LCAA from haing sensor fused data link with LCAA and other ew crafts.

This is a software simulation of a fight between 24 Su-35s and 24 Super Hornets+ 2 AWACS+ 6 tankers over Taiwan. A US vs China simulation.

Go through the entire video and you will get how things are done. Notice no specialized EW aircraft are used in any simulation (there are other videos with F-35s and F-22s also) because such a situation does not exist.

Software simulations are task specific not be all and end all.What is the role of ew craft in general?

Overall, only 4 Su-35s were killed against the loss of every American fighter and support aircraft. When it came to Su-35 vs F-22, it was the exact opposite with 4 F-22s lost, along with 2 AWACS and 4 tankers against 24 Su-35 losses. But in both simulations the Su-35s always took out the AWACS and tankers like they were nothing, even though the second simulation had an overwhelming F-22 presence.

LCA is a light weight single engine fighter forming about 10 percent of IAF. Not 90 percent .

So, expecting a far more advanced force of J-20s defeating all 400-500 LCAs with AWACS and tanker support is a 100% given, no questions asked.

Wars are nevr fought on YOUTUBE simulation.If we adopt a sensible approach we can have a mk-3 twin engines stealth tejas to counter them.that's what tejas has done to indian aviation.

This simulation was done by a company which sells this same simulator to various defence agencies like,
Used by Defense Specialists

Then all the 4th gen fighters other than su-35 are obsolete I suppose.

So, there is a huge difference in what you believe, and what IAF believes. LCA is obsolete, there is no doubt about it. The numbers coming down from 500-600 in 1999 to 123 in 2009 is an obvious indication of that.

As a fighter line LCA tejas 's continuance in IAf is assured. mk-1 ,mk-2, mk-3 in stealth version with twin engines if proposed as and when design matures for each product. F-22 finished production with 187. Do you call that success or failiure? F-35 has orders for 1700 do you call it more bigger success?

Anyway, tell me, what do you know about BVR and EW? You obviously have major misconceptions about this, just like the AWACS misconception.

Well asking as if you don't know!!!!! I have posted all I know in all posts with all links. I can't start again from LKG.
EW is the ability to foul the link between BVr and mother craft, Missile approach warning that helps 4th gens to easily evade 5th gen's fewer BVRs.

Your simulation is like a game of super mario in this regard. If TYPHOON has a missile warning of 100 kms will it fly blindly staight into the F-22's missile like the way your simulation suggests? Only mad pilot will do that.

If you are asking like a child what is ew. Then let me give you a slap in the face answer. It is the same system relied upon by the radar silent 5th gen stealths to launch their much vaunted bvrs. If they switch on their radar the modern ESM suite in any 4th gen will use the same radar beam to target the emittor., they will no longer be 5th gen stealth.


LPI asea is low pobability of intercept only not no probability of intercept. Wide spectrum radar warning receivers can detect aseas in future.

That is ew.Understood?

 

[p2prada]

mk-1 ,mk-2, mk-3 in stealth version with twin engines if proposed as and when design matures for each product.

F-22 finished production with 187.

Complete air dominance even with one squadron.

Do you call that success or failiure? F-35 has orders for 1700 do you call it more bigger success?

Only after it is no longer in development. That's more than what I can say for LCA.

 

[p2prada]

Well asking as if you don't know!!!!! I have posted all I know in all posts with all links. I can't start again from LKG.

I am not talking about posting links. Say what you know about BVR and EW without posting links.

You don't simply throw around words like Growler and then say it does EW and that it will be datalinked with LCA and that it will take out F-22. That's not how the world works.

Don't throw around words like AWACS and Passive guidance without knowing what it means or what's the purpose. It only makes you look more illiterate. Are you here to learn or rant? I have been on this board nearly since it's inception and have debated with many people. Some know more than me, some know less than me. In the end everybody learned from each other. OTOH, you are the first guy who's showed up here and only knows how to rant.

 

[ersakthivel]

I am not talking about posting links. Say what you know about BVR and EW without posting links.

You don't simply throw around words like Growler and then say it does EW and that it will be datalinked with LCA and that it will take out F-22. That's not how the world works.

Don't throw around words like AWACS and Passive guidance without knowing what it means or what's the purpose. It only makes you look more illiterate. Are you here to learn or rant? I have been on this board nearly since it's inception and have debated with many people. Some know more than me, some know less than me. In the end everybody learned from each other. OTOH, you are the first guy who's showed up here and only knows how to rant.

The radar data of all sukhois and rafales , Tejas and stealth UCAVs(IRST or L band asea ,in future off course) will be sensor fused to awacs. And AWACS will relay the most optimal information to the most relevant fighter in therter regardless of who has bigger radar or who has twin engines. And BVRs will be fired from the fighter which has most probability of taking down the enemy.

Hi HI HI no sukhoi commander can refuse to link his radar data with awacs in future air war,,,as you rambled on:thumb:

Now we re bordering on the point of posting out of topic maerial in this thread and being warned by MODs. You do one thing you open EW role of awacs in a separate thread we will shift this discussion there. It has no relation to tejas's capabilities as all IAF fighters in future PAKFA or sukhoi or rafale will rely on such sensor fused datalink.

Once again you are cleverly sidestepping the point that how radar silent F-22 targets it's BVr without the other fighter's help. So typical of you. DOn't reply like a genius as you once did by----ANOTHER F-22. As I too can say use the same analogy by saying that tejas relies on another ew caft to target it's BVrs.

 

[ersakthivel]

I am not talking about posting links. Say what you know about BVR and EW without posting links.

You don't simply throw around words like Growler and then say it does EW and that it will be datalinked with LCA and that it will take out F-22. That's not how the world works.

Don't throw around words like AWACS and Passive guidance without knowing what it means or what's the purpose. It only makes you look more illiterate. Are you here to learn or rant? I have been on this board nearly since it's inception and have debated with many people. Some know more than me, some know less than me. In the end everybody learned from each other. OTOH, you are the first guy who's showed up here and only knows how to rant.

Learning from you is a very dangerous proposition to me. I will never try that.

 

[p2prada]

Then all the 4th gen fighters other than su-35 are obsolete I suppose.

Depending on the roles and what they carry inside and outside.

The more it carries inside, the greater it's survivability against a 5th gen. Aircraft like MKI can carry electronics in many tons while LCA is restricted to 500 or 600Kg.

 

[ersakthivel]

Depending on the roles and what they carry inside and outside.

The more it carries inside, the greater it's survivability against a 5th gen. Aircraft like MKI can carry electronics in many tons while LCA is restricted to 500 or 600Kg.

but to power those tons of electronics it has to ask for a loan of spare power from enemy fighter perhaps.
What prevents a tejas fighter to be equipped with 100 kn EPE engine which has a spare power of 30 kn to power it's 3 ton electroincs( instead of wepon load ) including bigger radar like the one mounted on top of the embraer ew craft to fly along side a squadron of tejas fighters with lesser range radar. Only your signature perhaps. Can it be done or not?

I know bloody well it could be done.If the need arose.

By the way you still haven't replied about report that grippen NG is mulling epe version for better power, which is officially posted on the web.Typical of your dodging skills.


http://www.geaviation.com/press/military/military_20111204.html

So grippen is getting 98 kn engine. So tejas can get the same engine. Then do the math for twr of mk-2 and come back.

http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-n...12-07-10/gripen-ef-fighter-takes-step-forward

http://www.aviationweek.com/Blogs.a...79a7Post:16f384d9-46ab-4299-bd55-0f03086bcbb0

So what can you say about your bluff tht EPE is a paper tiger?

 

[p2prada]

Hi HI HI no sukhoi commander can refuse to link his radar data with awacs in future air war,,,as you rambled on:thumb:

How will that help it provide targeting? Targeting information transmission isn't as simple as you think. It is very complex. There is a huge difference between simply being linked to the AWACS display and targeting from a third party aircraft using AWACS linked to LCA, which never happens, btw.

Now we re bordering on the point of posting out of topic maerial in this thread and being warned by MODs.

The discussion is still relevant to the LCA. We are trying to fit the LCA into a networked environment after all. No need to side step. But if people are confused about simple concepts then it won't go anywhere.

It has no relation to tejas's capabilities as all IAF fighters in future PAKFA or sukhoi or rafale will rely on such sensor fused datalink.

You are confused between sensor fusion and networking. You are merely throwing around big words without any understanding of what you are saying.

Once again you are cleverly sidestepping the point that how radar silent F-22 targets it's BVr without the other fighter's help. So typical of you.

I am not sidestepping anything. I know how the F-22's silent kill concept works. But do you? How about explaining it in the first place?

People just look at the word silent kill and think it is some type of ninja assassin. So, explain what you know about it.

Every aircraft can do what the F-22 can do. Even LCA. But there is a massive, massive difference in the execution of such a silent kill.

DOn't reply like a genius as you once did by----ANOTHER F-22. As I too can say use the same analogy by saying that tejas relies on another ew caft to target it's BVrs.

You don't know what is EW, you don't know what is an EW aircraft, you don't know what is targeting. You don't know what is required for a BVR lock. Explain, anything, anything at all and let's see what you actually know about these things. I have already explained some of it in our discussions, so you can check back.

So, can you tell me what the EW aircraft can do here? Explain, because whatever the Growler can do the LCA can also do, albeit in a very limited way depending on the role.

Btw, we don't have any dedicated EW aircraft apart from some special mission aircraft which won't be used in OCA or DCA.

 

[p2prada]

but to power those tons of electronics it has to ask for a loan of spare power from enemy fighter perhaps.
What prevents a tejas fighter to be equipped with 100 kn EPE engine which has a spare power of 30 kn to power it's 3 ton electroincs( instead of wepon load ) including bigger radar like the one mounted on top of the embraer ew craft to fly along side a squadron of tejas fighters with lesser range radar. Only your signature perhaps. Can it be done or not?

Explain how power is generated on aircraft?

Hint: Hydroelectricity.

By the way you still haven't replied about report that grippen NG is mulling epe version for better power, which is officially posted on the web.Typical of your dodging skills.

No, I am not. Gripen NG is a 2018 project. They have not yet decided on their engine whereas we have already signed a deal for the 99 engines for LCA. This means the EPE is not meant for us at all. If Saab decides to use it, good for them. But they will have to pay far more than the $6Million we are paying for each engine.

So grippen is getting 98 kn engine. So tejas can get the same engine. Then do the math for twr of mk-2 and come back.

Good, now you understand that it is a 98 KN engine. EPE is a 120 KN engine. We are not getting it. The EPE for Saab is only a proposal. The final decision depends on a lot of factors, but even they may choose the regular F-414 because they won't be able to afford the $2-3billion development cost for the EPE.

Apart from that we don't know the current specs of LCA Mk2 until it starts flying, or perhaps the coming air show. After that we can calculate. But it will be in the Mirage-2000 category. 98KN engine, 7 to 7.5 tons empty weight, 5 tons of payload etc. So, around Mirage-2000s T/W at worst. A little better at best.

Until F-414EPE flies with the Gripen, it is a paper tiger. Our deal is definitely for a 98KN engine because of the estimated cost. If it crosses $2 or $3 Billion, only then we can talk.

 

[ersakthivel]

Explain how power is generated on aircraft?

Hint: Hydroelectricity.

You may be here from the inception of the forum. But your statements like

1.a 30 km radar tracking mig-21 bisons that too one target a t a time, will wipe out a squadron of lcas with 150 km detection and tracking TEJAS,

2.And low wing loading is relate to passenger aircrafts ,

3.thrust vectoring has nothing to do with enhancing close combat manoeuvers ,

4.One F-22 will shoot the BVr and another will guide it,

gives us all a hint to your depth of knowledge or rather lack of it.

No, I am not. Gripen NG is a 2018 project. They have not yet decided on their engine whereas we have already signed a deal for the 99 engines for LCA. This means the EPE is not meant for us at all. If Saab decides to use it, good for them. But they will have to pay far more than the $6Million we are paying for each engine.

from where did you get the 6 million price tag?EPE development is finished ,if large orders are given it will be produced,it is the statement of boeing official.Indian ge -414 version will be based on epe version,it is also official boeing statement.Your statements dont worth a dime against these,mind it.

Good, now you understand that it is a 98 KN engine. EPE is a 120 KN engine. We are not getting it. The EPE for Saab is only a proposal. The final decision depends on a lot of factors, but even they may choose the regular F-414 because they won't be able to afford the $2-3billion development cost for the EPE.

I put the worst case scenario for mk-2 if we don't go for epe version.Give me one authentic source that cites the thrust figure for mk-2 Ge-44 engine and then talk further on the subject.Who affords what is none of your concern.

Apart from that we don't know the current specs of LCA Mk2 until it starts flying, or perhaps the coming air show. After that we can calculate. But it will be in the Mirage-2000 category. 98KN engine, 7 to 7.5 tons empty weight, 5 tons of payload etc. So, around Mirage-2000s T/W at worst. A little better at best.

once again stupid twr calculation from you. you and shipone are the deciding authority here it seems, i have already explained the way to calculate twr. The weight of mk-2 wont be 7.5 tons or 75 tons as you fondly wish.According to ADA chief composites may go up to more than 50 percent in mk-2.So your weight figure is I am my source only type of statement.

Until F-414EPE flies with the Gripen, it is a paper tiger. Our deal is definitely for a 98KN engine because of the estimated cost. If it crosses $2 or $3 Billion, only then we can talk.

Even before flying PAKFA seems to be a paper tiger if we consider VLO design specs,what is your take on that?

 

[p2prada]

1.a 30 km radar tracking mig-21 bisons that too one target a t a time, will wipe out a squadron of lcas with 150 km detection and tracking TEJAS,

Those specs are for an ancient version of the Kopyo. Have you seen the ancient version of the EL/M 2032? The Kopyo was actually ahead of the EL/M at the time of the upgrade. The current specs for the Bison are far greater. Actually the Bison radar delivers 5KW of power, more than MKI's first Bars version. The Mig-21 can track a 5m2 target at 80Km, very similar to what LCA can do. Apart from that LCA will fly rookie pilots while Mig-21 will have our best pilots on them. According to our ACM, LCA is a little better than a Mig-21, so advantage LCA. But nowhere as what you are claiming. No need to call him a liar, because these guys are one of the few people in the country who actually speak the truth.

3.thrust vectoring has nothing to do with enhancing close combat manoeuvers ,

Only your assumption, I did not say that. You merely digressed from what we were talking about. I never brought in TVC.

4.One F-22 will shoot the BVr and another will guide it,

Seeker-Shooter combo. Exists for all aircraft and not just F-22.

gives us all a hint to your depth of knowledge or rather lack of it.

Heavily dependent on the comprehension ability of the reader.

from where did you get the 6 million price tag?

Simple math. 600million/99 engines.

EPE development is finished ,if large orders are given it will be produced,it is the statement of boeing official.Indian ge -414 version will be based on epe version,it is also official boeing statement.Your statements dont worth a dime against these,mind it.

Show me proof.

It requires 40-50 prototype models with minimum 50000 hours of testing in both air and ground to claim that. So, prove it. If the engine development was finished then it is very, very, very, very easy to find information about it because GE would have advertised it openly to all and sundry.

put the worst case scenario for mk-2 if we don't go for epe version.Give me one authentic source that cites the thrust figure for mk-2 Ge-44 engine and then talk further on the subject.Who affords what is none of your concern.

Who can afford IS the primary concern. Building the engine is the easy part for GE. EPE is a 5th gen engine. It won't come cheap. Even GTRE has asked for $2Billion as an initial amount for development of 5th gen M88-3 up from the current 4th gen M88-2. Simple math says we will need $2-3Billion minimum for development and production, thereby pushing the price to $30Million per engine for 99 engines. So, no need to be stupid regarding this. It is obvious a 5th gen engine will never come at $6Million that we will be paying for the F-414s.

once again stupid twr calculation from you. you and shipone are the deciding authority here it seems, i have already explained the way to calculate twr. The weight of mk-2 wont be 7.5 tons or 75 tons as you fondly wish.According to ADA chief composites may go up to more than 50 percent in mk-2.So your weight figure is I am my source only type of statement.

Actually we are.

MK2 composites will not go up by more than 50%, maybe he is talking about % of total weight. That's like 5-10% up from current usage. No big deal. Regardless the aircraft will be 1m longer and will need 0.5 tons of extra fuel to counter the extra fuel consumption. That alone is 500Kg of extra fuel, minimum, which means larger tanks along with more space for fuel and avionics. The engine is also bigger and heavier than the F-404. The weight of LCA being 7-7.5 tons as a design parameter compared to 5.5 tons on Mk1 is a good thing, not a bad thing. Your physics assumptions are not needed here. We don't even need a T/W of 1.2 or anything if LCA is able to perform at the level of the Mirage-2000 and carry better things internally. T/W was more important earlier because of lower specs expected on Mk1.

A design weight of 7 tons with a weight increase by 500Kg would still be a good thing. The 7 ton dry weight isn't even my opinion. At least the aircraft will be at the level of a Mirage-2000-5 Mk2 or a F-16 Block 52, but with newer technology. Add sensor fusion and it will be at the level of Gripen C in technology. These are extremely realistic goals.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Keep Personal attack at bay, Discuss things as civilized members..

 

[p2prada]

Even before flying PAKFA seems to be a paper tiger if we consider VLO design specs,what is your take on that?

New generation. Simple as that.

For this you will need a basic understanding in radar operation and RCS.

Simple analogy will suffice. Flying requires navigation. Human eyes are of no use unlike how it is when we drive cars. When you are on the ground you have visual cues like the road, traffic, landmarks etc. In the air there is none. You can only rely on your instruments. Failure results in blindness. Like how our helicopter pilots landed in Pakistan after the GPS failed, they still thought they were in India. So, to know your exact position you need your navigation systems like GPS/GLONASS.

To find traffic in the air you will need radar. This is like how you use your eyes to find traffic while driving. Radar sees everything for you. Sometimes it fails during flight and you are forced to return. The aircraft will be grounded. It's equivalent to your eyes falling off while driving. Without the radar, which are your eyes, you can't "see" anything. Aircraft are complex bodies and always give out large returns. From the time radar was invented to the time F-117 first flew, the radar was enough to see everything. From the time F-117 flew to the current technology, the radar just became useless. It means your eyes are no longer of any use to you. So, now imagine having to drive without eyes, to a certain extent. This is where 5th gen is as of today. It is not total invisibility, but it is partial blindness to the point where 4th gen engagements systems and missiles have become useless overnight.

No, UHF, VHF, L band etc cannot help alleviate this problem because of physics laws. You are expecting technology will mature to the point where L band will help guide missiles like how X band did. But that is not at all possible from a physics point of view due to the size and nature of the wave forms. It's like expecting magnifying glass to replace microscopes in finding bacteria. You tell me if identifying bacteria can be done using a magnifying glass. Heck, you claim to be from the nanotech field (hard to believe). So, you get the analogy I am making here. It is the same for X band vs long waves. X band is your electron microscope. UHF is like your eyes. You are expecting the impossible. Hence the reason why I keep calling you an idiot because you stubbornly keep believing in the impossible.

Now, where does PAKFA come into all of this. Albeit your skewed view on VLO techniques, which are wrong btw, because both B-2 and F-117 don't have serpentine intakes and neither does the SR-71. Only F-22 and F-35 do and that's only a design solution, it is not etched in stone. As long as the design allows PAKFA to take away the enemy's ability to use the radar with shaping and materials, then the objective is achieved. There are various ways to achieve this stealth. Not just what was used on F-22. It's like using canards, lerx or levcons, the choice is there. All depends on design solutions. In PAKFA's case, there is a chance they will pack the inlet with plasma or use blades that don't reflect waves or use a blocker. RAM coating is a given. Each of these are more expensive than the other. Serpentine intakes are the cheapest solution. So, we merely need to wait for the design solution that they have chosen before jumping to conclusions.

As for their "less than satisfactory" lower fuselage design. It is only speculation. Pack the engine with a blocker and saw tooth edges and the critics will be satisfied. Pretty much what the F-22 did. There is no way to test it, except looking at pictures, hence the criticism. It may be very similar to that "canards are not stealthy" misconception.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Some Information on Radars about both MIG-21 bison and LCA Tejas..

Tejas :

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

MIG-21 Bison :

MIG-21 radar is not at level of comparison with Tejas hybrid one..

 

[p2prada]

It is comparable. These are very old specs.

As of today, all the info you find on Bars radar is for Bars 1 with 4.5KW transmitter. You barely find information about the 7KW transmitter Bars 2 because it was recently updated.

Kopyo-M has seen such software updates over many years. Overall the hardware may not look much, but the potential exists because it is still a 500mm radar compared to LCA's 600mm radar. It is still an old radar, but it's like comparing a large orange with a small orange.

Overscan's guide to Russian Military Avionics

Very good info on Russian systems.

Kopyo had a tracking range of 45Km for a 3m2 target.

Kopyo-M had a tracking range of 56Km when it first came out. Beyond that there were more updates that are not mentioned.

Overall the differences between 2032 and Kopyo-M are very small, to the point of irrelevance. The only advantage is LCA has greater processing capability being a new platform. But when it comes to real life engagement, actual BVR ranges, power aperture product (5KW*0.5m*0.5m*pi vs 2KW*0.6m*0.6m*pi), gain and attenuation in the medium still allow the 5KW Mig-21 radar to be on par with the LCA's 2KW radar. You can say that once detected, both aircraft will try to kill each other within the R-77 or Derby's seeker range for greater kill probability rather than simply rely on radar targeting. Primarily due to the smaller BVR loads that both aircraft carry. So, the key here is who detects who first.

But this is only comparing specs. The problem is by the time LCA comes into full service the Mig-21 will be retiring with highly experienced pilots. So, pilot quality is terribly one sided in favor of the Mig-21. This alone defeats any advantage LCA has. By the time LCA gets such pilots, it will be 2025-30. Quite like how the youtube karnal said IAF pilots are still learning how to fly the MKI even in 2008, 6 years after MKI was formally inducted.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

It can behigh power consumption with less range can only be less efficient radar which its specs shows..

(2KW*0.6m*0.6m*pi) if this so where i can found the needed link ?,

Technically both are different radars and power-consumptions are different..

 

[Kunal Biswas]

LCA TEJAS RADAR :

The engineering model of the LCA's Multi-Mode-Radar (MMR), complete with IFF dipoles. The digital signals processor (DSP) and radar computer are not separate and have been integrated into a single, larger LRU. The antenna is 650 mm wide, larger than the Phazotron Zhuk-ME's 624 mm antenna, although it certainly doesn't look it at first glance. AUW of the entire set is just 130 kg.

ACIG Exclusives : Aero India 2005 : Chapter 4

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

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

LCA radar specs says something else..

 

[ersakthivel]

Those specs are for an ancient version of the Kopyo. Have you seen the ancient version of the EL/M 2032? The Kopyo was actually ahead of the EL/M at the time of the upgrade. The current specs for the Bison are far greater. Actually the Bison radar delivers 5KW of power, more than MKI's first Bars version. The Mig-21 can track a 5m2 target at 80Km, very similar to what LCA can do. Apart from that LCA will fly rookie pilots while Mig-21 will have our best pilots on them. According to our ACM, LCA is a little better than a Mig-21, so advantage LCA. But nowhere as what you are claiming. No need to call him a liar, because these guys are one of the few people in the country who actually speak the truth.

Which has a better radar , anybody can guess, as I won't post any further on the topic.

HAL Tejas - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The coherent pulse-Doppler Multi-Mode Radar in development is designed to keep track of a maximum of 10 targets and allows simultaneous multiple-target engagement. Jointly developed by the LRDE and HAL Hyderabad, the MMR is being designed to perform multi-target search, track-while-scan (TWS), and ground-mapping functions.

It features look-up/look-down modes, low/medium/high pulse repetition frequencies (PRF), platform motion compensation, doppler beam-sharpening, moving target indication (MTI), Doppler filtering, constant false alarm rate (CFAR) detection, range-Doppler ambiguity resolution, scan conversion, and online diagnostics to identify faulty processor modules.

While originally planned to be fitted on production aircraft, delays in the development of MMR prompted the DRDO to co-operate with Israel Aerospace Industries to integrate a Hybrid version of the EL/M-2032 radar for use with Tejas.[36]

The LCA radar is a hybrid version of LRDE and EL/M-2032.When announcement regarding ASEA comes all doubting thomases can close their ears permanently.
The signal processor is isralei, the antena and everything else is INDIAN.So 2032 specs don't apply to tejas,
And saying one rustbucket 1.5 ton load carrying MIG-21 with lesser RADAR than TEJAS wiping out a squadron of higher range 3.5 ton load carrying tejas is your usual standard of authentic argument.

The EL/M-2032 radar used in LSP-3 has a detection and tracking range of up to 150 km in air-to-air mode, the air-to-ground mode generates high resolution radar imagery of locations at up to 150 km, and air-to-sea mode can detect and classify naval targets at ranges of up to 300 km.Another track System is an infrared search and track system (IRST) [64]

The development of an AESA radar for the Tejas is expected to begin pending the selection of a developmental partner. The contenders for the contract are the European Consortium EADS and the Israel's Elta. The initial contract will see the co-development of 10 prototypes.[65]

Only your assumption, I did not say that. You merely digressed from what we were talking about. I never brought in TVC.

it is usual dodging stuff. If something the other guy posts is proves you are wrong ,it is typical of you to say I never brought this in.It is irrelevant.But at the same time you will ask for tons of proof from the other guy, and even if links are given ,you will simply ignore.You ill keep saying forever ignore thrust vectoring,ignore thrust vectoring,it doesn't do anything to improve the close combat performance of high wing loading sukhoi

Seeker-Shooter combo. Exists for all aircraft and not just F-22.

So it does exist for tejas,That's what I am saying throughout this thread, A bigger RCS bigger RADAR tracking range seeker aircraft and tejas as shooter aircraft.As we can have tejas more in number for the same price.The IAF will combine sukhoi or rafale or anyother bigger radar craft with tejas to achieve this.However harder you deny it. It is the fact face it.

Heavily dependent on the comprehension ability of the reader.



Simple math. 600million/99 engines.

I any official source regarding the price of the EPE ,not your simple math.Development cost of EPE will be shared by multiple users ,not only IAF.

Show me proof.

It requires 40-50 prototype models with minimum 50000 hours of testing in both air and ground to claim that. So, prove it. If the engine development was finished then it is very, very, very, very easy to find information about it because GE would have advertised it openly to all and sundry.

GE has already advertised it all over.Only sundries like you are closing the eye.Anyway let's wait for engine thrust announcement for LCA NAVY to clear the air.There are 3 links in the previously closed ADA tejas thread alone regarding EPE from GE. And it is hard for you to find out.

Who can afford IS the primary concern. Building the engine is the easy part for GE. EPE is a 5th gen engine. It won't come cheap. Even GTRE has asked for $2Billion as an initial amount for development of 5th gen M88-3 up from the current 4th gen M88-2. Simple math says we will need $2-3Billion minimum for development and production, thereby pushing the price to $30Million per engine for 99 engines. So, no need to be stupid regarding this. It is obvious a 5th gen engine will never come at $6Million that we will be paying for the F-414s.

EPE is not exclusively manufactured for LCA like french made engine for ALH, This shows the length to which you can go to write any bullshit to bolster your non existing truths, countering official press release as if EPE is developed exclusively for TEJAS.

Actually we are.

MK2 composites will not go up by more than 50%, maybe he is talking about % of total weight. That's like 5-10% up from current usage. No big deal. Regardless the aircraft will be 1m longer and will need 0.5 tons of extra fuel to counter the extra fuel consumption. That alone is 500Kg of extra fuel, minimum, which means larger tanks along with more space for fuel and avionics. The engine is also bigger and heavier than the F-404. The weight of LCA being 7-7.5 tons as a design parameter compared to 5.5 tons on Mk1 is a good thing, not a bad thing. Your physics assumptions are not needed here. We don't even need a T/W of 1.2 or anything if LCA is able to perform at the level of the Mirage-2000 and carry better things internally. T/W was more important earlier because of lower specs expected on Mk1.

Further weight reduction in mk-1 is possible as pointed out by CEMILAC report itself.
he further said it may go up to 60 percent weightwise.And as usual you won,t give any official link pointing out the final thrust of the GE- 414 engine that is going to be put on the tejas, but will say twr is worse than mirage!!!!!1You don't know the final weight, you don,t know the final thrust but you are sure TWR is worse than mirage.

A design weight of 7 tons with a weight increase by 500Kg would still be a good thing. The 7 ton dry weight isn't even my opinion. At least the aircraft will be at the level of a Mirage-2000-5 Mk2 or a F-16 Block 52, but with newer technology. Add sensor fusion and it will be at the level of Gripen C in technology. These are extremely realistic goals.

So if you cannot find any link regarding regarding EPE in the closed tejas -III thread then admit you don't know what it is and wait for oficial announcement.

 

[ersakthivel]

How will that help it provide targeting? Targeting information transmission isn't as simple as you think. It is very complex. There is a huge difference between simply being linked to the AWACS display and targeting from a third party aircraft using AWACS linked to LCA, which never happens, btw.



The discussion is still relevant to the LCA. We are trying to fit the LCA into a networked environment after all. No need to side step. But if people are confused about simple concepts then it won't go anywhere.



You are confused between sensor fusion and networking. You are merely throwing around big words without any understanding of what you are saying.



I am not sidestepping anything. I know how the F-22's silent kill concept works. But do you? How about explaining it in the first place?

People just look at the word silent kill and think it is some type of ninja assassin. So, explain what you know about it.

just a while before your were sitting at the foot of One MR.GAMBIT in the stealth tech thread in this froum, asking innocent questions like,
Sir ,what is LPI ASEA RADAR?
Sir ,is there no way to jam asea radar?
Sir,What is this and that?
I have been there and read all the bull shit.So don't pretend to be a BBBBBBBIIIIIIIIIIIGGGGGGGGGGGG expert on every thing under the sun.

Posting thing like silent assasin and ninja stuff doesn't mean you have a docterate in them either.

There are three ways of silent kill
1.Detecting electronic emissions from enemy enemy fighter called ELINT,
2.Passive IRST tracking,
3.Ridind the radar waves emitted by the enemy radar craft using ESM suit as offensive defence aid,
Every one knows that.So don't try to side track the issue.
The real issue is if seeker -shooter combination exists for all planes, not just F-22.

Every aircraft can do what the F-22 can do. Even LCA. But there is a massive, massive difference in the execution of such a silent kill.



You don't know what is EW, you don't know what is an EW aircraft, you don't know what is targeting. You don't know what is required for a BVR lock. Explain, anything, anything at all and let's see what you actually know about these things. I have already explained some of it in our discussions, so you can check back.

So, can you tell me what the EW aircraft can do here? Explain, because whatever the Growler can do the LCA can also do, albeit in a very limited way depending on the role.



Btw, we don't have any dedicated EW aircraft apart from some special mission aircraft which won't be used in OCA or DCA.

seeker -shooter combination exists for all type of aircrafts, not just for F-22

 

[ersakthivel]

ELTA MAKES SOME INCREDIBLY EFFECTIVE ELECTRONIC WARAFARE & JAMMING PODS | aviationintel

So 4th gen aircraft like tejas can spoof the BVr missiles fired from 5th gen fighters like F-22 ,they are not sitting ducks to be shot at as it is made out to be.Ultimately it doesn't matter whether the fighter is 4th gen or 5th gen,as long as spoofing system is available against BVR missilies.

On aircraft ECM can take the form of an attachable underwing pod or could be embedded in the airframe. Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radars like those mounted on the F-22 or MiG-35 can also act as an ECM device to track, locate and eventually jam enemy radar. Previous radar types were not capable of performing these activities due to:

the inability of the antenna to use suboptimal frequencies
the processing power needed
the impossibility to practically intermix or segment antenna usages

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth-generation_jet_fighter

Even committed fifth generation fighter users such as the Israelis concede that advances in sensors and computing will overcome a pure stealth configuration within a decade. This is why the Israelis insisted that the F-35 have defined interfaces so that the electronic warfare systems could be constantly improved to match the threat.[49] All known fifth generation designs have extensive electronic warfare systems, partly in response to an incident where the limited EW systems on a F-117 may have led to its loss in combat. Stealth is now seen as "part of the overall electronic warfare issue", in that a stealthy platform is easier to hide with the assistance of jamming.

So everyone in the world except some expert members here accept that 5th gen's stealth won't last beyond a decade and it is just another defensive aid like the ECM suite.The guys who don't accept this universal fact continue to insist one F-22 will wipe out a squadron of enemy fighters and 100 J-20s will wipe out 500 tejas and on and on.........

And that is the reason why americans said enough with 187 F-22s and designing lesser stealth F-35 to be used in thousands.