Indian RCS measuring facility is located in Hyderabad in Research centre Imarat. Below is a part of studies done thr.
http://www.google.co.in/url?sa=t&rc...2X_RCcw8ajb1CBbNvNvmQ&bvm=bv.1357700187,d.bmk
I pointed out correctly with my two posts. It talks of 2 anechoic chambers, one closed range and one open range. 4 facilities in all.
All of this is for scale models, 1/10th. Not for real, full sized aircraft as is the case for European and American birds.
Page 208 fig 2 shows the anechoic chamber for far field, fig 3 shows compact range.
No figures for open and closed ranges, too bad. Page 210 explains the use of a 1/10th scale model.
Such facilities for scale models exist in many countries, actually very basic for a country like India. I am talking about RCS measurement for a full scale model, that is because the real aircraft will have significant differences in wave behavior compared to scale models. Imagine how a 3 cm wave may behave on a 1.5m x 1m x 0.5m model compared to a 15m x 10m x 5m aircraft. It's like building a sand castle on a beach and watching the sea waves behavior on it as compared to a full scale stone castle on the same beach and seeing a difference in sea wave behavior on it. Obviously there would be big differences. Similar but more accurate readings are generated from scale models for wind tunnel testing, but the data generated is enough to design the aircraft. Even then the power houses in aeronautics still prefer full scale models for wind tunnel tests. Not the case with a scale model radar range and anechoic chamber. The data simply isn't enough for it.
More importantly, if LCA is expected to have a RCS even remotely close to Rafale/EF, the design
must incorporate LO characteristics right from design stage. It is
impossible to make an aircraft LO after the design stage is completed. I doubt ADA had the capability at the time to even speak of stealth during LCA's design stage in the mid 80s.
You can make minor changes like better RAM (if catered for the extra 1 ton of weight on a light aircraft) and radar blockers to reduce RCS. Significant changes may see a 50% decrease in radar detection. What I mean to say is the conversion of an existing aircraft like LCA Mk1 or F/A-18 Hornet to LCA Mk2 or Super Hornet may not see massive differences in RCS reduction, especially average RCS. To reduce radar detection range by 50%, the aircraft must have a RCS that is at least 16 times the original RCS. So, if the LCA Mk1 is detected at 150Km and if I want the LCA Mk2 to be detected at 75 Km, a hypothetical 1m2 RCS for Mk1 must be reduced to 0.06m2 on Mk2.
"Officially", LCA has a RCS 3 times smaller than Mirage-2000 while Rafale has a RCS 10-20 times smaller than Mirage-2000. Unofficially, I don't know, maybe you are right, especially if ADA is talking about average RCS while Dassault is referring to frontal RCS.
Aerodynamics always takes higher priority over stealth.
Scale model testing gives some clues on RCS figures, but it is in no way an exact measure. Nor can the data generated be used on real aircraft.
Like I said, full scale facilities are being built around the country. Large anechoic chambers are already confirmed in 2 different places for HAL and DRDO, 2 for IAF, apart from a number of smaller facilities. I have a feeling we may see a full scale radar range in Chitradurga, and/or Hyderabad, where it was announced will hold a new range for EW.
LINK.
