ADA Tejas (LCA) News and Discussions

[santosh_g]

Gentlemen, I am a guy who has not only flown these machines but have also had very good knowledge of aerodynamics, EW and missile warfare. LCA is just not up to the mark for being a carrier based ac. Period.
two generations of HAL scientists have started taking pension for the life and may be two more will have it but this ac will never be able to deliver what it was designed for as by than it will be too old a design.

sir , what about IAF tejas ?? whats your opinion on that?? can it be made very gud 4.5 gen fighter in future??

 

[arnabmit]

Tejas not suffering delays due to technical deficiency | idrw.org

Recent media reports has been claiming technical deficiency of Tejas, sources close to idrw.org and some close to the program have informed that Tejas program is not suffering from technical deficiency has reported, other sources somewhat confirmed that "Go slow "approach has been adopted on AMCA case but work is moving ahead by small group of scientist has most of focus is still on achieving IOC-2 and to get Tejas MK-II in air by 2015.

Claims of Tejas requiring hours or days of technical checks after each flight was also dismissed by our sources. "It has to happen when TD-1 and TD-2 has to fly but not now" claimed a source, "same aircrafts are available for flights even on same day if they are any schedule test flights ". Aircrafts have successfully operated outside HAL complex (Bangalore) many times for various trials with minimum Ground crew "said same source.

Another source claimed "Tejas is suffering delays due to inexperience of ADA and HAL in getting things done in time frame and its failure to move production of various components from lab to production house". But there is no denying that HAL is also guilty for not able to put the aircraft in production due to its own deficiency and it lack of trained manpower. It takes HAL 9 to 12 months to assemble and make one Tejas aircraft airworthy, HAL is trying to bring it down immediately to 3 months and by 2015 HAL plans to cut it to 1.5 months for each aircraft.

IAF have ordered 40 Tejas MK-1, first 20 Tejas MK-1 will be based on IOC-2 Configuration and next batch will be based on Tejas MK-1 FOC configuration, ADA will be putting together Tejas MK-2 for its first flight by early 2015. In next Two or three years Tejas program has to achieve IOC-2, FOC for Tejas MK-1 and first flight of Tejas MK-2 and its production and certification , Refocus will also be back on testing of Naval Tejas . This has lead to "Go slow "approach on AMCA. And first flight of AMCA will also suffer delays due to this and first flight mostly likely will happen in 2020 or later as per sources.

 

[ersakthivel]

Gentlemen, I am a guy who has not only flown these machines but have also had very good knowledge of aerodynamics, EW and missile warfare. LCA is just not up to the mark for being a carrier based ac. Period.
two generations of HAL scientists have started taking pension for the life and may be two more will have it but this ac will never be able to deliver what it was designed for as by than it will be too old a design.

I read somewhere in this forum that you have sent a fighter design of your own to the HAL and received some reply for that. I really appreciate the effort you put in for that. As a designer you must have been very confident of your design to prove it's mettle in the battlefield regardless of the reply from HAL.

In the same way designers of Tejas too must have been very confident of their design. Isn't it? They set out to achieve four very important technological capabilities in the country,

1. Dynamically unstable flight profile fighter that is controlled totally by Flight control software based on Fly by wire tech.

2. Mastering the composite tech,

3. Development of in house open architecture based avionics ,weapon stores system and mission computer along with many important sub systems like OBORG,RWR, indigenous EW suit,

4. Producing a world class radar jet engine .

You should appreciate the fact that they have achieved remarkable progress in some of the above fields and not so remarkable progress in rest as you can easily expect with a complex project of this kind.

In jet engine department they have a working K-9 that produces 10 percent lesser wet thrust even though up to the mark in dry thrust, the radar has been put together with Israeli back end processor from ELTA 2032.

You must measure this magnitude of achievement by comparing it to the fact the country has not produced in numbers even a decent 2nd generation fighter to date.

All this against the strong IAF desire for just another monkey version of MIG-21 like junk.The design team rightly decided that pandering to the IAF's tech blind tunnel vision of a a better Mig-21 is just like a one night affair opposed to the development of LCA which is a lasting relationship cultivated across hundreds of universities and research labs across the country cultivating the ecosystem of aeronautic research development , design and production transforming india into one of the major technological power with critical self reliance in sensitive and closely guarded field of fighter design.

For example no one come forward to help the ADA in worldwide search for consultancy when it comes to fly by wire tech. Even an experienced manufacturer like SAAB crashed the first prototype due to fly by wire issues and went to seek the help of US firms for their grippen.. But the FCS of tejas is praised by each and every one of the test pilots for emergency free 2000 test flights. Now the world grudgingly accepts Indian ability in this critical field.

So I am simply astounded by your statement that LCA is the worst design for any small light weight fighter, Well you are entitled to have such a base opinion of ADA as many other people have of ADA, but do you think Dassault which gave design consultancy for Tejas as also such an incompetent design house to recommend the world's worst fighter design for ADA? Well IMHO that is really stupendous judgement to make.
AFAIK ADA went for low wing loading platform , not low drag platform as many misconceived posters are posting here.

ADA went for most beneficial lift to drag ratio platform which is optimized for carefree unstable handling in the all important transonic flight regime.Many people put a magnifying glass to look at the small ant in the form of higher drag in tejas due to it's large wing. Bt they shut their eyes to the giant elephant called beneficial lift to drag ratio that is critical for high alpha trans sonic maneuvers .

You advised to me to read up on YF-23 in my spare time. You too can have a look at F-16 XL to understand the beneficial lift to drag ratio of the compound or cranked delta wing form that was first tried on it.Despite the higher drag the fighter performed much better than the lesser drag lower sweep version of the normal F-16.it is a universally acknowledged fact that needs no research in spare time .All the details in the following link.

http://www.airforcemag.com/MagazineArchive/Pages/1983/November 1983/1183f16xl.aspx

Ofcourse this design calls for higher wing weight as that of Mirages. But it gives it much lower wing loading in the form of better ITR and better nose pointing ability to have a quicker firing solution for high off boresight WVR missiles combined with HMDS suit.

This design naturally gives the tejas lower STR than the lesser swept wing fighters you mention. But no one can out turn a missile in sustained turn.And the advent of high offboresight WVR missiles has made this parameter not as important as the higher ITR that is the natural out come of the high wing weight low wing loading design of tejas.

The sweep angles for Tejas's wing are the outcome of the mirage like performance asked by IAF,not some arbitrary design assumption by ADA. The wing of tejas is not just a combination of two simple sweeps as you said.

The cranked part near the fuselage is at a different angle to the higher swept wing part near the tip. It is a cranked and compound type arrangement.

The wing has a twist at wing root and mounted in a slightly angular plane on the fuselage opposed to normally horizontal plane arrangement that is normally done.

All this were the result of complex CFD studies done in the computer labs of IIT delhi and validated in extensive wind tunnel testing of the scale model. There are CFD images on the net that detail the huge beneficial lift inducing vortices attached to the upper crank of the delta wing.This is the exact job done by canards in canard delta planforms.


The cranked and compound wing form of tejas achieve the same purpose of the canards without disturbing the aerodynamic efficiency of the wing by ensuring fresh air stream undisturbed by canards at all fligh profiles ,all the times and eliminating the need for extra power hungry and weight causing canards according to ADA. Also it avoids complex issue like force coupling that can be dangerous to the fighter leading to flat spin in some extreme flight profiles and uncontrollable oscillation that caused the crash of the grippen prototype while landing. Carefree canard operation also increases the RCS of the fighter.

I am as an aircraft designer you too would have gone through all the design disciplines. I can understand your contempt for HAL for not accepting your well thought out design. But don't do ADA what the HAL did to your design.

Important consideration in fighter design is the aerodynamic performance of the wing in trans sonic flight profile in which the fighter flies most of the time opposite to fancy topspeeds which will consume all the fuel in minutes .It cannot be based on the sole criteria of the last generation of career based simple delta fighter design's sweep angles.

However according to Navy needs the mk-2 is going to get higher power engines and levcons especially for carrier landing and suitable modifications in FCS using this LEVCONS. LEVCONS also don't disturb the fresh airstream as they fuction as part of the wing oppose to the independent functioning of canards. I think Indian Navy has some faint idea regarding the operational suitability of the fighter on a carrier before sinking in 1000 crores into the project.Once it takes off from carrier it must also fight in the air so we cannot base everything on the ease of carrier landing.

And you can show some belief on the design team initially led by KOTA HARINARAYANA to deliver a better than junk fighter to Indian Navy.

The following link will give you some idea regarding the persona of KOTA HRINARAYANA

http://tejas.gov.in/featured_articles/dr_kota_harinarayana/page01.html

 

[p2prada]

Another article with unnamed sources to dust the previous article with unnamed sources.

Also the 3 days per flight is a statistic. It doesn't mean the aircraft flies every 4th day.

F-22 is said to have a 30 hour maintenance for every flight hour, that doesn't mean the F-22 will fly for 4 hours and then go into a weekly hibernation with Sunday off.

 

[A chauhan]

We can make LCA stealthy but can't turn it into a Stealth, for it we'll have to design a completely new aircraft, which will surely have to be bigger than LCA to carry internal weapon loads, rather than developing a new Stealth-LCA we should turn our current AMCA program into a 5th+6th gen combo AC as pointed out by p2p and others, as now we are in the starting phase of AMCA program, and if we can not make it 6th gen then too we can develop some of 6th gen features for AMCA.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

That is what i mention at back, One can update fighters with there time..

If one wish to go with gen terminology then it should be like this > 5.0 - 5.5 - 5.8 - 6.0 Gen ration..

No system make a direct leap from 5th to 6th..

as now we are in the starting phase of AMCA program, and if we can not make it 6th gen then too we can develop some of 6th gen features for AMCA.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Btw, This is Tejas MK1 thread lets keep it to Tejas..

 

[ersakthivel]

Gentlemen, I am a guy who has not only flown these machines but have also had very good knowledge of aerodynamics, EW and missile warfare. LCA is just not up to the mark for being a carrier based ac. Period.
two generations of HAL scientists have started taking pension for the life and may be two more will have it but this ac will never be able to deliver what it was designed for as by than it will be too old a design.

Navy knows much better than that.They are no fools to sink 1000 crores voluntarily without being asked by ADA and HAL.navy thinks levcons along with much powerful engine will give mk-2 enough performance boost for carrier ops considering the dated versions of MIG-29s and Harriers they are operating as carrier fighters that are at the end of the product lifecycle with no scope for further upgradation opposed to brand new tejas that is just starting it's development lifecycle.

If it shows Mirage like performance even with half of mirages combat load the navy will be well served by tejas mk-2.No one is lining up to sell navy a brand new tailor made fighter they want with any useful capacity over mk-2.Even if they do ,the development cost they will ask alone will be more than the cost of the few squadrons of fighters they need.

 

[ersakthivel]

We can make LCA stealthy but can't turn it into a Stealth, for it we'll have to design a completely new aircraft, which will surely have to be bigger than LCA to carry internal weapon loads, rather than developing a new Stealth-LCA we should turn our current AMCA program into a 5th+6th gen combo AC as pointed out by p2p and others, as now we are in the starting phase of AMCA program, and if we can not make it 6th gen then too we can develop some of 6th gen features for AMCA.

We can not turn LCA stealthy for sure. But we can develop a larger twin engine version of LCA mk-3 as a stealth to induct within a decade if the mk-3 largely follows the wing design and aerodynamic loadout of LCA tejas design.it will reduce the flight testing time and project definition time needed .

but disturbing the ASR for AMCA will be a never ending disaster.We don't even have a decent fourth gen engine. How are we supposed to develop a sixth gen plane?
You should note it took IAf a decade o finalize the specs for AMCA. if we reopen it now IAF will take another decade to arrive at ASR.

If the IAf wishes for 6th gen plane then it should be asked to set the ASR in stone and identify the techs needed for it.It should be asked to provide the entire financial
contribution for the 6th gen project. then only there will be some commitment from IAf side for the project in the form of realistic ASR.If not it will give unattainable tech specs that will result in endless delays and more imported fighters.

 

[ersakthivel]

Iron Fist 2013 - Tejas - India's Light Combat Aircraft
In the video in above link just watch from 2 minutes 38 seconds to 2 minutes 43 seconds.

tejas just changes it's position completely so swiftly within 4 seconds.How useful it would be in dog fights?

If there is such huge amount of drag as some people repeatedly insist how can tejas achieve a complete change of position within 3 seconds?

It shows that it has excellent lift to drag ratio.

 

[p2prada]

We can make LCA stealthy but can't turn it into a Stealth, for it we'll have to design a completely new aircraft, which will surely have to be bigger than LCA to carry internal weapon loads, rather than developing a new Stealth-LCA we should turn our current AMCA program into a 5th+6th gen combo AC as pointed out by p2p and others, as now we are in the starting phase of AMCA program, and if we can not make it 6th gen then too we can develop some of 6th gen features for AMCA.

Yes. We should be capable of making a drastic jump in capability if we are to be able to induct our own aircraft as a frontline aircraft.

LCA is a 4th gen aircraft. Eventually it will carry some elements of 5th gen electronics like AESA, sensor fusion etc.

We should be able to make a direct jump from 4th gen to 6th gen if we are to keep our military relevant. The French and British are already planning this jump from Rafale and EF to UCAVs. We should not be far behind.

Anyway, there is nothing called 5.5th gen, 5.6th, 5.8th gen etc. Similarly, there is no 4.6th, 4.75th gen etc. There is a 4th gen aircraft. There is a 4th gen aircraft with 5th gen electronics called 4.5th gen. The Russians call it 4++. After that there is 5th gen and then 6th gen.

5th gen has everything. Stealth, AESA radar, sensor fusion, internal bays, EW, networking, directed energy weapons, supercruise capable engines, super maneuverability etc while having one major disadvantage.

6th gen removes the disadvantage while retaining all the qualities of the 5th gen. Removal of the pilot would improve the performance of the aircraft. Add extreme endurance to this as well, ie, being able to fly constantly for 50 to 100 hours in a single sortie. Like some UAVs can do today.

If we continue with today's AMCA, we will end up doing what we did with LCA or what the Europeans did with their program. They sacrificed stealth for saving cash and ended up with another 4th gen aircraft. Generations are marketing terms, but the number showcases the capabilities that the aircraft will bring.

 

[A chauhan]

...
You should note it took IAf a decade o finalize the specs for AMCA. if we reopen it now IAF will take another decade to arrive at ASR.

If the IAf wishes for 6th gen plane then it should be asked to set the ASR in stone and identify the techs needed for it.It should be asked to provide the entire financial
contribution for the 6th gen project. then only there will be some commitment from IAf side for the project in the form of realistic ASR.If not it will give unattainable tech specs that will result in endless delays and more imported fighters.

Sadly that is true !

Yes. We should be capable of making a drastic jump in capability if we are to be able to induct our own aircraft as a frontline aircraft.

LCA is a 4th gen aircraft. Eventually it will carry some elements of 5th gen electronics like AESA, sensor fusion etc.

Yeah, I also believe so, or at-least an AC which has 6th gen features.

We should be able to make a direct jump from 4th gen to 6th gen if we are to keep our military relevant. The French and British are already planning this jump from Rafale and EF to UCAVs. We should not be far behind.

Without any development partner I doubt we can do it in a fixed time period, however yes we can jump to a 6th gen AC.

Anyway, there is nothing called 5.5th gen, 5.6th, 5.8th gen etc. Similarly, there is no 4.6th, 4.75th gen etc. There is a 4th gen aircraft. There is a 4th gen aircraft with 5th gen electronics called 4.5th gen. The Russians call it 4++. After that there is 5th gen and then 6th gen.

Actually gradual progressive technology development is meant by KB through those numbers, however if we stick to the western definition of generations we'll call it as you pointed out.

5th gen has everything. Stealth, AESA radar, sensor fusion, internal bays, EW, networking, directed energy weapons, supercruise capable engines, super maneuverability etc while having one major disadvantage.

6th gen removes the disadvantage while retaining all the qualities of the 5th gen. Removal of the pilot would improve the performance of the aircraft. Add extreme endurance to this as well, ie, being able to fly constantly for 50 to 100 hours in a single sortie. Like some UAVs can do today.

I concur with you.

If we continue with today's AMCA, we will end up doing what we did with LCA or what the Europeans did with their program. They sacrificed stealth for saving cash and ended up with another 4th gen aircraft. Generations are marketing terms, but the number showcases the capabilities that the aircraft will bring.

Yeah, this why we should aim higher. I hope IAF and ADA will bring a positive change in their attitude and work methods for future projects and they will work in co-operation unlike what they did in LCA project.

 

[ersakthivel]

Guys, the Dassault and EADS have the engine tech ,R&D,
supporting industrial infrastructure and missile tech in place from eons of development of fourth gen fighters and their production running into thousands and thousands,(just add the total number of Mirage+Typhoon +RAFALE+Grippen number in service) all ready to be utlized for the 6th gen UCAVs.

Also they have mature airforces which set attainable ASR.
But sadly everything is missing here.
No industrial infra ,no engine tech, no no radar tech and air to air missile tech.

The LCA has just laid the foundation stone. it has just put up an alliance of nation wide research centers and tech universities in fighter development eco system.

With IAF and Navy restricting orders for just 180 fighters ,this fledgling eco system is not going to herald fulfledged private sector participation as supporting sub assembly vendors for such advanced projects like AMCA without which it will be impossible for ADA and HAL to shoulder the entire responsibility for 6th gens.

With no supporting industrial infra , and vendor base 6th gen will have to go through the same agonizing run of LCA , while the IAF fighter fleet gets swelled with 5th gen FGFA in hundreds and hundreds strengthening the russian R&D base with indian tax payer money.then we will be forever condmned to live as a vassal state of China.

Because china is going to introduce it's own 5th gens in thousands in future. SO if speedy development of much more easily attainable tejas mk-3 and AMCA is not gone through we will lose our entire north east to them or will have to live forever a client state of US to avoid this danger. Don't count on russia in a couple of decades from now PLAF will be twice more powerful than Russian airforce both in tech level and numbers.how many expect the russians to fight a war with twice stronger china to the benefit of 6th gen fantasizing indians?. They will not even think about supporting us if we are so foolish and meek.

All these Indian aerospace eco system can be developed only if the 5th gen AMCA is produced in hundreds and exported in hundreds. They are absolutely needed to counter the thousands of j-20s and J-31s from PLAF besides strengthening Indian aerospace eco system.Then only indian private sector will come in with determination to participate in future projects

 

[Ganesh2691]

LCA Flight test update

From
LCA-Tejas has completed 2134 Test Flights Successfully. (23-April--2013).

(TD1-233,TD2-305,PV1-242,PV2-222,PV3-364,LSP1-74,LSP2-260,PV5-36,LSP3-121,LSP4-72,LSP5-165,LSP7-34,NP1-4,LSP8-2)

to

LCA-Tejas has completed 2136 Test Flights Successfully. (25-April--2013).

(TD1-233,TD2-305,PV1-242,PV2-222,PV3-364,LSP1-74,LSP2-261,PV5-36,LSP3-121,LSP4-72,LSP5-166,LSP7-34,NP1-4,LSP8-2)

 

[amanbat11]

Hey Guys,
I'm trying to compare the earlier versions JAS 39 Gripen with Tejas Mk1. I don't know much about aerodynamics of these aircrafts,
I took these figures from wiki, so it might be wrong.
Gripen with its Volvo-Flygmotor RM12 engine which is a derivative of the GE F404 has a top speed of Mach 2. Its empty weight is 6800 Kg, more than Tejas. Gripen's payload is 5300 Kg. So, Gripen being heavier and having same engine is faster than Tejas, does it mean Gripen's aerodynamics is superior to Tejas, or it doesn't work that way? What advantages Tejas has that justifies this loss in performance?
Doesn't it mean that even after the upgraded engine, performance of Tejas will not be as good as Gripen NG?

 

[brahmastra11]

I think there is already a link of Jas 39 Gripen vs Tejas Mk1..

Its not that Tejas have aerodynamics flaws and inferior to Gripen.. We are yet to see it opens up complete flight envelope..

When do LSP 6 going to fly ?

Hey Guys,
I'm trying to compare the earlier versions JAS 39 Gripen with Tejas Mk1. I don't know much about aerodynamics of these aircrafts,
I took these figures from wiki, so it might be wrong.
Gripen with its Volvo-Flygmotor RM12 engine which is a derivative of the GE F404 has a top speed of Mach 2. Its empty weight is 6800 Kg, more than Tejas. Gripen's payload is 5300 Kg. So, Gripen being heavier and having same engine is faster than Tejas, does it mean Gripen's aerodynamics is superior to Tejas, or it doesn't work that way? What advantages Tejas has that justifies this loss in performance?
Doesn't it mean that even after the upgraded engine, performance of Tejas will not be as good as Gripen NG?

 

[brahmastra11]

I mean a thread on Jas 39 Gripen vs Tejas Mk1..

I think there is already a link of Jas 39 Gripen vs Tejas Mk1..

Its not that Tejas have aerodynamics flaws and inferior to Gripen.. We are yet to see it opens up complete flight envelope..

When do LSP 6 going to fly ?

 

[ersakthivel]

The author, Air Marshal M.S.D. Wollen (Retd) was the chairman of Hindustan Aeronautics Limited from September 1984 to March 1988.


He entered the Indian Air Force in 1947 and was awarded the Param Vishisht Seva Medal (PVSM) for his exemplary role in the 1971 Indo-Pak War.

It was during his tenure at HAL that the design and development of the Advanced Light Helicopter and Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) was undertaken. He is considered an authority on LCA, and MIGs in particular.

Air Marshal Wollen has authored several papers on aviation and here he talks about Tejas and the reason why it is so important.

Tejas - Feature - The Light Combat Aircraft Story by Air Marshal MSD Wollen (Retd)

The following is the actual timeline of LCA

1983 ADA was formed.


The IAF's Air Staff Requirement, finalized in October 1985 is the base document for development.

Project definition (PD) commenced in October 1987 and was completed in September I988

A Review Committee was formed in May 1989. Experts from outside the aviation industry were included. The general view was that infrastructure, facilities and technology had advanced in most areas to undertake the project. As a precaution, Full Scale Engineering Development would proceed in two phases. Phase 1: design, construction and flight test of two Technology Demonstrator aircraft (TDI & 2); construction of a Structural Test Specimen; construction of two Prototype Vehicles (PVI &2); creation of infrastructure and test facilities. Phase 2: construction of three more PV '5, the last PV5, being a trainer; construction of a Fatigue Test Specimen; creation of facilities at various work centres. Cost of Phase I - 2188 crores, of Phase II - 2,340 crores. Phase I commenced in 1990. However, due to a financial crunch, sanction was accorded in April 1993 and was marked by an upsurge in work.

As a point of interest, a second series of in-flight simulation tests of flight control software took place in July 1996 at Calspan USA on an F-16D VISTA (variable in-flight stability aircraft); 33 test flights were carried out. Another reason for delay was the sanction imposed after Pokhran II in May 1999. Scientists working at Lockheed Martin, USA were sent back; equipment, software and documents were impounded. Herculean efforts brought the FCS software to a standard where the FCS performed flawlessly over 50 hours of testing on TD 1 by pilots, resulting in the aircraft being cleared for flight in early 2001.

The LCA is tailless with a double-sweep delta wing. Its wing span is 8.2 m, length 13.2 m, height 4.4 m. TOW clean 8.500 kg, MTOW 12500kg. It will be super-sonic at all altitudes, max speed of M 1.5 at the tropopause. Specific excess power and g-over load data has not been published. Maximum sustained rate of turn will be 17 deg per sec and maximum attainable 30 deg per sec.
The fighter that was in the works in 1970 was MARUT.Not LCA.
The first funding for the aircraft TD-1 came in 1993 due to severe Financial crunch in the early nineties.
Previously 500 cr was given on 1989 ,which went into establishment of infra and testing facilities and labs for ADA.

SO saying LCA program started in 1970s and it's designers are working on it for 30 years is a motivated lie.

TD-1 won't walk out of the ADA labs with it's own legs in 1995 , just because these 500 cr worth of labs and infra was set up in 1989.
Phase -1 commenced in 1990 with 2180 cr is the official statement .But it was only peper work because due to severe financial crisis in the i990-93 period funds for construction of TD-1 was not released.

The first funding of the prototype TD-1 was received in 1993.

In 7 years the TD-1 flew on 2001 with complete fly by wire software.




But the same absurd cock and bull story that LCA is in the works for 45 years and it is 30 years late is being repeated again and again.


again from the same article.

In the late eighties India's aircraft Industry was not as advanced as Sweden's; and yet India follows a more arduous design/development route for its LCA, compared to Sweden for its JAS-39 Gripen. The Gripen embodied a far higher percentage of foreign, off-the-shelf technology, including its RM-12 engine (improved GE F404). France (Dassault Aviation) built and exhaustively flew a demonstrator aircraft (Rafale-A) before embarking on construction of Rafale prototypes. Over 2,000 flights were completed by September 1994 when first Flight of a production Rafale was still 20 months away. At that point of time, Dassault Aviation had built or flown 93 prototypes, of which at least fifteen went into production after sixteen years elapsed from 'first-metal-cut' of the Rafale demonstrator to entry into service.

It is unlikely that the LCA will attain initial operational clearance (IOC) before 2010.When it is achieved, it will be an industrial success of magnificent proportion, and is sure to receive the acclaim it deserves.

It achieved IOC with much higher specs than the original ASR.


SO reputed article writers who rue the LOSS OF DATABASE by HAL are more credible than the author of the above article Air marshal MSD WOOLLEN !!!!,

Even without taking into account sanctions affecting the FCS program of LCA due to N-test which delayed the LCAA program by several years MSD WOLLEN gives 2010 as the finishing date for Tejas with much lesser specs than the Mk-1.

 

[ersakthivel]

Shore based test facility completed for naval tejas?

 

[Rahul Singh]

Iron Fist 2013 - Tejas - India's Light Combat Aircraft
In the video in above link just watch from 2 minutes 38 seconds to 2 minutes 43 seconds.

tejas just changes it's position completely so swiftly within 4 seconds.How useful it would be in dog fights?

If there is such huge amount of drag as some people repeatedly insist how can tejas achieve a complete change of position within 3 seconds?

It shows that it has excellent lift to drag ratio.

While with 2 large drop tanks + 2 R-73s and 1 EL/OP....As was also LCA taking off in less than 250 meters from an airfield where ambient temperature* is highest in India, all that while being a canard less delta which some will shame shame it for......

*higher the ambient temperature, lower the air pressure, lesser the turbo fan thrust, poorer the runway performance.

I wonder if someone knows Gripen's performance figures while operating from half the hotter airfield LCA operates from?