ADA Tejas (LCA) News and Discussions

[Sea Eagle]

 

[makmohan]

Are these SPs that are taking shape for IAF delivery ??

 

[Sea Eagle]

Are these SPs that are taking shape for IAF delivery ??

Possibly... Looks like three LSPs and two SPs

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Regarding Payload Of Tejas MK1 >>

Pylons payload capacity

With Multiple rack, Payload capacity

 

[Kunal Biswas]

The first one on right is a NP1, The first one on left is IAF trainer version of Tejas, The last on on right is latest LSP version ..

The photo is old but rare and rarely posted, Nice find @Sea Eagle

Are these SPs that are taking shape for IAF delivery ??

 

[ersakthivel]

jockeys jockeying for lesser wing sweep in tejas ,have gone quiet for a while, Wonder what?

t seems F-16 has just 35 degree wing sweep, Why did the russians got a horribly high 46 degree wing sweep for PAKFA? They haven't heard jockey's advice perhaps,

Even Americans failed to stick with jockey's preferred lower wing sweep, they stupidly increased wing sweep angle from 35 degree in F-16 to 42 degree in F-22.The Americans too are committing the stupid mistake again and again from the close to zero wing sweep angle of Mustang days , they are erroneously increasing wing sweeps with each passing decade!!!

Now they are dangerously close to error zone with 42 degree wing sweep for F-22!!!!

The french from 58 degree wing sweep for Mirage-2000 seems to have heeded jockey's advice and started to reduce wing sweep in rafale.

May be the drafter with which old ADA guys drew the picture of tejas wing was malfunctioning at that time. Or they could have used the same faulty mini drafter used by French while drawing Mirage-2000 wing form is my idea.

AFAIK higher wing sweep angle was primarily meant for keeping the air flow perpendicular to wing leading edge subsonic while the fighter is flying in super sonic speeds, to postpone the onset of super sonic shock waves , creating turbulent air flow, which results in highest possible drag,

Also it is the simplest way of optimally using maximum possible are enclosed with in supersonic shock wave, so that wing tip and leading edges dont interfere with the shock cone. Also this form of highly swept delta wing helps in maximum space for fuel increasing its range and fuel holding capacity.

Thats why traditionally deltas are praised for their supersonic handling capabilities, while they buffet at lower speeds.This bufetting is sought to be corrected by the use of strakes, LREX or compound or cranked delta with lesser swept angle at the wing root,

Thats why the retired greek air force chief praised Mirage-2000 with high wing sweep angle over the F-16 .The reason is this wing form gives the best possible lift to drag ratio which gives a very favorable ITR(Instantaneous turn rate) to evade missiles and get a first look ,first shot ability on F-16 when Mirage-2000 pilot is experienced.

Same is the case with F-16 Xl's superior perormance over plain F-16,
http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/indian-air-force/18521-ada-tejas-lca-iii-182.html

Tejas has ten percent more TWR and even higher wing area than Mirage-2000, So why people are complaining?

Or

is there any special jockey number and jockey laws of aerodynamics behind the absolute number on the wing sweep?

If people dont know shit about aerodynamics, They should keep shut up rather than reducing themselves laughing stock,

Fighter design is not fixated on a single item called wing sweep angle. it is a holistic sum of requirements raised by the ASR. And best possible design that can optimally deliver all the needs is chosen.

Fighter design is not like a laundry list that reads like 12 shirts and 10 pants,

 

[SajeevJino]

Even Americans failed to stick with jockey's preferred lower wing sweep, they stupidly increased wing sweep angle from 35 degree in F-16 to 42 degree in F-22.The Americans too are committing the stupid mistake again and again from the close to zero wing sweep angle of Mustang days , they are erroneously increasing wing sweeps with each passing decade!!!

I don't think they are Stupid with their Wing sweep or something really I don't Know But What i know is US alone have produced More than 70% of Fighters all over the World and Dominated from WW2 to till Now ...their Fighters did Massive damage to enemies ..

till you calling they are stupid

 

[ersakthivel]

http://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=30&t=1872&start=30

Read an article in the magazine "Illustrated Aircraft" from March 2005 where a HAF MIRA 330 squadron commander states the following:

"I'm very satisfied with the F-16 - in fact, I love it. In particular I love the Block 30."

He also states about the Mirage 2000 used mainly for Air to Air:

"It's an effective fighter, which the f-16 can't beat in a dogfight."

He ends by saying:

"The F-16 is much better multi-roll combat jet... it really is the complete package..."

To me this captures it in a nutshell.

http://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=30&t=1872&start=45

Would you agree with these statements of a former HAF fighter pilot?


<<To conclude, the Mirage 2000 is slicker than the Viper but less powerful. >>

This true.

>>With good pilots on both sides, they are probably equal in dogfight>>

This is wrong. A good pilot in an M2K will kill a good pilot in an F-16 9 out of 10 times (1 provided for launch failure).

I served in an M2K fighter squadron in HAF. We analyzed tactics and combat scores against HAF F-16 squadrons all the time.

The M2Ks higher INSTANTANEOUS turn rate gives it an advantage during the first pass. The F-16 cannot outturn the Mirage. It has to climb in hopes of avoiding the lock. A good M2K pilot will end it right there (the Magic 2 is a better IR weapon than the AIM-9L/M).

A rookie in the M2K, however, will probably lose the F-16's climb. The more powerful viper will escape and will then gain the advantage because of 1) Altitude 2) Higher SUSTAINABLE turn rate.

As for turn rates, altitude differences are purely theoretical and in practice make no difference EXCEPT for sea level manuevers where the more powerful Viper starts gaining the advantage.
Would you agree with the statement that F-16 is a better choice for multi role missions than Mirage 2000 ?

Absolutely. The M2K is a multi-role fighter also, but its performance varies greatly among roles - whereas the Viper performs almost all missions at a very satisfactory level.

HAF M2Ks are specialized. 331's (where I served) primary role is now TASMO (naval strike with AM-39 Exocet) and 332's primary role will become Deep Strike (with SCALP EG). CAP & Air Supremacy are their secondary roles.

The F-16 sqdns OTOH undertake a number of roles such as SEAD, CAP, CAS, and numerous specialized strike missions (enemy AFBs, enemy C&C centers etc). The Viper is a much more volatile weapons system

Mirage-2000 and tejas share the same high sweep wing leading edge with a sweep angle of above 50 degrees,So why people criticize tejas for this high wing sweep angle?

People can through the whole material in the above link to see what is the plus points of highly swept , large wing area, low wing loading , RSS fly by wire dleta wing form in the above thread.

 

[ersakthivel]

I don't think they are Stupid with their Wing sweep or something really I don't Know But What i know is US alone have produced More than 70% of Fighters all over the World and Dominated from WW2 to till Now ...their Fighters did Massive damage to enemies ..

till you calling they are stupid

OMG!!!!

You don't know what I meant at all,,,,

What I meant was there are some mudheads spewing bile on tejas with stupid ideas in their mind,

My post was a satire those guys , who are wrongly arguing that low wing loading, highly swept large wing area , RSS fly by wire deltas are a mistake.

my post was not about deriding the Americans for keep on increasing the wing sweep!!!! On the other hand I was asking people to see the reason why there is an increase in wing sweep in all fighter making nations(Of course with the exception of Pakistanis who are making jurasic era JF-17s).

I asked those guys to see the point behind the gradually increasing wing sweep angle,

I am not criticizing the highly swept wing. Nowadays in your haste to criticize me you are responding even without understanding the meaning of my post!!!!

 

[SajeevJino]

OMG!!!!

You don't know what I meant at all,,,,

truth ..But Calling the USAF and their designers are all stupid makes sense me ...why ..?

 

[ersakthivel]

truth ..But Calling the USAF and their designers are all stupid makes sense me ...why ..?

Please google and find out the meaning of the word satire. I was just trying to highlight that the US decision to go for higher wing sweep was correct in a satirical way, nothing Else!!!!!!!

Why are you getting a totally wrong meaning?

 

[abhi_the _gr8_maratha]

many quoting why there is no canards on tejas
.
even chinese found that canards increases wayhigher rcs and now they are changing canards with other things
.
that's the reason there is no canard in f22,f35,pakfa,fgfa like stealth fighters
.
and good news is those who were commenting about foolish designs of ada without any knowledge should know that ada never used canard in amca

 

[ersakthivel]

Are super computers needed to simulate the fight of Pigs?

In that case I too will have to hire a super computer to simulate the back side of a fighter,

What is the flow field equation for a Pig?

I visit those forums to expose stupid rank novices in aerodynamic principles posing as ace fighter designers, dispensing fake Gyan to unsuspecting people.

Because these guys are trying to fool the entire world by having INDIA in their forum name,

Since those guys ran away with tails between their legs from this forum, I have no other options,

Mud heads who can't answer a simple question like Why Mirage-2000 with a high wing leading edge sweep, RSS fly by wire tail less delta,high wing area, low wing loading exactly like tejas ,

did better in its days even though it had a lower TWR than even tejas mk-1,

and sold in thousands all over the world(the IAF was preferring it till as recently as 2004, in direct contradiction of few jockeys jockeying like as if there is no tomorrow!!!!!,) should shut all their holes tight when commenting on tejas.

If they have the guts they can explain the answer to my above simple question in their tejas thread, why scavenge in other threads ,to escape scrutiny perhaps?

Because if they give a true answer for this question , their baseless allegations on tejas would be exposed .

 

[abhi_the _gr8_maratha]

truth ..But Calling the USAF and their designers are all stupid makes sense me ...why ..?

satire means irony
.
let of give you an example
.
you are too rich to buy it
.
satirical meaning of this is opposite
.
you are poor so you can't buy it
.
.
satire is commonly used in literature and good novels are ANIMAL FARM, GUILLIVER'S TRAVELL

 

[bhramos]

Fuselage of a Mk 1 Tejas being loaded into a Indian C-17 Globemaster III.

 

[ersakthivel]

IAF plan for upgraded Jaguars fails to take off as it gets caught up in design and development delays | idrw.org
More reasons for ordering more tejas

 

[ersakthivel]

For people endlessly jockeying in other forums that the wing design of tejas was so wrong ,

and the reason for "higher drag",

the nasty surprise is the leading edge wing sweep angle of 6th gen Boeing concept is almost same as that of Tjeas.

And it looks so similar to the cancelled old MCA from ADA.


Not only that the LM's 6th gen miss february concept also has similar high sweep angle exactly like that of tejas,

And if tejas mk-2 is twin enegined and developed as stealth tejas mk-3 it will look exactly similar like the Miss february concept.

So highly swept wing leading edge fighters are here to stay.

 

[ersakthivel]

Avro which is quoted as exceeding anything that still flies also has the same highly swept wing leading edge angle as tejas.

 

[ersakthivel]

Avro which is quoted as exceeding anything that still flies also has the same highly swept wing leading edge angle as tejas.

 

[abhi_the _gr8_maratha]

chinese removed canards of j20 after finding that it gives way higher rcs
.
and ada never applied canard to mca
.
so this proves the stupidity of those who calling ada as stupid on design creation
.
ada also tested canard on tejas but found that it doesn't multiply force but actually increase rcs
.