ADA Tejas (LCA) News and Discussions

Which role suits LCA 'Tejas' more than others from following options?

  • Interceptor-Defend Skies from Intruders.

    Votes: 342 51.3%
  • Airsuperiority-Complete control of the skies.

    Votes: 17 2.5%
  • Strike-Attack deep into enemy zone.

    Votes: 24 3.6%
  • Multirole-Perform multiple roles.

    Votes: 284 42.6%

  • Total voters
    667
Status
Not open for further replies.

nandu

New Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2009
Messages
1,913
Likes
163
LCA (Navy) Chief's Speech On NP-1 Roll-out Day

The following is the full text of the speech that was delivered by LCA-Navy programme director COMMODORE CD BALAJI on 06 July 2010 at the roll-out ceremony of the aircraft's first prototype, NP-1.




In 2003, based on the progress made on the Air Force LCA Programme the Govt approved Phase-1 development of 2 LCA Navy Prototypes that would operate from an aircraft carrier with the concept of Ski-jump Take-off and Arrested Recovery (STOBAR). Navy actively supported this Challenging programme to design, develop, build and flight test a carrier borne aircraft for the first time in the country. The two prototypes under development would be used to demonstrate that the aircraft is capable of operating from a ship, i.e., carrier compatible.

The question often asked is 'what are the changes in LCA(Navy) in comparison to the Air Force version?' Typically the aircraft will get airborne in about 200m over the ski-jump on the ship as against a land based take-off run of about 800m. Landing on the ship is with an arrester hook on the aircraft engaging an arrester wire on the ship and the aircraft stops in 90m which is about 1/10th land based stopping distance.

Unlike shore based take-off and landing applications, typical ship borne requirements imposes large loads on the aircraft structure which entails new design. Also, the nose section of the aircraft is drooped down in order to have better pilot vision for ship landing. Whilst the external aerodynamic shape of the aircraft is same as the Air Force Trainer, the internal structure is entirely different due to larger loads resulting from carrier operations. However, all Mechanical, Avionics and Flight Control system layout are by and large common with the Air Force version. The design of LCA(Navy) has been performed in a 3Dimensional Computer Aided Design (CAD) concurrent engineering environment. A Digital Mock Up (DMU) of the aircraft was ultimately created which had all the internal equipment laid out. This helped in visualising possible areas of clash with various system groups and the structural interfaces due a possibility of 'virtual walk through'. No physical mock up has been built. Due to first time design, there could be additional reserve factors taken as a conservative measure, but would be optimised based on experience in the future prototypes. This would result in significant weight savings.

Areas identified as challenges over and above the Air Force Version were structural design, Landing gear design, arrester hook, introduction of a new control surface (LEVCON) and ski-jump take-off. A case in point for Naval specific activities was the development of large sized landing gear forgings. Midhani had to develop the special tooling and processes and provide the special steel forgings. In addition, Bharat Forge, Pune provided the near shaped forgings of the major landing gear elements. These have been fabricated at private companies at Hyderabad and landing gears have been assembled at HAL (Nasik). Some of the typical challenges encountered during the development cycle, resulted in them taking longer than anticipated. However, today these have been resolved and we all await the aircraft's rollout in the presence of the Hon'ble Raksha Mantri and the Chief of the Naval Staff.

In its primary role of Air to Air combat, the aircraft will carry both Close Combat Missiles (CCM) and Beyond Visual Range (BVR) Missiles. In its Air to Sea role, the aircraft will carry Anti Ship Missile (ASM). The aircraft can carry external fuel drop tanks to increase range and endurance. The aircraft can carry a wide variety of bombs based on role requirement.

To meet specific Naval testing, new test facilities have and are being developed. A new landing gear drop test facility has been created to handle testing to Naval requirements for qualifying larger landing gear loads. A hardware-in-loop simulation for flight control system testing called 'Iron-bird' has been set up and functioning. In this facility, entire hydraulics, flight control system and avionics would be integrated for the evaluation of the software. The Avionics and Weapon test rigs have been suitably modified to test the changes in system layout and architecture required for the Naval version. Shore Based Test Facility (SBTF) to simulate an aircraft carrier with ski-jump and arrested recovery is being set up at the Naval Air Station at Goa. The ski-jump facility is expected to be ready by the last quarter of 2011 and the landing area a year later. Goa Shipyard Ltd is handling the complete structural work, system integration and operations. R&D Engineers and CCE(R&D) west Pune are handling the civil works. Specialised equipment supply is from Russia in order to have the same configuration as on the Vikramaditya.

It is critical to demonstrate carrier compatibility to infuse confidence in the Indian Navy that we indeed have a Carrier borne aircraft and towards that it is critical to demonstrate ski-jump take off and validate the simulations that have been carried out by the control Law team. Navy has defined the Mission and Performance requirements expected of the aircraft. As mentioned earlier, due to first time design, there may be shortfall in certain parameters with the current engine. Two more LCA(Navy) prototypes has been sanctioned by the Govt in Dec 2009 with a higher thrust engine to enable meeting the Mission objectives set out by the Navy.

The act of 'Rollout' is a significant milestone in the development process of an aircraft wherein it is structurally complete, equipment installed, plumbing and wiring completed. The aircraft is on its wheels and can be moved by assisted power and is a precursor to the phase of ground based system integration testing leading the engine ground run, taxi tests and flight. Every effort is being made by all the stake holders to have the maiden flight in 3 to 4 months time.

This day of NP1 rollout has been possible with the active involvement of HAL as the Principal Partner of ADA and support by DRDO, CSIR labs, CEMILAC, DGAQA, Public and Private sector industries, Educational Institutions and a host of other agencies. I wish to salute all of those who have contributed as a composite LCA Navy Team in realising this important milestone and look forward to the same spirit to take the aircraft towards its maiden flight at the earliest.

http://livefist.blogspot.com/
 

Crusader53

New Member
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
772
Likes
38
I'm quite sure LCA MK II will be powered by Kaveri engine. As for US/European substitute, It won't be entire substitute for engine. GTRE will form JV with some company in obtaining required thrust from Kaveri for LCA MK II. Kaveri doesn't need great deal of development, its just underpowered for LCA payload. The engine exists.

@NLCA

NLCA won't be reality for another 4 years. So training platform will be Mig29K. And as Rahul rightly mentioned, being small is boon for NLCA. Other heavier fighters in future will do the their respective job. NLCA will be the base fighter & real force in IN fighter inventory. It also has multiple future use i.e. EW fighter, UCAV.

I think you are mistaken. The LCA MK2 will be equipped with either the EJ200 or F414 and not the Kaveri Engine. Unless something has dramatically changes over the last few months???


As for the (N) LCA I do see it being used mainly in a Training Role with perhaps a 60/40 split between twin and single seater's. While, it won't initially because it won't be available. Yet, as time goes it a natural. Especially, considering its low cost of ownership and its limited capabilities. That said, during peace time operations. I am sure a small number will make up your typical Carrier Air Wing.
 

nrj

New Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2009
Messages
9,658
Likes
3,911
Country flag
I think you are mistaken. The LCA MK2 will be equipped with either the EJ200 or F414 and not the Kaveri Engine. Unless something has dramatically changes over the last few months???


As for the (N) LCA I do see it being used mainly in a Training Role with perhaps a 60/40 split between twin and single seater's. While, it won't initially because it won't be available. Yet, as time goes it a natural. Especially, considering its low cost of ownership and its limited capabilities. That said, during peace time operations. I am sure a small number will make up your typical Carrier Air Wing.
No mistake. LCA MK II will be powered by Kaveri variant.

NLCA will have multiple capabilities. No one can say it has limited capabilities.
 

Rahul Singh

New Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
3,652
Likes
5,790
Country flag
Report: Elta Or EADS To Help Build Tejas AESA

India's home-grown AESA radar effort will soon finalise a developent partner, reports The Indian Express. According to the report, a progressive downselect since December -- when the DRDO first invited bids -- has come down to Israel's Elta and EADS Defence & Security, following the elimination of Selex, Phazotron and Thales.
 

plugwater

New Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2009
Messages
4,154
Likes
1,082
Israel, EU in contention to co-develop radars for Tejas

India is close to finalising a developmental partner for a next generation radar that will be the eyes and ears of the Tejas Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) in the future. With other contenders falling off the race due to different reasons, the race now is between European Consortium EADS and Israeli company Elta that are vying for the initial contract to co-develop 10 prototypes of an Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radar with India.

While the initial contract is for 10 prototypes, industry estimates put the requirement of the Indian defence forces at close to 600 radars for different types of fighters, making the deal potentially worth over $ 3 billion over the next decade. The tenders for co-development were issued by DRDO's Electronics and Radar Development Establishment (LRDE) in December last year for the LCA Mk II that has already been approved by the government.

Sources said that LRDE is close to short listing its partner for the project and the competition now is between Elta and EADS, down from the initial bid by five companies that were vying for the potentially large contract. While EADS is showcasing its X band technology, Elta specialises in L band technology and is promoting its new generation X band antenna.

While US companies did not participate in the tender — apparently after they could not gain permission from the government to share the high end technology — Russia's largest radar company Phazotron and France's defence giant Thales were dropped due to technical reasons. Italian Selex did not make it to the next round after failing to deposit the earnest money specified in the tender.

The radar will also be considered for the SU 30 MKI upgrade and modernisation projects for front line fighters of the Navy and Air Force

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/israel-eu-in-contention-to-codevelop-radars-for-tejas/646059/2
 

neo29

New Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2009
Messages
1,284
Likes
30
This LCA naval variant launch news probably eliminates the Sea Gripens in Naval MMRCA.
 

nandu

New Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2009
Messages
1,913
Likes
163
Report: Elta Or EADS To Help Build Tejas AESA, Project Codenamed "Uttam"



India's home-grown AESA radar effort will soon finalise a developent partner, reports The Indian Express. According to the report, a progressive downselect since December -- when the DRDO first invited bids -- has come down to Israel's Elta and EADS Defence & Security, following the elimination of Selex, Phazotron and Thales. A recent Livefist post on the Tejas AESA is here. Oh, and by the way, I hear the LCA AESA is being developed under something called "Project Uttam".

http://livefist.blogspot.com/
 

Rahul Singh

New Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
3,652
Likes
5,790
Country flag
Has Mark 2 LCA become a facade for DRDO agencies buying time? To me it more certainly looks like that.
You know it's tough to build something advanced and it's toughest to keep it contemporary! Existence of words like Mark, Block, Tranche etc proves it.

Being critic is good and most of the time necessary but doing criticism without putting whole thing into perspective is bad(a general statement not directed to you)!

1. The MMR radar conceptualised in 1997 is no where in sight. the agency responsible for it is the hyderabad based the LRDE. Does anyone know the status? can someone also explain if MMR is AESA or PESA? or what is the inherent difference?is the MMR still being pursued or an AESA BEING PURSUED? ULIMATELY THE CURRENT STATUS IS an isreli radar had to be installed after all these years.
Answers:

# MMR was not alone LRDE's responsibility rather it was a joint venture between LRDE and HAL.
# After failing to fully develop on own we decided to go for hybrid MMR which as PPGJ said had already been flown on LSP-3,4.
# Present MMR is not phased array.
# Redundancy, force multiplying ability, resistance to jamming, excellent resolution, better SAR etc. These are few among many advantage(in relative terms) AESA carries over standard pulse Doppler MMR.
# AESA is definite on Mk-2 irrespective of indigenous or imported.


2. EW suite.responsibility rests with DARE(defense avionics research establishment). not much news about the progress of the so called Mayavi. again israelis have been pulled in. what is this talk of integrating this suite with JSF f-35? AGAIN WE ARE CITING tEJAS MARK 2 AS IF WITH mARK 2's APPEARNCE EVERYTHING WILL BECOME AVAILABLE INSTANTLY.
You may not always get news in shape you want or wish to. Some components of EW suit called Mayavi have already been integrated in LSP-4 namely RWR, CMDS. Rest of the components like direction finder, jammer, MAWS etc will be integrated with time, may be at FOC stage.

Collaboration is road to success in this world. Israelis were contacted because they are best of best in jammers and even US military uses Israelis jammers masked under made in USA.

Mayavi has not been integrated with F-35 or JSF because JSF is still under development and even first example in IDF is still due!

yes there are positives from the project and we may get a decent plane BUT on critical technological issues we have not only failed to develop but sadly we have also failed to address prudently.
Except engine there is nothing where we completely failed. Even kaveri is not complete failure. As far as MMR is concerned then it is something which can be developed only with time. You can develop hardware but algorithms and modes can only be developed with time.

What would have been the fate of Tejas without Israel?
You know first fighter jet developed by RAC MIG used jet engines from captured German ME fighters? You know Mig-9 was produced with copied/reversed engineered German BMW turbojet engins? You know Kilmov first bought then copy produced Rolls Royce engine as RD-45 and RD-500 for Mig-15? You know first long range Russian bomber T-4 was a copied version of Boeing B-29 Superfortress on which they got their hands when these planes landed in Russia after getting starved for fuel? You know British learned about synchronising gun fire with propellers from downed German figher of WW1? You know much hyped WW2 american fighter 'P-51 Mustang' was compelled to use Britsh 'Merlin' engines to get close to tall yankee claims?...............

One question to answer your question. Can there be any like Mig, Sukhoi, Yak, Kilmov and IAF(which lives on Russian fighters) if these mentioned historical incidents would not have taken place?


Has Wait for mark 2 become a convenient excuse for the DRDO angencies??.......It seems likely mark 2 is a convenient excuse for many
No, in reality it shows that ADA as a designer and IAF as a user is maturing and accepting unwritten facts about nature of weapon development.

don't tell me XY AND Z took 50 years to develop that and 80 years to develop this. .
Rules of nature can not change. A baby can be born in 7 months and 10 months but not in 1 month. A 6 yer old can't be graduate and a 1 year old can't appear in AISSCE. Enough said!

PS: Please do not take my words as offensive but reactionary.
 
Last edited:

icecoolben

New Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
472
Likes
5
Can tejas be configured for a catapult launch?
Or being a stobar type can it be launched and retrived for a nimitz class or a smaller french class carrier- de gaulle?
Just considering tejas size and its take off distance specified under mk-2, what is the take off distance of sea gripen from aircraft carrier given in its browshe?
Knowledgeable people pls reply.
 

Rahul Singh

New Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
3,652
Likes
5,790
Country flag
Can tejas be configured for a catapult launch?
Navy had asked the same question from ADA and ADA had replied "only nose gear will require some modification" considering this true 'Yes it can'.

N-LCA has been designed to be rugged enough for carrier(STOBAR) operations and except 'cat-shot' everything is same between CATOBAR and STOBAR. So, i think except suitable nose gear for cat-shots, N-LCA has got everything required for operations from CATOBAR carriers. I believe, for making N-LCA cat-shot compatible, LCA may require complete re-designing of nose gear or at least major modifications in existing one. I think these will come in the form of two wheel arrangement instead of existing one wheel, addition of 'T' shaped aircraft's launch-bar (days of cable tying and hooking its one end to catapult shuttle like in A-4 are over because they are considered relatively unsafe) for hooking/attaching jet to catapult shuttle, some pick to back side of nose gear for hooking hold-back bar and strengthening whole structure(nose gear) to make it strong enough to bear repeated violent pulling jolts.

Or being a stobar type can it be launched and retrived for a nimitz class or a smaller french class carrier- de gaulle?
If N-LCA MK-1's nose gear is strengthen enough then N-LCA can surely be launched using catapult of these two carriers by hooking N-LCA to catapult shuttle like A-4 and Super Etendard. And if you are saying "can it without catapult?" then i will say, no because neither Nimitz nor CDG offers a 400-500 m long take-off strip.

N-LCA is STOBAR capable and can surely be recovered on these mentioned carriers because recovery procedure on STOBAR and CATOBAR is exactly same.

Just considering tejas size and its take off distance specified under mk-2, what is the take off distance of sea gripen from aircraft carrier given in its browshe?
I haven't seen any brochure of Sea Gripen in which take-off distance is mentioned. But i guess, it should be no longer than 200m because Sea Gripen is a contender in Naval MRCA contest and 200m is the maximum take-off distance offered by concerned carrier.
 
Last edited:

Rahul Singh

New Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
3,652
Likes
5,790
Country flag
As long as N-LCA manages to take-off from 200m take-off strip with ski-jump, i see no problem with STOBAR version. BTW Tejas as CATOBAR capable will stand meaningful only when navy buys CATOBAR carriers.
 

Rahul Singh

New Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
3,652
Likes
5,790
Country flag
Check this all new looking ADA website...........Looks like ADA finally understanding importance of public relations. Great work. God willing better to follow. Jai HInd

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

LCA-Tejas has completed 1403 Test Flights successfully.(17-July-10).
(TD1-233,TD2-305,PV1-242,PV2-155, PV3-223,LSP1-59,LSP2-154,PV5-15, LSP3-14,LSP4-3)
 

icecoolben

New Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
472
Likes
5
IAC-2 Vishal, IAC-3 Viraat will be CATOBAR type

As long as N-LCA manages to take-off from 200m take-off strip with ski-jump, i see no problem with STOBAR version. BTW Tejas as CATOBAR capable will stand meaningful only when navy buys CATOBAR carriers.
Indications in the open source, point to overwhelming preference by IN for CATOBAR, than STOBAR.

http://www.subcontinentaldef.net/2010/01/second-indian-aircraft-carrier-will-be.html

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/gene...ne=Indian Navy Pursues Fixed-Wing Carrier AEW
 

Crusader53

New Member
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
772
Likes
38

Rahul Singh

New Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
3,652
Likes
5,790
Country flag
Yes navy prefer CATOBAR over STOBAR and during late 80s and early 90s there was a plan to build 3 catapult equipped ADSs with French help. But the plan was dropped citing complications involved with US origin catapults and [then] Indo-US relations. Well, now when navy is getting confident about building mid-size carriers and when catapults can be bought from one other than US, she again started showing interest in CATOBAR and god willing if everything go well then IAC-2 or surely IAC-3 will be a CATOBAR carrier.
 

vijay jagannathan

New Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2010
Messages
178
Likes
10
ADa's new website is extremely amateurish and bereft of class. there is no new info added. most importantly it defines a typical indian government organisation. you question them about the shoddy portal and they will blame lack of funds. Its silly. very sad when we have an abundance of web designers in this country
 

Crusader53

New Member
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
772
Likes
38
Yes navy prefer CATOBAR over STOBAR and during late 80s and early 90s there was a plan to build 3 catapult equipped ADSs with French help. But the plan was dropped citing complications involved with US origin catapults and [then] Indo-US relations. Well, now when navy is getting confident about building mid-size carriers and when catapults can be bought from one other than US, she again started showing interest in CATOBAR and god willing if everything go well then IAC-2 or surely IAC-3 will be a CATOBAR carrier.

India will need help from the US to Develop the IAC-2. If, it wants it to be equipped with Catapults and much of the associated hardware.....In short expect to see much more of US assistance with the IAC-2 Design in the near future.

Otherwise, the IAC-2 will be decades off. (unless it keeps the Ski Jump)
 

EagleOne

New Member
Joined
May 10, 2010
Messages
886
Likes
87
Elta, EADs to Pitch for LCA Radar
India Defence Online, New Delhi — India's futuristic plans concerning the Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) are taking shape as a co-development project with an international major is on the cards. India is on the verge of finalising a foreign firm for an initial contract to co-develop ten prototypes of Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radars with India.

The two majors who are in the race for this next generation AESA radars are the European Consortium EADS and Israeli company Elta. Although the initial requirement is of ten radars, this co-development deal is expected to be to the tune of $3 billion over the next ten years. This is because the estimates reveal that the Indian defence forces will need close to 600 radars for different types of fighters in the near future.

The tenders for the co-developmental project of advanced radars were floated in December 2009 and only EADS of Europe and Elta of Israel are left in the race following the elimination of other majors like Selex of Italy and Thales of France. While EADS is showcasing its "X" band technology, Elta specialises in the "L" band technology and is promoting its new generation X band antenna. The radar will also be considered for the SU 30 MKI upgrade and modernisation projects for front line fighters of the Indian Navy and Indian Air Force
It seems that Israeli firm Elta stands a better chance to win this contract since India and Israel have defence interactions based on radar acquisitions in the past. Israel has supplied radars in the past to India as well
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Articles

Top