ADA Tejas (LCA) News and Discussions

[Advaidhya Tiwari]

First of all, even a decade after LCA concept was created, 3rd gen fighters proved their worth in Kargil and that's why IAF wanted more M2Ks.
Secondly, no a programme that is based on by that time, advanced materials and techs is not meant to be cost-effective, so that claim is wrong too.

It's strange how you try to talk LCA down, to just a cheap fighter, only to have an excuse, why it development went wrong.

What is advanced about composites? Even gripen had composites. Though tejas project was envisaged in 1983, the actual start happened in 1990s and by that time composite was not a difficult technology.

 

[Sancho]

WHAT I SAID WAS ,PERFORMANCE SHORTFALL FROM ,"REVISED ASR", NOT the original ASR.

Nope, you admitted that LCA has performance shortfalls, which once again is a U turn to your original claims, that it doesn't, that it fully complies to ASR, that it doesn't have overweight and all the other nonsense.

The rest of your post was only the usual desperate distraction, from once again being proven wrong, but everyone who actually informed himself on LCA, or simply read the sources and proofs I gave, knows that there was never a revision on flight performance, or weight! That's why the only solution for the performance shortfall remains to be higher thrust and weight reduction in the MK2, while all MK1 versions won't meet the ASR on speed, turn rates, G-limits...


But let me quote myself:

No matter how often you want to deny the facts, with made up "opinions" and the lack of knowledge you continue to expose, it doesn't matter, because you simply remain to be wrong!

 

[Sancho]

What is advanced about composites?

Lol really? For a nation like India, with our industrial capability, you think composites are not advanced? Not to mention that even the global standard for fighters at that time was not using composites, that's why older gen fighters only got minor amounts of it during later upgrades.

 

[Saichand K]

And that's bad, not good! Because the expected weight reduction did not happen, which is why the planned empty weight was not achieved.




Not really, using modern composites, developing an own FBW system, own radar and at least in the planned time frame, state of the art glass cockpit and avionics, was the opposite of a cheap and quality compromising!
In fact it showed the modern technological standard and potential LCA should have got as a 4th gen fighter, if it would had been successful in time. Only the low operational costs of light class fighters, made it a cost-effective choice to operate it in high numbers.
If we wanted to develop a cheap fighter, we would had gone the other way around and aimed on materials and tech standards of 3rd gen fighters available in the IAF fleet and would have taken off the shelf techs, at least for the initial orders.

The importance in the whole LCA programme was not on being cheap, but on building up a modern aviation industry and gain know how and experience. That's why ADA/DRDO and HAL went on modern material and tech developments, sadly on their own, instead of using available partners right away and not after messing things up.

The major reason I feel why the weight is high, inspite of using the composites is because of over design in several areas. This is because LCA is a first ever effort of India to build a fighter jet. This is also because many of the sub-systems design was carried out by ADA. This is not the case for Swedes or Russians. Such over designs ensure crash proof but less agile designs . Slowly with time I am confident that with more and more indigenisation the weight of Tejas could come down to target 5.6 t or so. For starters, redesign of landing gear by ADA is already on cards which reduces the overall weight by perhaps 400 kgs. However, in such cases, redistribution of weight and centre of mass issues needs to be resolved. The 5.6t i thought came from the target weight in LSP production.

 

[ersakthivel]

Nope, you admitted that LCA has performance shortfalls, which once again is a U turn to your original claims, that it doesn't, that it fully complies to ASR, that it doesn't have overweight and all the other nonsense.

The rest of your post was only the usual desperate distraction, from once again being proven wrong, but everyone who actually informed himself on LCA, or simply read the sources and proofs I gave, knows that there was never a revision on flight performance, or weight! That's why the only solution for the performance shortfall remains to be higher thrust and weight reduction in the MK2, while all MK1 versions won't meet the ASR on speed, turn rates, G-limits...


But let me quote myself:

Just hopeless , pathetic stuff.

You cited saurav jha's article saying there ,"was performance shortfall from 1994 ASR requirements".

Project definition .Of Tejas started in 1984. So if you hv any link for 1984 ASR definition , post it.


Air marshal MSD wollen cites ADA's press releases , which states LCA was expected to hv a top speed of Mach 1.5. now it flies at Mach 1.6.

So it is a pathetic attempt to repeatedly lie, "that tejas is underpowered , overweight & unable to meet the original ASR of 1984" etc, etc

From the day LCA Project started IAF has revised everything on its ASR,

Because refuelling probe,

software designed radios,

DRFM based AESA jammer,

ELBIT HMDS with visually cued high off bore WVR missile like Python, R73E,

Astra BVR with AESA radar on mk1A

That are now on LCA ASR,

can never be there in original ASR of 1984, because they didn't exist in IAF in 1984.

ROFL.

So why this crazy attempt at arriving a convoluted conclusion?

Rest of your post is as usual , meaningless sentences ,
In a wasteful effort to thrust your misconceived notions as facts.


Why make a heavy weather of LCA shortfall,

Just post a link to the original ASR of 1984 & then list the shortfalls.

 

[ersakthivel]

We brag about the high use of composites in LCA, which suppose to be light weight, but somehow our fighter ended up with similar empty weight as comparable light weight fighters, that were build with standard materials.
Drag issues were created by design flaws, which had to be corrected later too.

This then lead to the fact, that the initial conclusion to have an engine with around 80kN was not enough to meet the goals for speed, turn rates or G-limits.
So were the goals the problem, or the issues in the development?

It's always easy to blame IAF, but that doesn't help our defence industrial development, if we always look for excuses to shift the accountability from our scientists, who messed things up. And it's not like LCA was the only project that saw similar overweight, drag or size problems!
LCH, IJT, Saras suffered weight and drag issues, even Arjuns size and weight are the main problems.

We can only improve, if we admit to our mistakes and learn from them.
Making performance concessions all the time and leave the forces with less capable material to defend the country, is not a solution.

Another twisted attempt at misinformation.


But key point here is

tejas has 20 percent larger wing area

&

Higher internal fuel capacity


than gripenC.

Tejas which uses highest composite content, still weighs marginally less than GripenC.

So composites is definitely one of the key ingredient in getting tejas upto this level.

Gripen STR & ITR are given for atmospheric conditions as per International standards,

Where temp , humidity are all far lower than indian conditions ,

at which tejas STR, ITR figures are given.

Surely no typhoon , Gripen, rafale can repeat those Brochure spec STRs, ITRs, Gs, AOA s at indian high temp, high humidity conditions.

So larger , light weight, composite wings of tejas is of big help in giving it agility.


Ask gripen C to take off with the same loads & at same runway length as tejas mk1 does in Leh & you will see the difference.

TABULATE THE THE
WING LOADINGS OF FIGHTERS FROM

MIG 21 era

To

F22 & PAKFA era
know why fighter designers are increasing wing loading, & designing larger wing area fighters.

So a higher composite content has given tejas

a larger wing ,

Higher radome dia,(more nose cone volume)

&
Higher fuel capacity, (more fuselage volume)



then ,"comparable light fighters", like gripenC.

Completing this low wing loading , compound delta wing , the RSS fly by wire makes tejas as contemporary as any other fighter.

CEMILAC report mentions drag only in ,"transtion to supersonic flight regime at sea level , which prevented tejas from achieving supersonic speeds at sea level".

But this too is remedied & now tejas is supersonic at all altitudes.

Tejas has the same top speed as that of su 30 mki in sea level.

Does any one call su 30 mki draggy design????

LOL.



That too because of poorer fitness ratio due to far bigger radome dia(teja has a bigger radome dua than rafale).

So there is a reason for this poorer fitness ratio, it is aimed at getting a far bigger radar, making tejas a potent BVR fighter with a deadly combo of high tracking range & low RCS.

As far as STR, ITR, AOA is concerned, they are all done at far lower speeds than trans sonic & supersonic speeds,

So no drag penalties there.

 

[Jackd]

This thread has become really convoluted. Keep it simple guys, so that laymen like myself can get an inkling about what other members are talking about.

I don't know which party to believe in.

 

[pankaj nema]

[Mod Edit -- Redacted -- ]

He only talks of HMDS ,HOBS and composites all day long :blah:

Whereas the simple fact is that The limited combat radius and loiter time are its Biggest weaknesses

Therefore we are going for a Larger MK 2
Which would be the real Multi Role Fighter

By having an AESA and BVR capability
IAF is trying to make the best use of its
Limited Abilities

 

[pankaj nema]

@ersakthivel

Instead of going on and on about the MK 1 , why don't you write a Fictional Combat scenario incorporating the COLD Start doctrine

Let us see where do you fit in the Tejas
MK 1 in a battle field and battle scenario

Then we can debate in a much better manner

 

[Advaidhya Tiwari]

@ersakthivel

Instead of going on and on about the MK 1 , why don't you write a Fictional Combat scenario incorporating the COLD Start doctrine

Let us see where do you fit in the Tejas
MK 1 in a battle field and battle scenario

Then we can debate in a much better manner

I have also been wanting to say this - you harp too much on combat radius and loiter time without giving proper figures or numbers of requirements, of other planes and of Tejas.

Saying the same thing over and over again without any realistic idea of warfare is not reasonable. Let us see, how you intend to win a war with Pakistan, Bangladesh and Maldives together by using your favourite rafales and other assets in your own viewpoint. Common now, don't hesitate

 

[Enquirer]

The major reason I feel why the weight is high, inspite of using the composites is because of over design in several areas. This is because LCA is a first ever effort of India to build a fighter jet. This is also because many of the sub-systems design was carried out by ADA. This is not the case for Swedes or Russians. Such over designs ensure crash proof but less agile designs . Slowly with time I am confident that with more and more indigenisation the weight of Tejas could come down to target 5.6 t or so. For starters, redesign of landing gear by ADA is already on cards which reduces the overall weight by perhaps 400 kgs. However, in such cases, redistribution of weight and centre of mass issues needs to be resolved. The 5.6t i thought came from the target weight in LSP production.

This post should be directed to ersakthivel, who doesn't care about the actual design (cooking), but gets carried away by the ingredients!!
This is something I have said multiple times - Gripen being an all metal aircraft weighs around the same as Tejas which is supposed to used composites predominantly; and not to mention has better payload etc.
Obviously Tejas designers didn't OPTIMIZE properly.
What use is the best/expensive ingredients in a dish if they're all not COOKED properly! But crazies like ersakthivel will chomp on uncooked meat and claim that their 'machan' cooked biryani is the BEST!!!

 

[pankaj nema]

@ersakthivel

Do you really think that in a Joint Air Land Campaign the Tejas Mk 1 has the Ability to go in
At least 50 km inside Pakistan after taking off from a base some 150 km inside India

Then Fight and Bring down the JF 17s which will be attacking our Army Formations and also bomb their Rear areas or logistic chains and then come back safely

Or is it better to stay inside Indian territory
Being a part of a Mixed Fighter package and take long range BVR shots using it's AESA radar and Derby ER missile

The pakis will also try to attack our rear areas logistic chains and airbases

So don't we we need some fighters for a constant CAP

Also Tejas can shoot down the slow and stupid cruise Missiles like Babur which fly at 0.7 mach

 

[Enquirer]

I have also been wanting to say this - you harp too much on combat radius and loiter time without giving proper figures or numbers of requirements, of other planes and of Tejas.

Saying the same thing over and over again without any realistic idea of warfare is not reasonable. Let us see, how you intend to win a war with Pakistan, Bangladesh and Maldives together by using your favourite rafales and other assets in your own viewpoint. Common now, don't hesitate

Dude, you always leave out China in your arguments against Rafale.
IAF does need a more capable (more available) deep strike aircraft than the high-maintenance Su-30MKI.

 

[pankaj nema]

I have also been wanting to say this - you harp too much on combat radius and loiter time without giving proper figures or numbers of requirements, of other planes and of Tejas.

Saying the same thing over and over again without any realistic idea of warfare is not reasonable. Let us see, how you intend to win a war with Pakistan, Bangladesh and Maldives together by using your favourite rafales and other assets in your own viewpoint. Common now, don't hesitate

Ok so if you want to deploy Tejas against
Bangladesh , I have no objection

Three front war ,Hic Hic Hooray

 

[pankaj nema]

@ersakthivel In all the joint Air land Exercises for implementing the Cold Start that we have read about , it is Mig 29 and Mirage 2000 which are used along with Jaguars and Mig 27

Where as Mig 21 are used for CAP

The Sukhois are for Offensive Fighter Sweeps

The same thing will happen with Mk 1
It will take the role earlier played by Mig 21

With The additional advantage of AESA and BVR

Which in itself is a huge gain over the Mig 21

 

[pankaj nema]

I have also been wanting to say this - you harp too much on combat radius and loiter time without giving proper figures or numbers of requirements, of other planes and of Tejas.

Saying the same thing over and over again without any realistic idea of warfare is not reasonable. Let us see, how you intend to win a war with Pakistan, Bangladesh and Maldives together by using your favourite rafales and other assets in your own viewpoint. Common now, don't hesitate

Here is another fictional scenario

You are sending Tejas for a bombing mission inside Pakistan where it will also have an encounter with JF 17s

It has taken off from a base 150 km inside India

But then it's own home air base is under attack and is closed temporarily

The Tejas is ordered by the Ground Staff to land at another airbase but because of this lengthy mission ,it runs out of fuel

And there is no Re Fuelling aircraft around

Now what happens

 

[Advaidhya Tiwari]

Dude, you always leave out China in your arguments against Rafale.
IAF does need a more capable (more available) deep strike aircraft than the high-maintenance Su-30MKI.

China issue is about to be resolved. Ram Madhav has already given statement that all except in Aksai Chin the boundary dispute has been resolved. I don't see China as a threat as they are not crazed jihadis. China also has no objective trying to get some barren land of India and simply starting a big war. The issue was about Dalai Lama and it is appearing to be coming to an end.

Ok so if you want to deploy Tejas against
Bangladesh , I have no objection

Three front war ,Hic Hic Hooray

Bangladesh and Pakistan is what I said. China is to be excluded. The thrid front will be Maldives and internal ones.

Here is another fictional scenario

You are sending Tejas for a bombing mission inside Pakistan where it will also have an encounter with JF 17s

It has taken off from a base 150 km inside India

But then it's own home air base is under attack and is closed temporarily

The Tejas is ordered by the Ground Staff to land at another airbase but because of this lengthy mission ,it runs out of fuel

And there is no Re Fuelling aircraft around

Now what happens

India has several roads where Tejas can land. So, that is not an issue that can't be resolved. Also, don't forget that India has a large border with Pakistan and can go into Pakistan from Gujarat and come back in Rajasthan

 

[ezsasa]

what is being used in the current prototypes then?
============
Council of Scientific & Industrial Research has successfully completed development of a Head up Display (HUD) for the #LCA #tejas True #MakeInIndia

 

[Enquirer]

China issue is about to be resolved. Ram Madhav has already given statement that all except in Aksai Chin the boundary dispute has been resolved. I don't see China as a threat as they are not crazed jihadis. China also has no objective trying to get some barren land of India and simply starting a big war. The issue was about Dalai Lama and it is appearing to be coming to an end

Dude, you’re too naive!!
I want to sell you Taj Mahal

 

[cannonfodder]

@pankaj nema

Some of the concerns about combat radius of tejas is answered here:
https://www.quora.com/Is-it-true-th...km-with-a-drop-tank-as-mentioned-in-Wikipedia

Saikot had analyzed both western front and eastern front air bases, distances from major enemy cities from indian air bases. In case of war, I believe IAF won't send all fighter AC on bombing mission/CAS mission keeping none to defend the airbases. Also for western front, the airbases are near by so they can send interceptor AC for defence.

Thanks to @saikot banerjee for answering. He has analyzed all air bases in west and east in the link provided above.

//Combat Radius(taken from wiki) is not that bad at all taking into mind LCA can operate from Leh with reasonable payload

//Indian airbases - Yellow
//Paki cities - Red

Even on BRF, I have seen posters having same viewpoint that most of the areas of conflict can be covered by tejas for air defence and CAS operations(in both west & northeast). I am not expert and just browse through LCA thread whenever I get spare time.