Indian Air Force: News & Discussions

[abhi_the _gr8_maratha]

and lca tejas incorporates avionics of mki which and better radar than j10 and lesser rcs

 

[abhi_the _gr8_maratha]

You are assuming things that are not true. The EL/M 2035 specs you quoted are from the 90s. Things have changed drastically. Even JF-17 has a better radar than the specs you quoted, which is pretty much the same as LCA's current MMR.

The EW suite on J-10 is unknown, the one on J-10B seems to be solid state with AESA transmitter. LCA doesn't use the same EW kit as the MKI. Whether it is better or worse than what's on J-10B, we have no idea of knowing.

LCA doesn't have FLIR or OLS.

LCA is yet to be integrated with air to air missiles like R-77, Astra, Derby or Python-V. It carries only the old R-73 as of today. This capability will be available only two years later. J-10 is already equipped with the PL-12. A new Ramjet version is being made.

a mig from 90s which have inferior radar and will this radar will change after sometimes china have a talent in nothing but reverse engineering .

 

[Pulkit]

+ves In your terms only there is a aircraft that can fly,carry load,achieve mach 1.5,has a good ceiling and most Importantly provides a base for future aircrafts... As you said it is a fly bus okay but the one we created (DRDO) own our own.... and sooner or later 100% ours....
Questions: Is MK1 Better than MIG?
Will MK2 comparable to Any of the present aircrafts In IAF which will still be in service say another 15-20 years?
Will it be effective against PAF ? MK2
Others might have finalised deal for Rafale b4 India but I believe once it won MMRCA then only it again came in light again and others noticed it again.
TOT was definately part of deal.
Does that 20 billion include setting of base for rafale and maintenance I mean service life cost? HOw will it actually cost us?
65Mil 80 mil provide the source and surely in which year they were calculated?


By predictions i simply meant what u mentioned that wat ever you said in past is coming true...
and Google doesnot make predictions????

What do you think MK2 will be capable of?

I am asking many questions as I am interested in knowing your point of view as you are actually totally against my views about Tejas....

What are the +ves?



Who is talking about LCA's flaws? If we get into it, it will never end. I am talking about the actual design goals of the program which can never be improved upon.

Tejas has an endurance of 40 minutes today. It won't become 2 hours by FOC, it will remain 40 minutes tomorrow and forever. This is a design point. And not a flaw. Flaws can be improved upon, Mk2 is the direct result of achieving such a goal, but Mk1 has no such chance. The very reason why Mk1 cannot be improved is why Mk2 was started. It wasn't a new program. ADA said, "Okay, we fvked up with Mk1. Let's design a new Mk2 and bring it to the original ASR specs, maybe improve it a little where we can." So, that's where LCA is today.

Mk1 is messed up. It is much heavier than anticipated, and became underpowered in the process. Earlier the plan was that LCA will lift 4 tons of payload with full external fuel and two 500 Kg bombs, but today it is more in the region of carrying two bombs but sacrifice a lot of external fuel. ADA suggested to IAF that they should sacrifice fuel in order to carry the bombs, the IAF was very angry at the suggestion. That's pretty much what supported the design of Mk2. Today, the new payload is similar to what Gripen C carries, 5 tons. This way, even if Mk2 becomes overweight, at least the aircraft will be able to carry 4 tons payload instead of the 3.5 tons it does today.

LCA has been a mix of compromises rather than a real fighter program. Expecting the IAF to buy Mk1 is merely sending the IAF pilots to their deaths because our enemies have better aircraft today, forget tomorrow, they have better aircraft today and will improve drastically even before Mk1 and Mk2 are even in operation. PLAAF seem to have plans on inducting and operating at least 600-700 Flankers at one time and perhaps well over 1000 J-10s, both aircraft superior to even LCA Mk2 in every major performance parameter.

Guess what? LCA won't even be used against China. The IAF is planning two bases for LCA Mk2 and only one will be near Pakistan. It is supposed to be in Rajasthan with two squadrons. This is apart from the home base of Sulur for the 40 Mk1s which will eventually be used to train pilots before they move to Rafale, FGFA and AMCA. Another Mk2 base is being set up in Tanjore with two squadrons. Basically, around 80 aircraft will be located in South India, far away from any enemy, and one will be setup with 40 aircraft near Pakistan. While the bases in Sulur and Thanjavur and set in stone, the base in Rajasthan is still undecided. With IAF's Look South policy, it is possible all the LCAs will be located in Tamil Nadu, against the vast might of the Sri Lankans.



No. It looks like the French will sell to Qatar first, very likely. And ALA/MN are obligated to order 60 more Rafales and bring the number to near 200, that's a very good number. There is no danger to the future of Rafale. Don't get caught up in the media blitz, especially by anti-Rafale media which is available in plenty.



What are you talking about? Rafale has been in production since the late 90s. It was inducted in 2000.



Who told you Rafale will cost $20 Billion? F-35 is not available to us and its utility is much lower than what Rafale will offer. Rafale has more range than the F-35 and currently carries far more weapons. F-35 is not the choice for IAF.

More importantly, Rafale came in a tender which make the aircraft cheap. Some reports have pegged the cost of a single Rafale in flyaway condition at less than $80 Million for India. One report said $65 Million. ALA bought Rafale-C at E57 Million in 2012. An FMS buy from the US will cost twice as much. Without a tender the F-35 will be very expensive. LM obviously plans on milking the F-35 from the Gulf countries, just like how we paid $400 Million for each C-17.

And Dassault did not get the deal because they offered ToT, ToT is just one part of the entire setup. ToT had no part to play in the first stage of the evaluations where only technical aspects were compared. IAF chose the two best aircraft of the lot. It was well after that that ToT, industrial production and lifecycle costs came into play. Basically, MoD chose the cheapest bidder.

For the technology that Rafale brings to the IAF, even if the Rafale costs $20 Billion, it is well worth the costs. You simply don't understand the importance of high level capability that comes with Rafale which LCA does not provide.

As for the cost, there are various costs that people simply don't understand. There are flyaway costs, recurring flyaway costs, non-recurring flyaway costs, total flyaway costs, procurement costs, program acquisition costs, lifecycle costs and total lifecycle costs. These are further divided into more types. So, when someone comes up and says LCA Mk1 costs only $30+ Million and Rafale costs $150 Million or $250 Million, ask them what they are referring to. LCA's cost is total flyaway costs with engines. The engines are supplied to HAL directly by GE and ADA contracted it. Rafale's apparent cost of $120 Million reported in the media is procurement cost which includes cost of spares, maintenance and training. Rafale's cost of $20 to $30 Billion that you see in the media in the actual lifecycle costs of what the entire aircraft will cost us over 30 or 40 years.

So, if LCA costs around $40 Million in unit costs (compared to around $80 Million for Rafale), the actual procurement costs will be significantly different. LCA will cost much higher than the Mirage-2000 upgrade because the procurement costs for M-2000 has been amortized over many years of service. This IAF and MoD know for a fact, the general public doesn't.



Who is predicting? Start googling all my "predictions."

 

[p2prada]

we have mki to take care until amca and fgfa comes and we must be proud of lca cause we have made a better aircraft than chinese lca ie jf17 and f16 @p2prada

Yeah, that's why we will have two squadrons to face Pakistan.

 

[ersakthivel]

It's been nearly 8 now. IDF was created in 2007 or 2008.



J-10B has AESA. J-10A has an Israeli radar called EL/M 2035 which they made for Lavi. That was reverse engineered and is better than the MMR that LCA Mk1 has in many of the specs. It is a much larger radar and the nose in the J-10 is much bigger. Mk2's AESA design has not even been finalized yet. LRDE is still negotiating with ELTA on supply of front end systems.

Apart from this, J-10 has greater range, greater TWR, more weapons stations, higher dash speed, greater service ceiling, greater payload and its performance characteristics, rather conclusively, appear to be superior to LCAs. It is possible turn rates, roll rates and climb rates are all superior to the LCA. J-10A is supersonic at all altitudes, LCA is not.

I'm not sure if you know this but J-10's and LCA's first flights happened in just a span of 3 years. And J-10 has been in operational use for over 10 years now, while LCA is still in development. And J-10B is in serial production with AESA and other 4.5th gen technology and they are already developing a J-10C. The first tranches of J-10A could very well be replaced soon.

There is a reason why the first MRCA RFP was canceled in 2004 and restarted again in 2007, and also why there were some requirement changes from Mk1 to Mk2 on LCA. J-10 was first revealed to the world in 2005, if you didn't know.

The J-10 has A version which was accepted with all its flaws and its unfinished fly by wire software killing pilts in scores of crashes secret and publiched crashes are known to every one.

in fact it is nowadays being called a bomber. recently PLAF has replaced j-10 with flankers in tibetian in Tibet air fields, because of its low wing loading not permitting take off with reasonable weapon loads from high altitude air fields in Tibetian high lands.

And its nomenclature was changed to bomber , which was also mentioned widely over the net.now they are proceeding with high composite content J-10 B version for serious deployment exactly like tejas.

Compared to that tejas is a text book example of how to run a RSS fly by wire with prime consideration being the pilot safety record and safety of the platform as paramount aims.

Over 10 platforms tejas cleared more than 2000 test flights in varying climatic conditions with a spotless , incident free safety record. That alone testifies to the rigors of discipline built into the program by ADA. This was achieved against all odds as all the major tech consultants pulled out of the project citing one reason or another during various point of the program time table.

Higher dash speed --source? It is well known here you can't give source for the dash speed of any fighter here. So such claims are purely waste of time.

Tejas is supersonic at all altitudes as per the IOC-2 release to service document, despite your repeated false claims to the contrary. It has the same top speed as that of Su-30 MKI in indian hot climatic sea level conditions what is officially declared by IAF press release after hot weather trials in Goa. I have posted source so many times

http://archive.indianexpress.com/ne...s-clocks-fastest-speed-during-testing/551536/

In the final phase of its tests before formal commissioning, India's indigenous light combat aircraft Tejas went past its ultimate speed of 1,350 KMPH over the Goa skies and clocked the fastest speed ever, a top IAF officer said on Tuesday.

"The aircraft went past its ultimate speed of 1350 kmph on December 7 over the skies in Goa after take off from the naval air station INS Hansa," Commander Rohit Varma, project director (flight test), National flight test centre, told reporters here.

"This is the fastest speed ever achieved by an Indian- made fighter aircraft," he said.

The aircraft also passed flight flutter test diving from an altitude of four kilometers to almost sea level at 900 feet.

"Tejas has already passed high-altitude tests in Leh, the desert rigours in Rajasthan and now it has proved its worth over the maritime space in Goa," Varma said.

http://www.domain-b.com/aero/mil_avi/mil_aircraft/20091209_tejas_lca.html

Tejas LCA goes supersonic news

09 December 2009

INS Hansa, Dabolim, Goa: The ongoing sea-level flight trials of India's Tejas Light Combat Aircraft (LCA), which were carried out for two weeks over Goa air space, have been brought to a successful conclusion with the aircraft zooming around at a speed of 1,350 kmph (approx. Mach1.1). In the process it clocked its fastest speed ever, a top IAF officer said on Tuesday. The aircraft has steadily been crossing one critical milestone after another on the way to initial operational clearance in December 2010.

The above is the conclusive proof that despite getting bulkier by more than 700 Kgs tejas went past its ultimate design speed in Goa skies.


So PLAF accepted J-10 A with all the issues and allowed the makers to proceed for J-10 B. But IAF has in mid way asked so many changes which lead to FSED phase-2 in 2004 and later the development initiative of mk-2 in 2009.

It is possible turn rates, roll rates and climb rates are all superior to the LCA. J-10A is supersonic at all altitudes, LCA is not.

With my experience of debating with you I know the above statement has no source other than your fertile imagination. SO I have nothing to say to that. Even a kid knows how many declared and undeclared crashes of J-10 A are due to fly by wire issues.

A couple of years ago two Su-30 MKis also crashed due to fky by wire issues leading to the entire grounding of the fleet till the problem was identified and sorted out. But all the test pilots of tejas have nothing but praise for its handling.

Infact the test pilots of tejas are the safest lot in IAF if we compare the inferior tech Mig-21s and Mig-29s which keep crashing repeatedly.

It was clarified to you many times that with the funding release for two TDs in 1993, first flight in 2001, IOC-2 in 2014 Tejas conforms to the time lines of most fly by wire RSS fighter programs undertaken in the western world.

IThe funding given in 1983 was mostly used to set up test facilities, and establishment of ADA and even then the feasibility study and PD was almost finished in 1989. But due to the delicate BOP position in the early 90s funding for Tds was delayed by four years to 1993, which is no fault of ADA.

Also IAF added specs which too lead to its own delays.

If j-10 As are so top notch why are they replacing the first batch planes of J-10 just after a decade? So either there are serious issues with j-10 A or as usal your statement is factually wrong.

Most of your wrong claims on tejas debunked by Captain Suneet Krishna in the following page,

http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/indian-air-force/43717-ada-lca-tejas-iv-160.html

read @Pandora post to get some correct info on tejas

Your false claim that ," tejas can not have a multi ejector rake as it is a draggy platform is roundly debunked here",

>Are they planing for multiejector for Tejas Mk1 ? Tarmak007 Yes

Another one of your false claim that there are design flaws in air intake which makes the tejas draggy , so it can not reach the original topspeed specified by IAF(which incidently is a much lower mach 1.5 in original requirement!!!) is
also conclusively proven wrong here.

>Tarmak007As on now we have cleared the Tejas to 1.6 Mach as per the IAF requirement

 

[ersakthivel]

@ersakthivel

I don't think @p2prada has a history of racist or abusive behaviour, I have known for over 6 years.

We are not publishing editorials, so there is no responsibility of staff to "fight the untruths and lies" or to take sides re: DRDO etc.

So DFI would also welcome my stinging rebuttals of each and every false claim he makes , since it has no editorial policy and it does not take sides.


Thanks,
So I hope you won't restrain me from replying to his attacks with the same vehemence shown by my opponent.

 

[p2prada]

+ves In your terms only there is a aircraft that can fly,carry load,achieve mach 1.5,has a good ceiling and most Importantly provides a base for future aircrafts... As you said it is a fly bus okay but the one we created (DRDO) own our own.... and sooner or later 100% ours....

That's why we have inducting enough to support the industry. 178 aircraft in total is a very good number.

Questions: Is MK1 Better than MIG?
Will MK2 comparable to Any of the present aircrafts In IAF which will still be in service say another 15-20 years?
Will it be effective against PAF ? MK2

Rhetorical questions, but they have eye opening answers.

Answers after hyphens.
"Is MK1 Better than MIG?" - Yes.
"Will MK2 comparable to Any of the present aircrafts In IAF which will still be in service say another 15-20 years?" - Slightly comparable in some parameters, exceed in some and inferior in some.
"Will it be effective against PAF ? MK2" - Probably, yes.

Pakistan is doing what you are suggesting. So, I will post the same questions and replace LCA and IAF with JF-17 and PAF. My answers follow after the hyphens.
"Is JF-17 better than Mirage-3/5?" - Yes.
"Will JF-17 comparable to Any of the present aircrafts In PAF which will still be in service say another 15-20 years?" - Yes.
"Will it be effective against IAF ? JF-17" - Probably yes.

Now, I will replace the same questions and replace LCA with Rafale.
"Is Rafale Better than MIG?" - Rafale will murder Mig.
"Will Rafae comparable to Any of the present aircrafts In IAF which will still be in service say another 15-20 years?" No. Not one is comparable.
"Will it be effective against PAF ? Rafale" - It will be a one-sided slaughter.

You see the difference. Just enough is not enough. What we want is overkill. And that's what IAF is aiming for. The reason why PAF cannot aim for overkill is because they cannot afford it. OTOH, we can. And here you come and try to sell LCA to the IAF and try to take away our humongous advantage and give PAF that advantage over us. We want aircraft of such caliber than once we cross the border we want to completely dominate everything that's in the air and on the ground. LCA does not provide that capability and IAF fully well knows and understands that.

Others might have finalised deal for Rafale b4 India but I believe once it won MMRCA then only it again came in light again and others noticed it again.
TOT was definately part of deal.
Does that 20 billion include setting of base for rafale and maintenance I mean service life cost? HOw will it actually cost us?
65Mil 80 mil provide the source and surely in which year they were calculated?

Firstly we don't know the actual cost of the deal. What you see in the media are just random speculations. When the size of the deal will be announced it will be cost of procurement, like the MKI was, including production.

Over 300 Sukhoi-30, Tejas aircraft at a cost of Rs 64,408 cr to be inducted into IAF - The Economic Times

"The total cost of procurement of Su-30 MKI is over Rs 55,717 crore while the cost of procurement of Tejas LCA is about Rs 8,691 crore," he added.

Take exchange rate as 45 for the time it was announced. The cost of 40 Tejas Mk1 that was contracted for is roughly around $2 Billion. That's a little over $50 Million per aircraft. The MKIs cost around $54 Million each. This is the apples to apples comparison for costs. In comparison the actual Mirage-2000 upgrade puts the procurement cost at $37 Million. Anthony mentioned in the Parliament that the actual cost of upgrade of the Mirage-2000 per unit was Rs 167 crores or $37 Million. And we get a better aircraft in return for much lower cost than what LCA costs the taxpayer.

Now, do you understand why even LCA is expensive? At least now do you understand a bit about how costs work? Now, do you understand that the Mirage-2000 upgrade is cheaper in per unit costs than LCA? IAF announced the same, but there were no takers for it. That was actually funny.

By predictions i simply meant what u mentioned that wat ever you said in past is coming true...

Sure. That's called analysis. There are professional analysts who do this. Consider me an amateur analyst, but I have been more consistent than most professional analysts regarding LCA.

and Google doesnot make predictions????

Another candidate with comprehension issues. When I told you to google what I said, I meant look up everything I say on google and you will find a link to it.

What do you think MK2 will be capable of?

Everything that the Mk2 does, Mig-29UPG and Mirage-2000UPG can equal it or better it in many parameters. The Mig-29UPG currently has our most advanced EW suite, much more advanced than what LCA is getting today. That's because the Mig-29 has an indigenous AESA internal jammer while LCA will have an internal TWT jammer.

I am asking many questions as I am interested in knowing your point of view as you are actually totally against my views about Tejas....

You have an uninformed opinion on LCA. I have answered all your questions. And you still haven't answered the only real question that I actually asked you.

The question is very simple. What are the +ves that the IAF gets from LCA that it doesn't get from better aircraft? This time you explain your stand.

You may have already forgotten but your very first post in this topic was why we don't order more Mk1s. But it looks like you have changed your colors and jumped to supporting the Mk2 instead.

Don't forget that there is a simple and very important fact that needs to be repeated here. IAF buys weapons for the benefit of the nation. DRDO and HAL sell weapons for their own personal benefit. They are very, very concerned about profit and loss and they are very vocal about it, like forcing the army to buy Arjuns for the sake of "breaking even." Breaking even means a case of no profit or no loss for DRDO. You see the difference? And do you see where your actual loyalties should lie?

So, when DRDO is trying to sell something, you should be reading the fine print. When IAF wants to buy something, close your eyes and give them what they want, they exist for our benefit.

 

[ersakthivel]

HAL Tejas - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Tejas is the second supersonic fighter developed indigenously by Hindustan ..... a speed of over 1,350 kilometres per hour (840 mph) during its sea level flight trials in 2009. ...

So people claiming that tejas is subsonic at sea level should give proof for their claims or retract their claim.

 

[ersakthivel]

Answers after hyphens.
"Is MK1 Better than MIG?" - Yes.
"Will MK2 comparable to Any of the present aircrafts In IAF which will still be in service say another 15-20 years?" - Slightly comparable in some parameters, exceed in some and inferior in some.
"Will it be effective against PAF ? MK2" - Probably, yes.

Pakistan is doing what you are suggesting. So, I will post the same questions and replace LCA and IAF with JF-17 and PAF. My answers follow after the hyphens.
"Is JF-17 better than Mirage-3/5?" - Yes.
"Will JF-17 comparable to Any of the present aircrafts In PAF which will still be in service say another 15-20 years?" - Yes.
"Will it be effective against IAF ? JF-17" - Probably yes.

Now, I will replace the same questions and replace LCA with Rafale.
"Is Rafale Better than MIG?" - Rafale will murder Mig.
"Will Rafae comparable to Any of the present aircrafts In IAF which will still be in service say another 15-20 years?" No. Not one is comparable.
"Will it be effective against PAF ? Rafale" - It will be a one-sided slaughter.

These are all mostly useless prejudiced personal opinions far removed from truth!!!!

For the same cost we can put four tejas mk-2 in skies against a single rafale.
Four tejas mk-2 means four Ew suits, four same sized ASEA radars.And almost the same range of BVR missiles as ADA chief himself has said that tejas mk-2 will have the interface to carry Meteor (the same main BVR to be carried by RAFALE and Grippen NG) .

So the odds are even. tejas mk-2 will also be equipped with latest IRST kits in future as RAFALEs which doesn't have basic HMDS enabled WVRs is going to be outfitted with russian help in case it is inducted into IAF.

So putting ones personal opinions which does not have a shred of evidence is comical to say the least!!!!

Take exchange rate as 45 for the time it was announced. The cost of 40 Tejas Mk1 that was contracted for is roughly around $2 Billion. That's a little over $50 Million per aircraft. The MKIs cost around $54 Million each. This is the apples to apples comparison for costs. In comparison the actual Mirage-2000 upgrade puts the procurement cost at $37 Million. Anthony mentioned in the Parliament that the actual cost of upgrade of the Mirage-2000 per unit was Rs 167 crores or $37 Million. And we get a better aircraft in return for much lower cost than what LCA costs the taxpayer.

The cost of tejas mk-1 is

http://www.business-standard.com/ar...s-fighter-at-rs-162-crore-114011100829_1.html

The Tejas Mark I will be one of the world's most affordable fighters in its class. Ministry of Defence (MoD) sources tell Business Standard that Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL) has quoted a price of Rs 162 crore per aircraft for the first 20 Tejas fighters that have begun production in Bangalore. That translates into a dollar price of approximately $26 million a fighter.

This is a fraction of the cost of the comparable Mirage-2000, which was bought relatively cheaply in the 1980s, but is currently being upgraded for Rs 280 crore ($45 million) per fighter. On December 19, 2011, Defence Minister A K Antony had told Parliament that Thales would get Euro 1.4 billion (Rs 11,830 crore today) for upgrading the Indian Air Force (IAF) fleet of 49 Mirage-2000 fighters, while HAL would get Rs 2,020 crore, i.e., a total of Rs 13,850 crore. Since the upgrade will only be completed by 2021, that cost would rise further if the rupee falls.

One poster made a fantastic claim that this 23 million does not include engines!!!! As usual with no source ofcourse.

I don't know who gave the figure of 50 million per piece to a particular gentleman here!!!!

Everything that the Mk2 does, Mig-29UPG and Mirage-2000UPG can equal it or better it in many parameters. The Mig-29UPG currently has our most advanced EW suite, much more advanced than what LCA is getting today. That's because the Mig-29 has an indigenous AESA internal jammer while LCA will have an internal TWT jammer.

As usual wrong!!!!
Upgraded mig-29s still have an elephants' clean config frontal RCS compared to rat sized tejas frontal clean config RCS ,

Also upgraded Migs are still inferior dynamically stable flight profile fighters belonging to the seventies aerodynamic era,

while tejas is dynamically unstable RSS fly by wire fighter(same aerodynamic profile as grippen Ng, TYPHOON, F-22, RAFALE and PAKFA) with even more higher composite content than RAFALE.

And the twin engined Mig-29 has a torrid safety record rivaling the much older Mig-21s ,
thats why upgraded mig-29s are never claimed 4.5th gen foghters as Tejas is,

Mig-29 is at the end of its product lifecycle, while tejas is yet to get even its first MLU!!!

from the perspective of ,

Quality ,
aerodynamic design ,
service availability rate,
clean config frontal RCS,
higher composite content which further reduces overall RCS,

tejas is a generation ahead of Mig-29s from its DNA itself.

Just to give you some perspective,

Once tejas mk-1 or mk-2 fires off its heavier RCS giving long range BVR and approaches the Mig-29 for close combat, it disappears from mig-29 radar screen , since it has manifold lesser clean config RCS than Mig-29,
but Mig-29 with its 1 plus frontal clean config RCS will still be visible on ASEA radar screen,

If tejas gets stealth weapon pods(as tey are planning for RAFALE in silent rafale concepts) in future the difference become even starker,

Like multi ejector rake , IRSt and ASEA radars stealth weapon pods will be integrated in all future 4th and 4.5th gen fighter to counter the older fighters like J-10, F-16, Mirage-2000, Mig-29 and Su-30 MKI all of which have a clean config RCS of more than 1 sq meter, which is four to five times bigger than the clean config frontal RCS of tejas

Tejas can track and fire its 100 plus Km range BVR simply undetected by the radars of J-10 or Mirage or F-16 or Su-30 MKi or Mig-29. It is a physical fact, there is no point denying it!!!!

 

[Singh]

So DFI would also welcome my stinging rebuttals of each and every false claim he makes , since it has no editorial policy and it does not take sides.

Thanks,
So I hope you won't restrain me from replying to his attacks with the same vehemence shown by my opponent.

Please check the number of infractions and bans @p2prada has got. Be my guest.

 

[p2prada]

@ersakthivel

Everything you wrote about J-10 is completely wrong. And J-10 has achieved speeds of Mach 2.

Tejas Mk1 is not supersonic at sea level. The speed it achieved in Goa can be done by Mig-21 too, Mig-21 also cannot go supersonic at sea level. LCA climbed to 4 Km altitude and then dived to breach the mach 1 speed. MKI, Mig-29, Mirage-2000 etc can achieve mach 1.2 at level flight. They don't have to climb and dive to achieve that speed. Tejas Mk2 is advertised to have supersonic capability at all altitudes, not Mk1. That's the very reason why Mk2's advertisement carries the statement that it will be supersonic at all altitudes.

The changes IAF asked on LCA are extremely minimal. Even J-10B should have much higher changes as proven by the prototypes. Even the Mk2 requirements are extremely modest. I will repeat, extremely modest. The only ones who were making major changes to the LCA was ADA, not IAF. Asking for an internal EW kit and digital electronics is not a major change. ADA themselves say they want to upgrade LCA every few years in terms of avionics. So, that's no fault of IAF.

It was clarified to you many times that with the funding release for two TDs in 1993, first flight in 2001, IOC-2 in 2014 Tejas conforms to the time lines of most fly by wire RSS fighter programs undertaken in the western world.

Utter Nonsense. 14 years of flight tests is normal?
F-16 took 4. Mirage-2000 took 4. Even J-10 took 7.

Even F-35 has done only 7 years and it faces so much criticism.
You simply don't know what normal is.

PAKFA first flew in 2010, it is already undergoing state acceptance trials and will undergo squadron inductions from 2015-16 onwards. Even for such an advanced aircraft it is only 5 years.

As for the comments by by the good group captain, you simply don't understand them. When he talked about multi-ejector racks, he talked about bomb racks, not missile racks. The IAF doesn't consider carrying more than 4 missiles (2+2) on the LCA, even Mig-21 carried only two, so the IAF doesn't believe more are needed. And the wing tip stations cannot carry racks anyway. So, it is of no use. Your lack of understanding of his comments, my comments, or anybody else's comments are your undoing. IAF prefers greater endurance over more missiles because we have other aircraft in the air that fly more than LCA and carry more missiles. Multi-ejector racks are for air forces that do not have aircraft like MKI and Rafale.

Also, he is not a Captain, which is a completely different rank in the army, he is called a Group Captain which is an entirely different rank in the air force.

And surprise, surprise, LCA is still below mach 1.6, that is just a rounded off figure presented to the media.

And yes, the inlet drag still exists and the time it takes the LCA to accelerate to mach 1.6 is insanely high. By the time it reaches mach 1.6, it is already hovering near bingo fuel. So, no, LCA's operational speed is still below that.

Also, if you didn't notice, he did not provide an actual answer to the AoA question because it was a major source of embarrassment for ADA. He simply said absolute figures are not needed. Matter of fact, he is correct, absolute figures are not needed, and most of the time LCA won't even touch such AoA figures just like it won't do more than mach 0.9 for 99% of its life. They were stuck at 18 deg then, and I mentioned the same to you many years ago. But jumping away from the question is plenty enough proof that they did not reach such figures until LSP-8 was made with major design changes. And this happened only last year. It was so simple for him to jump away from that answer with this statement : We will be testing the aircraft to the AOA where we can derive maximum performance from it.

Normally during tests, they test it to beyond the operational performance figures. While Rafale is restricted to an AoA of 32deg, it was tested up to 100 deg. Gripen was the same, it was tested to 100 deg. With LCA, they cannot do such a test. They will be lucky to achieve 30 deg. For LCA the normal operational figures are 24 deg and they plan to achieve anywhere between 26-28 deg for the same. Look at the difference between foreign aircraft capabilities and the modest abilities of LCA Mk1.

What was compromised, what design changes were made and what was lost during the process, we don't know. It is possible that LCA achieves higher AoA than 20 deg at very great expense to the life of the airframe. It is just that they don't mention such things when they throw figures around. Everything else the good group captain mentions is stuff I have known for a very long time. Also, he is a test pilot, test pilots are only required to speak good things about the aircraft they are testing to the media. If you have a closed door meeting with the group captain, he will tell you in detail why IAF prefers Rafale over LCA, as I have been with some others.

 

[ersakthivel]

Don't forget that there is a simple and very important fact that needs to be repeated here. IAF buys weapons for the benefit of the nation. DRDO and HAL sell weapons for their own personal benefit. They are very, very concerned about profit and loss and they are very vocal about it, like forcing the army to buy Arjuns for the sake of "breaking even." Breaking even means a case of no profit or no loss for DRDO. You see the difference? And do you see where your actual loyalties should lie?

So, when DRDO is trying to sell something, you should be reading the fine print. When IAF wants to buy something, close your eyes and give them what they want, they exist for our benefit.

IAF buys weapons for the benefits of the nation, But DRDO is perhaps building tejas for pakistan !!!!

All the test pilots of tejas are IAF pilts and IAF technicians are involved from the design stage of tejas mk-2 itself. So there are no fine prints and secrets over tejas as some people are trying to pass it off!!!

Of the 250 belated requests for Action raised by IAf all save 12 were cleared by ADA team in record time, And these 12 are to be sored out in Tejas mk-2.

Who is attending IAf's cries of crisis in the ever crashing Mig-29 and Mig-21s?

It is only expected of such posters to tarnish Arjun as well which is even more OT and prejudiced BS here in this thread.The T-90 in indian desert conditions is aiming to make its crews disfunctional with the searing summer heat rather than the enemy tank crew, And till today no solution is found out !!!!

If DRDO and ADA are concrned about profits what were the considerations of Sukhoi and dassault and Augusta westland and the makers of T-90? Charity perhaps?

Why is the CBI running after ex IAf chief in Augusta westand purchase?

Why did MOD scrap LUH tender after allegations surfaced from the same augusta westland agent that an indian army guy who was part of the evaluation team asked for bribes to swing the deal.

people should not assume that nobody is even reading newspapers in india.

The whole arms dealing world knows how the wheels within wheels system of defence procurement functions and where to put the grease to swing the deal and hobble indigenous projects by keep on moving the goal post.

 

[laughingbuddha]

We'll know soon enough who is right.

 

[ersakthivel]

@ersakthivel

Everything you wrote about J-10 is completely wrong. And J-10 has achieved speeds of Mach 2.

Rafale has only achieved mach 1.8 , So does it mean it is inferior to J-10?

both you, dassault and I know that these top speeds which require extra strengthening of the air frame leading to more weight penalty is meaning less as in todays missile combat what matters is agility in trans sonic flight envelope and low wing loading plus high TWR .

J-10 has far far higher wingloading which will obviously reduce its ITR in the turn fast and shoot at first sight mode , and also penalise it in evading missile shots since its high wingloading will give it a lesser ITR, which is a basic law of physics against which no argument can be made.

And these top speeds are can not be maintained for more than a few minutes as all their fuel will be emptied in count of seconds also.

No fighter can use this top speed to practically evade missile shots as 4 plus mach missiles has no problem in negotiating the extra o.2 or o.4 mach speeds,

A mg-21 is a costing in peanuts mach 2 fighter, rafale is a mach 1.8 fighter costing 120 million dollars. Make your choice.

Tejas Mk1 is not supersonic at sea level. The speed it achieved in Goa can be done by Mig-21 too, Mig-21 also cannot go supersonic at sea level. LCA climbed to 4 Km altitude and then dived to breach the mach 1 speed. MKI, Mig-29, Mirage-2000 etc can achieve mach 1.2 at level flight. They don't have to climb and dive to achieve that speed. Tejas Mk2 is advertised to have supersonic capability at all altitudes, not Mk1. That's the very reason why Mk2's advertisement carries the statement that it will be supersonic at all altitudes.

The four Km dive was POWERLESS not a POWERED DIVE!!! which you will omit as usual. It was not that for want of power tejas mk-1 dived from four KMs with full after burners to break the sound barrier in sea level.

The standard procedure in a flutter test is to undertake a powerless dive to confirm the handling of the fighter , while finishing the flutter test and pulling out of the powerless dive tejas mk-1 crossed mach 1.1 is the official statement.

So there is no truth in saying that tejas undertook the powered dive to cross mach 1.1 at sea level. which can be done by Mirage-2000 in level flight. there is no source for your claim.

release to service document of tejas mk-1 in IOC-2 itself states that tejas mk1 is super sonic in all altitudes.

The changes IAF asked on LCA are extremely minimal. Even J-10B should have much higher changes as proven by the prototypes. Even the Mk2 requirements are extremely modest. I will repeat, extremely modest. The only ones who were making major changes to the LCA was ADA, not IAF. Asking for an internal EW kit and digital electronics is not a major change. ADA themselves say they want to upgrade LCA every few years in terms of avionics. So, that's no fault of IAF.

You and I dont know what are the changes asked in mk-2. But from the interview of ADA chief subramanium to Ajai Shukla they were aiming for 30 percent increase in all specs in mk2 over mk-1, while at the same time going for weight reduction by removing the lead plates and going for more composites.

topseed mach-2, higher flight ceiling,9G capability , ASEA radar, retracting refueling probe,interfaces for firing METEOR BVR are some of the specs listed by the ADA chief for mk-2 as design aim for tejas mk-2 using the higher powered GE-414 engine , better cockpit displays shaving off more weight

I don't know whether these are major or minor improvements over mk1. I let other posters to judge it.

Utter Nonsense. 14 years of flight tests is normal?
F-16 took 4. Mirage-2000 took 4. Even J-10 took 7.

Even F-35 has done only 7 years and it faces so much criticism.
You simply don't know what normal is.

PAKFA first flew in 2010, it is already undergoing state acceptance trials and will undergo squadron inductions from 2015-16 onwards. Even for such an advanced aircraft it is only 5 years.

The nick name for F-16 for its scorching pace is "widow maker".

Mirage-2000 was undertaken after extensive experiments on RSS fly by wire (also analog fly by wire) so it is not a green field all rolled into one experimental cum production project like tejas.

The less said abut the reliability of J-10 the better, Also you seem to unaware of how much israeli lavi project contributed to J-10, strange, no one considers it as a new project undertaken from scratch.

F-35 despite oceans of budget and eons of experience is flying at much reduced Flight envelope, which i am sure you know of,

PAKFA still uses old engines and even a kid knows is an improvement over the existing excellent flanker airframes which were finessed after decades of experience.

Compare rafale and typhoon and you know what I am talking about,

And btw it was not me who who made the time line comparison, But a distinguished air marshal and retired HAL chief who made it.
Do you know his name?

As for the comments by by the good group captain, you simply don't understand them. When he talked about multi-ejector racks, he talked about bomb racks, not missile racks. The IAF doesn't consider carrying more than 4 missiles (2+2) on the LCA, even Mig-21 carried only two, so the IAF doesn't believe more are needed.

Again this is what you make up repeatedly with as usual no credible source which I am getting tired off countering.
lets see whether tejas carries multi ejector missile racks or not.

Who in IAF told you that? It is not the IAF which designs the plane. if a plane has 3.7 ton weapon load for 7 hard points makers give it a flexibility with multi ejector missile or bomb racks.I don't know where your opinion is considered in this matter?

And the wing tip stations cannot carry racks anyway. So, it is of no use. Your lack of understanding of his comments, my comments, or anybody else's comments are your undoing. IAF prefers greater endurance over more missiles because we have other aircraft in the air that fly more than LCA and carry more missiles. Multi-ejector racks are for air forces that do not have aircraft like MKI and Rafale.

have a thought in mind that refueling probe with buddy refuelling takes care of endurance.

And tejas mk-1 has better fuel fractions than grippen C/D which determines the range and endurance not the amount of fuel or the size of fighter in hot indian climatic conditions.

Also, he is not a Captain, which is a completely different rank in the army, he is called a Group Captain which is an entirely different rank in the air force.

And surprise, surprise, LCA is still below mach 1.6, that is just a rounded off figure presented to the media.

And yes, the inlet drag still exists and the time it takes the LCA to accelerate to mach 1.6 is insanely high. By the time it reaches mach 1.6, it is already hovering near bingo fuel. So, no, LCA's operational speed is still below that.

Since the above claims of yours are just your personal opinions , there is no point in countering them.

You and I dont know what time it takes for tejas to reach mach 1.6, So no point in debating it, Since you were wrong on many known specs on tejas mk-1 , what is the point of debating something for which both of us have no proof?


They are just enlarging the intakes by 100 mm dia for tejas mk-2 for a much more powerful engine,

that shows whether the air intake of tejs mk1 is adequate or not

Also, if you didn't notice, he did not provide an actual answer to the AoA question because it was a major source of embarrassment for ADA. He simply said absolute figures are not needed. Matter of fact, he is correct, absolute figures are not needed, and most of the time LCA won't even touch such AoA figures just like it won't do more than mach 0.9 for 99% of its life. They were stuck at 18 deg then, and I mentioned the same to you many years ago. But jumping away from the question is plenty enough proof that they did not reach such figures until LSP-8 was made with major design changes. And this happened only last year. It was so simple for him to jump away from that answer with this statement : We will be testing the aircraft to the AOA where we can derive maximum performance from it.

What is the AOA mentioned in the release to service document of tejas mk-1 during the IOC-2?
What he said was AOA is not the be all and end all of fighter, it is a combination of factors like TWR, wing loading and AOA which determine the agility of the fighter.Not pure AOA alone.

On TWR tejas mk-2 will do substantailly better, even mk-1 is better than upgraded mirage-2000.

On wing loading tejas beats all other fighters in IAF hands down.

On AOA it will have the same 28 deg figure limited by fly by wire software for non-stall recovery flight profiles which is the norm for all fly by wire RSS fighters.

Normally during tests, they test it to beyond the operational performance figures. While Rafale is restricted to an AoA of 32deg, it was tested up to 100 deg. Gripen was the same, it was tested to 100 deg. With LCA, they cannot do such a test. They will be lucky to achieve 30 deg. For LCA the normal operational figures are 24 deg and they plan to achieve anywhere between 26-28 deg for the same. Look at the difference between foreign aircraft capabilities and the modest abilities of LCA Mk1.

Extreme AOA tests have nothing to do with combat operations.

I have posted research PDFs to show that tejas retains stability even beyond 30 deg ,For FOC they want to certify the fly by wire software for safe operations till 26-28 deg margin which is the norm in all RSS fly by wire fighters.

Suneet krishna himself has said that LSP-6 is an experimental aircraft(not a requirement for FOC as it has been falsely alleged )and they will carry on experiments to improve AOA to beyond 30 deg which is the design principle.

They will be doing the tests with LSp-6even after FOC is over.

What was compromised, what design changes were made and what was lost during the process, we don't know. It is possible that LCA achieves higher AoA than 20 deg at very great expense to the life of the airframe. It is just that they don't mention such things when they throw figures around. Everything else the good group captain mentions is stuff I have known for a very long time. Also, he is a test pilot, test pilots are only required to speak good things about the aircraft they are testing to the media. If you have a closed door meeting with the group captain, he will tell you in detail why IAF prefers Rafale over LCA, as I have been with some others.

What was compromised , I dont understand, First get yourself with upto date testing procedure for fly by wire RSs fighters,
All extreem specs are tested in the last phase only. In stable flight profile fighter it is the direct impulse of the pilot which plies the fighter.

In RSS fly by wire fighter it is the software, So certifying the extreme specs are painfully slow and careful exercise.

 

[ersakthivel]

For people saying that tejas is a short legged design flaw fighter , some food for thought,

The Beta Coefficient...: Search results for lca
----------------------------------------------------------


Some interesting statements on combat range of tejas in different profiles, presented by Vivek Ahuja

Low altitude air space penetration flight profile (4x 250 kg bombs, fuel max internal and all available external)combat radius of 700 Km,

high altitude PGM attack profile (2 LGBs , all available external and internal fuel)- a combat radius of 1200 Km,

HAL gives a radius of action up to 500 Km for tejas, but does not specifies the fuel or weapon combo along with flight altitude,

Mirage-2000 has a fuel fraction of around 30 percent similar to tejas,

So I think there won't be any significant difference combat range between the two fighters if similar altitude and roles are assigned with optimum load capacity for each fighter,

needs some clarification as well

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

 

[Pulkit]

Thanks for all the responses I think I have taken all your view quite nice and expect same in return....
BAck to your Questions...
Personally I still think that Tejas MK1 is a good fighter aircraft the one which has the ability to stand up for the nation and fight for it...
It might not be the best and is certainly not below the requirements of present day req... which you obviously don't agree to....
When you said that MK1 is just a fly bus and MK2 will actually meet the IAF req and that will be the actual aircraft just to see what your views would be the discussion was made based on MK2.....
But to my disappointment you also are among the few who believe in foreign aircrafts more than Indian if you may allow me Fighter Aircrafts....

I still suggest that MK1 could have been added in higher numbers till the time MK2 comes to action and later u can surely take the upgraded version....

I still say that IAF should get more MK1 till the time FGFA AMCA gets mature enough....

Atleast AMCA is not coming soon....

What will IAF get hmmm....
arent our Squad strength going down..??
OH yes thats why we are getting 40MK1 80MK2 and sukhoi and yes yes Rafale 126.....

will they be enough with the rate they will be inducted say 2020 if everything goes by plan ...
but if not???? Time will not wait... will it?
so the best thing what IAF will get the required numbers ... Which will allow the present Su-30MKI and MIG-29 to do what they are meant for DOminate ...
Rafales are good there is no question about it.... but when u say Tejas is a disaster I seriously doubt you....
Tejas has the ability ... You can keeping throwing numbers at me and keep denying bu if the same aircraft would have come just 5 years earlier everyone would have praising it... In five years alot has changed but till wars are played with all the available toys.....

you can afford all the toys in the world....so why not go for the most expensive one... its tax payers money and they are fools.... lovely....


you are a very learned man .... and i think you must have seen the stats many times ..
Performance

Maximum speed: Tested up to Mach 1.6 (1,350 km/h) (CAS) at high altitude
Range: 850 km (459 nmi, 528 mi)
Combat radius: 300 km (162 nmi, 186 mi)
Ferry range: 3,000 km (1,840 mi)
Service ceiling: 15,000 m (49,200 ft)
Wing loading: 247 kg/m² (50.7 lb/ft²)
Thrust/weight: 1.07
g-limits: +8/−3.5 g
Armament

Guns: 1× mounted 23 mm twin-barrel GSh-23 cannon with 220 rounds of ammunition.
Hardpoints: 8 total: 1× beneath the port-side intake trunk for targeting pods, 6× under-wing, and 1× under-fuselage with a capacity of 4,200 kg external fuel and ordnance
Missiles:


HAL Tejas carrying R-73 missile and Drop Tank.


Tejas weapon display Aero India 2011
Air-to-air missiles:
Python 5
Derby
Astra
Vympel R-77
Vympel R-73
Air-to-surface missiles:
Kh-59ME (TV guided standoff Missile)
Kh-59MK (Laser guided standoff Missile)
Anti-ship missiles
Kh-35
Kh-31
Bombs:

KAB-1500L laser-guided bombs
GBU-16 Paveway II
FAB-250
ODAB-500PM fuel-air explosives
ZAB-250/350 incendiary bombs
BetAB-500Shp powered concrete-piercing bombs
FAB-500T dumb bombs
OFAB-250-270 dumb bombs
OFAB-100-120 dumb bombs
RBK-500 cluster bomb stake


with all this you feel its not a good aircraft....



Okay lets change the direction of discussion....

U say MK1 will be a trainer aircraft correct... good we need many of them aswell our old buddies are retiring soon...
and none the less they are play a good role as training aircraft why need to import from outside....Its not a question....

You donot believe in economics of nation... I do...
what more will it bring it will push are Defense Industry to come up with better products...
we are the largest importers in the world...We buy all the fancy stuff... even they are flawed......


some where you said You have not started about flaws of Tejas...
Hmmmm.... Dead weight,,,, degree of turn.....hmmm speed..... fuel capacity .....weapons choice....

doesnt matter till its better than the enemies and bring them down which it can.....

Indian defense is full of people who wanna make profit out of it...
They played with Tejas for long.... who will be unhappy if Tejas rises they will.... we are the largest importers of military goods...

Cost.... Till the time money stays here in India doesnt matter because wat you were saying conversion to dollars the rate increases when ur debt is high...

So in a way its a more expensive deal.... but who cares we can afford....


I m not good with numbers but for the fact i knoW Tejas is a machine India should hve....

tO THE BEST OF MY ABILITY I HAVE ANSWERED YOU

Hoping soon to enter to your ignore list like a few others here....

END OF DISCUSSION TILL YOU LEARN TO HAVE FAITH AND TRUST .ITS ALWAYS TO HAVE ONE IN HAND THAN TWO IN BUSH.IN THE HOPE OF BETTER FUTURE NEVER LET THE PRESENT FLY AWAY

That's why we have inducting enough to support the industry. 178 aircraft in total is a very good number.



Rhetorical questions, but they have eye opening answers.

Answers after hyphens.
"Is MK1 Better than MIG?" - Yes.
"Will MK2 comparable to Any of the present aircrafts In IAF which will still be in service say another 15-20 years?" - Slightly comparable in some parameters, exceed in some and inferior in some.
"Will it be effective against PAF ? MK2" - Probably, yes.

Pakistan is doing what you are suggesting. So, I will post the same questions and replace LCA and IAF with JF-17 and PAF. My answers follow after the hyphens.
"Is JF-17 better than Mirage-3/5?" - Yes.
"Will JF-17 comparable to Any of the present aircrafts In PAF which will still be in service say another 15-20 years?" - Yes.
"Will it be effective against IAF ? JF-17" - Probably yes.

Now, I will replace the same questions and replace LCA with Rafale.
"Is Rafale Better than MIG?" - Rafale will murder Mig.
"Will Rafae comparable to Any of the present aircrafts In IAF which will still be in service say another 15-20 years?" No. Not one is comparable.
"Will it be effective against PAF ? Rafale" - It will be a one-sided slaughter.

You see the difference. Just enough is not enough. What we want is overkill. And that's what IAF is aiming for. The reason why PAF cannot aim for overkill is because they cannot afford it. OTOH, we can. And here you come and try to sell LCA to the IAF and try to take away our humongous advantage and give PAF that advantage over us. We want aircraft of such caliber than once we cross the border we want to completely dominate everything that's in the air and on the ground. LCA does not provide that capability and IAF fully well knows and understands that.



Firstly we don't know the actual cost of the deal. What you see in the media are just random speculations. When the size of the deal will be announced it will be cost of procurement, like the MKI was, including production.

Over 300 Sukhoi-30, Tejas aircraft at a cost of Rs 64,408 cr to be inducted into IAF - The Economic Times


Take exchange rate as 45 for the time it was announced. The cost of 40 Tejas Mk1 that was contracted for is roughly around $2 Billion. That's a little over $50 Million per aircraft. The MKIs cost around $54 Million each. This is the apples to apples comparison for costs. In comparison the actual Mirage-2000 upgrade puts the procurement cost at $37 Million. Anthony mentioned in the Parliament that the actual cost of upgrade of the Mirage-2000 per unit was Rs 167 crores or $37 Million. And we get a better aircraft in return for much lower cost than what LCA costs the taxpayer.

Now, do you understand why even LCA is expensive? At least now do you understand a bit about how costs work? Now, do you understand that the Mirage-2000 upgrade is cheaper in per unit costs than LCA? IAF announced the same, but there were no takers for it. That was actually funny.



Sure. That's called analysis. There are professional analysts who do this. Consider me an amateur analyst, but I have been more consistent than most professional analysts regarding LCA.



Another candidate with comprehension issues. When I told you to google what I said, I meant look up everything I say on google and you will find a link to it.



Everything that the Mk2 does, Mig-29UPG and Mirage-2000UPG can equal it or better it in many parameters. The Mig-29UPG currently has our most advanced EW suite, much more advanced than what LCA is getting today. That's because the Mig-29 has an indigenous AESA internal jammer while LCA will have an internal TWT jammer.



You have an uninformed opinion on LCA. I have answered all your questions. And you still haven't answered the only real question that I actually asked you.

The question is very simple. What are the +ves that the IAF gets from LCA that it doesn't get from better aircraft? This time you explain your stand.

You may have already forgotten but your very first post in this topic was why we don't order more Mk1s. But it looks like you have changed your colors and jumped to supporting the Mk2 instead.

Don't forget that there is a simple and very important fact that needs to be repeated here. IAF buys weapons for the benefit of the nation. DRDO and HAL sell weapons for their own personal benefit. They are very, very concerned about profit and loss and they are very vocal about it, like forcing the army to buy Arjuns for the sake of "breaking even." Breaking even means a case of no profit or no loss for DRDO. You see the difference? And do you see where your actual loyalties should lie?

So, when DRDO is trying to sell something, you should be reading the fine print. When IAF wants to buy something, close your eyes and give them what they want, they exist for our benefit.

 

[ersakthivel]

Tejas can retain rudder control even after 35 degrees is the statement from it's designers.

Read Captain Mao's statement on alpha posted by Karthick in BR.

IAF culled out the best specs of both Mig-29 and Mirage-2000 for tejas without even knowing it is impossible to achieve them in a single fighter platform of Mig-21 size with 80 Kn engine with a decent range.

So what is being done on Tejas is the best available air frame to get the most optimum specs in indian condition taking into account high altitude Himalayan landing and take off condition was chosen and the best available engine was chosen keeping in mind the competing fighter platform's specs.

With the high percentage of composites and modern cranked delta low wing loading RSS fully digital fly by wire air frame it is imperative that the end product will compare with the it's contemporaries world wide in indian hot climatic conditions.

That's why it is having a radome dia almost equivalent to RAFALE , internal EW suits 120 Km tracking range for 2 sq meter target radar and is supposed to carry both the Astra mk-1 and mk-2 taking it's higher BVR range to 120 Km fully exploiting it's radar capability.

Leaving all this aside repeatedly dumping on the plane with IAF cleared it with lower alpha because it did not meet expectations is simply ignorant.


From 1 to 21 seconds a vertical loop in 20 seconds gives it a Vertical STR of 18 deg(360 degree /20 seconds).

tejas did pull this 20 seconds vertical loop with 6G and 20 deg AOA flight envelope restriction in 2013 aeroindia flight display.

if it is going to be cleared for 8Gs , along with a much higher AOA of 26-28 deg in FOC it sure is going to better this vertical STR of around 18 deg displayed in aeroindia 2013.

this video was originally posted by @rahulrds1 in

http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/indian-air-force/38586-aero-india-2013-a-17.html

The original ASR for tejas posted by Retired Airmarshal MS WOOLEN called fro a top speed of mach 1.5 and 17 deg STR.

now with 6G limit and 20 DEG aoa limit before IOC-2, Tejas has pulled 18 deg vertical STR , SO where is the shortfall and relaxation?

http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/indian-air-force/43717-ada-lca-tejas-iv-122.html

The following PDF was posted many years back before IOC-2 ,

Approach to High Angle of Attack Testing of Light Combat Aircraft [LCA] Tejas
As shown at Fig-1, the Tejas flyingconfiguration was selected for good balance between supersonic and subsonicperformance and good handling characteristics throughout.

It consists of a pure double delta configuration with leading edge angles of 50 deg and 62.5 deg and a trailing edge forward sweep angle of 4deg. The CG lies about 33.5% of MACand the wing area is 38.5 sq meter.

. The only augmentation devices are three-piece leading

However, directional characteristics indicated the proverbial 'cliff' with a sudden drop inCn, CRM (Coefficient of Rolling Moment) and CYM (Coefficient of Yawing Moment) atapprox 25 deg AoA as shown at fig-4 and 5. These phenomena require the High AoA trialsto be limited to 24 deg (as shown in dotted line) until directional stability is bolstered andaugmented by rudder control up to an expected 26 deg . Currently the Tejas is flying to AOAlimits of 20 deg and 22 deg never exceed. Fortunately as shown in fig-6, the LCA hassignificant rudder authority (CYM-Del R) even up to 30

AoA that will allow artificialstabilization in yaw at high AOA
Wind tunnel experiments haveindicated that CL max continues to improve till approx 35 deg AoA as shown at fig-3 below,

Rudder authority Vis a Vis AOA

Going to the link above and seeing the experimental graph will give a lot of info about lift at high AOA.

So with full slats CL max continues to improve till 35 degree

It also states this about the airframe in the wind tunnel experiments------Tejas retains significant rudder authority even at 30 Deg if directional stability is bolstered and augmented by rudder controls .

 

[Pulkit]

+1... Killer

what was compromised , i dont understand, first get yourself with upto date testing procedure for fly by wire rss fighters,
all extreem specs are tested in the last phase only. In stable flight profile fighter it is the direct impulse of the pilot which plies the fighter.

In rss fly by wire fighter it is the software, so certifying the extreme specs are painfully slow and careful exercise.

 

[abhi_the _gr8_maratha]

@p2prada not even giving a single reference and arguing with @ersakthivel who is giving reference for his every claim , p2prada sir, please give reference

 

[p2prada]

Personally I still think that Tejas MK1 is a good fighter aircraft the one which has the ability to stand up for the nation and fight for it...
It might not be the best and is certainly not below the requirements of present day req... which you obviously don't agree to....

Why? I know your PoV, but why? Why should we induct Tejas? What use is it to the IAF?

There has to be a solid reason for the IAF to buy more LCAs. They have already decided to buy 123. That number itself is more than what most air forces have. Total LCAs to be ordered are 178. Even France, UK, Germany, Italy and Spain have smaller aircraft numbers than that. Italy and Spain are less than 100 as a matter of fact. 178 is already a huge number.

But to my disappointment you also are among the few who believe in foreign aircrafts more than Indian if you may allow me Fighter Aircrafts....

I have asked this to many people, and I will ask this to you as well. Make a list of all electronics items and vehicles you have at your house. I am 100% certain that you have at least one foreign item. For every foreign household appliance or electronics you have at home there is an equivalent Indian brand available in the market. But I am pretty sure you have something foreign, be it a vehicle, or a phone or your refrigerator. Why?

Don't buy Apple, LG, Samsung, Nokia or any other foreign brand phone. There are new Indian brands available in the market today. Use those.
Top 10 desi mobile phones | Know Your Mobile India

Buy Videocon TVs and ACs. Buy Godrej refrigerators and washing machines.

We have such good car companies, still people buy Honda, Hyundai and Ford instead of Maruti, Tata and Mahindra.

If you have even one foreign product out of these then you don't deserve to even have the opinion that the IAF should buy Indian at all. Always remember that the consumer appliance industry is far, far bigger than the defence industry, and you are practically handing out money to foreign companies instead of Indian companies.

You want the IAF to buy Indian, then start at your home first. A modern Swadeshi movement has more benefit than IAF buying LCAs.

I have truncated the rest of your post since it is just repeating what I have already said.

There is only one person on my ignore list. And don't worry, you won't go on my ignore list. You haven't earned that honor. :thumb: