LCA Tejas vs JF-17 Thunder

farhan_9909

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Aug 30, 2012
Messages
5,895
Likes
497
i still claim it is an improvement of the past mig-21 clone and crap 3rd gen fighter with no future.Not me alone.

Because that is why it was junked by PLAF and pushed down the throat of PAF.

If not why didn't chinese induct it?

They went for the original F16 , LAVI clone the J-10 with much better russian AL-31 engine and junking the JF-17 plane on the heads of bankrupt third world countries in the name of cheap exports.

The single RD engine on the JF-17 is no world class engine. In mig-29 there are two engines of the same tech. SO it more safer.
you claim and your claim doenst matter

but your ACM does consider your LCA what you consider JFT

your ACM considered LCA MK2 as mig 21++ which might be in mass production by 2020.

JFT is a small aircraft and china a very big country..for a country of china size they need aircraft with more range and better payload..

you can only dream of LCA.

because LCA is a techonology demostrator and will never ever enter into service
 

farhan_9909

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Aug 30, 2012
Messages
5,895
Likes
497
BS. these are your illiterate opinions. Not facts. Answer one question. What is the time taken by JF-17 to complete one vertical loop?
i will have to watch the videos of all the 5 airshows JFT has performed in..since in the zhuhai airshow i just recently watched.JFT didnt performed verticle loop.a full complete verticle loop.

so wil report tomorrow..since i cant watch all the videos now
 

ersakthivel

Brilliance
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2011
Messages
7,029
Likes
8,763
Country flag
you claim and your claim doenst matter

but your ACM does consider your LCA what you consider JFT

your ACM considered LCA MK2 as mig 21++ which might be in mass production by 2020.

JFT is a small aircraft and china a very big country..for a country of china size they need aircraft with more range and better payload..

you can only dream of LCA.

because LCA is a techonology demostrator and will never ever enter into service
re you playing foot ball as full back tackle. i told you that the same ACM said two sentences later on the same interview that after FOC lca is just short of grippen , can't you read?
Orders for 188 tejas in mk-1 and mk-2 versions are confirmed , while china junked this obsolete JF-17 on third world countries.
 

farhan_9909

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Aug 30, 2012
Messages
5,895
Likes
497
re you playing foot ball as full back tackle. i told you that the same ACM said two sentences later on the same interview that after FOC lca is just short of grippen , can't you read?
Orders for 188 tejas in mk-1 and mk-2 versions are confirmed , while china junked this obsolete JF-17 on third world countries.
quote me the statement again.

BS..the most recent news mention only 40 lca mk1 or as per your acm 2nd generation are to be inducted by 2016-17
the time when we will have almost jft 3 in production.

china induct it or not it doesnt matter..china is competing with super power directly not with a country having 44% of world poor population alone.

and FOC of LCA mk1 is expected in mid 2015.when we will have almost 50 jft 2 in serive and 50 jft 1.
 

p2prada

Senior Member
Joined
May 25, 2009
Messages
10,234
Likes
4,017
So its about fuel now? Like i said in is no more WW2 where one better STR gets to beat other.
It is not just one parameter or another. It is about all parameters and their relationship between them.

Read up interviews of Mirage-2000 pilots and they will tell you that they cannot get into long drawn dog fights. They need to end it quickly or it will end badly.

Anyway are you saying with lighter airframe weight and greater thrust LCAs at MK-2 the STR will not be better? Hell at atleast 65 KN dry LCA has far better TWR than any fighter of light class and better TWR also means better sustained rate.
Every single 4th gen aircraft today has greater STR than LCA.

BTW you are still due to give me source of the yours which says LCA has 17 deg STR......
Its been posted thousands of times. Read the article by Admiral Woollen.

Give me the link which says otherwise.
Why don't you click on the link that I already gave. Proof that you never even bothered to check the link.
 

ersakthivel

Brilliance
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2011
Messages
7,029
Likes
8,763
Country flag
quote me the statement again.

BS..the most recent news mention only 40 lca mk1 or as per your acm 2nd generation are to be inducted by 2016-17
the time when we will have almost jft 3 in production.
During IOC it did not validate many of it's performance parameters. It was referring to this aspect that ACM said that . Just a few sentences later , he said that LCA is in the league of grippen once it integrates it's radar and long range BVRS after validating all the specs in FOC.But even after me postin it three times you pretend not to read it!!!!!
china induct it or not it doesnt matter..china is competing with super power directly not with a country having 44% of world poor population alone.
This fighter is JF-17 is not fit to be inducted into any airforce of any country in 2010 , that is truly a big power.

Because it is a 40 year old design just being powdered up with DSI and LREX and no scope for improvement.
and FOC of LCA mk1 is expected in mid 2015.when we will have almost 50 jft 2 in serive and 50 jft 1.
All the 50 won't be able to complete a vertical loop in under 20 seconds as Tejas showed even with using it's capability, well within the limits of it's extreme performance with just 6G opening of the flight envelope. limited
And all those JF-17s are going to have much inferior radar detection and ranging capacity than the LCA Tejas and going to have at least 5 times bigger clean config RCS han the Tejas.A deadly combination which makes them forever inferior to tejas.

Meaning in any engagement the JF-17 will be seen by LCA first,
because it has higher RCS than the Tejas.
And tejas will fire it's long range BVR first resulting in better combat win prospects for tejas.
 
Last edited:

ersakthivel

Brilliance
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2011
Messages
7,029
Likes
8,763
Country flag
i had no intentions to do so.

but you forced me by posting the mig 21 picture

there was one another project from brazil if i am not wrong..the fighter aircraft was 100% identicle to tejas..it seems like india bought the design from brazil..will try to post it in future..

and we believe Tejas is a dead design with no future..this i+s the reason after 30-40 years india is still not able to even enter it into mass production

the recent indian sources claims that LCA has problems with radar,has more than 100 more problems..has a very small payload of 3.5tons when compared to JFT most latest specs 4600kg

has a true combat radius of only 800km vis a vis JFT 1300+km,

is as much manouverible as K-8..

i can post a video of k-8 and than you yourself should compare it with lca..
I dont want to post JFT Video since i am well aware of the fact that JFT will eat lca alive


in Fig. 6 for angle of attack a = 13° and 18° . A fairly goodcomparison is observed. The vortical flow field capturedin calculations is presented in Fig. 7. The particle tracesillustrate the detailed structure of the rolled-up vortices.It is seen that the leading edge vortices are strengthenedas the flow develops progressively away from the leading-edge of the win
To generate large lift inducing vortices the wing of Tejas was designed with a crank or compound delta model, along with the twist in wing root.

You can obsever the the lift inducing vortices generated by this compound delta +wingroot twist+curvarute of the wing resulting in large beneficial lift inducing vortices benefitting Tejas in vertical maneuvers.

These lift inducing vortices delay the onset of stall.Because of the 53 deg Sweep angle these lift inducing vortices act on large part of the wing giving the fighter beneficial lift. With the addition of Levcons leading to even more sudden vertical agility.

That was the reason ADA chose the impressive F-16 XL's cranked delta wing form. F-16 Xl has a crank at the edge of the wing.


The wing and rear horizontal control surfaces were replaced with a cranked-arrow delta wing 120% larger than the original wing. Extensive use of carbon fiber composites allowed the savings of 600 lb (270 kg) of weight but the F-16XL was still 2,800 lb (1300 kg) heavier than the original F-16A.
Less noticeable is that the fuselage was lengthened by 56 in (1.4 m) by the addition of 2 sections at the joints of the main fuselage sub-assemblies. With the new wing design, the tail section had to be canted up 3°, and the ventral fins removed, to prevent them from striking the pavement during takeoff and landing. However, as the F-16XL exhibits greater stability than the native F-16, these changes were not detrimental to the handling of the aircraft.
These changes resulted in a 25% improvement in maximum lift-to-drag ratio in supersonic flight and 11% in subsonic flight, and a plane that reportedly handled much smoother at high speeds and low altitudes. The enlargements increased fuel capacity by 82%. The F-16XL could carry twice the ordnance of the F-16 and deliver it 40% further. The enlarged wing allowed a total of 27 hardpoints:
16 wing stations of capacity 750 lb (340 kg) each
4 semi-recessed AIM-120 AMRAAM stations under fuselage
2 wingtip stations
1 centerline station
2 wing "heavy/wet" stations
2 chin LANTIRN stations
http://www.airforcemag.com/MagazineArchive/Pages/1983/November 1983/1183f16xl.aspx

Two additional capabilities of the F-16XL contribute to survivability. First is improved instantaneous maneuver ability coupled with greatly expanded flight operating limits (with bombs), and second is reduced radar signature resulting from the configuration shaping.


For a decade and a half, many fighter tacticians have stressed the paramount importance of being able to sustain a high turn rate at high Gs. The rationale was that with such a capability, enemy aircraft that cannot equal or better the sustained turn rate at high Gs could not get off a killing shot with guns or missiles.


With developments in missiles that can engage at all aspects, and as a result of having evaluated Israeli successes in combat, the tacticians are now leaning toward the driving need for quick, high-G turns to get a "first-shot, quick-kill" capability before the adversary is able to launch his missiles. This the F-16XL can do. Harry Hillaker says it can attain five Gs in 0.8 seconds, on the way to nine Gs in just a bit more time. That's half the time required for the F-16A, which in turn is less than half the time required for the F-4. The speed loss to achieve five Gs is likewise half that of the F-16A.


All of these apparent miracles seem to violate the laws of aerodynamics by achieving greater range, payload, maneuverability, and survivability. Instead, they are achieved by inspired design, much wind-tunnel testing of shapes, exploitation of advanced technologies, and freedom from the normal contract constraints.


The inspired design mates a "cranked-arrow" wing to a fifty-six inch longer fuselage. The cranked-arrow design retains the advantages of delta wings for high-speed flight, but overcomes all of the disadvantages by having its aft portion less highly swept than the forward section. It thus retains excellent low-speed characteristics and minimizes the trim drag penalties of a tailless delta.


Although the wing area is more than double that of the standard F-16 (633square feet vs. 300 square feet), the drag is actually reduced.

Although the wing area is more than double that of the standard F-16 (633square feet vs. 300 square feet), the drag is actually reduced. The skin friction drag that is a function of the increased wetted (skin surface) area is increased,

but the other components of drag (wave, interference, and trim) that are a function of the configuration shape and arrangement are lower so that the "clean airplane" drag is slightly lower during level flight, and forty percent lower when bombs and missiles are added.


And although the thrust-to-weight (T/W) ratio is lower due to the increased weight, the excess thrust is greater because the drag is lower – and excess thrust is what counts.


Also go to the above link and read why F-16 Xl wing design was modern and not obsolete.

Tejas has the crank or compound delta at the beginning of the wing.The reason is the need to generate this high lift inducing Vortices at high AOA to improve it's maneuverability and improve it's operation at trans sonic flight envelopes in high altitude. This huge wing enables it to lift high loads while taking off from high altitude air fields in Hialamalayas. That's why the IAF used the Mirage-2000 for precision bombing in Kargil.

No ACM type is going to belittle this as saying Mig-21 ++ or minus minus. If people say such thing it only exposes their ignorance of the modern aerodynamic design of the tejas wing form.

If you are such an expert who says Lca tejas is 30 year old dead aerodynamic design. Explain this.
 
Last edited:

farhan_9909

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Aug 30, 2012
Messages
5,895
Likes
497
And all those JF-17s are going to have much inferior radar detection and ranging capacity than the LCA Tejas and going to have at least 5 times bigger clean config RCS han the Tejas.A deadly combination which makes them forever inferior to tejas.

Meaning in any engagement the JF-17 will be seen by LCA first,
because it has higher RCS than the Tejas.
And tejas will fire it's long range BVR first resulting in better combat win prospects for tejas.
raw compound delta designed having less rcs than JFT is not only your dream but misconception and reason of blind patriotism

Tejas Radar range is 120km
JFT radar range is 130km

KLJ-7v2 would be something different.

ok tell me how will the LCA see JFT first?
and why you think a compound delta fighter with simple convetional design have less rcs than jft?
 

farhan_9909

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Aug 30, 2012
Messages
5,895
Likes
497


To generate large lift inducing vortices the wing of Tejas was designed with a crank or compound delta model, along with the twist in wing root.

You can obsever the the lift inducing vortices generated by this compound delta +wingroot twist+curvarute of the wing resulting in large beneficial lift inducing vortices benefitting Tejas in vertical maneuvers.

These lift inducing vortices delay the onset of stall.Because of the 53 deg Sweep angle these lift inducing vortices act on large part of the wing giving the fighter beneficial lift. With the addition of Levcons leading to even more sudden vertical agility.

That was the reason ADA chose the impressive F-16 XL's cranked delta wing form. F-16 Xl has a crank at the edge of the wing.




The Revolutionary Evolution of the F-16XL



Also go to the above link and read why F-16 Xl wing design was modern and not obsolete.

Tejas has the crank or compound delta at the beginning of the wing.The reason is the need to generate this high lift inducing Vortices at high AOA to improve it's maneuverability and improve it's operation at trans sonic flight envelopes in high altitude. This huge wing enables it to lift high loads while taking off from high altitude air fields in Hialamalayas. That's why the IAF used the Mirage-2000 for precision bombing in Kargil.

No ACM type is going to belittle this as saying Mig-21 ++ or minus minus. If people say such thing it only exposes their ignorance of the modern aerodynamic design of the tejas wing form.

If you are such an expert who says Lca tejas is 30 year old dead aerodynamic design. Explain this.
BS lca is not a true cranked delta configuration.i dont know from where you come up with all this BS without any solid source being posted.

LCA is a pure compound delta design..i can show you a CGI of possible JFT 3 with crank delta configuration..
JFT 3 would be the only crank delta fighter to get into mass production.

compound delta


LCA


and now this is what you can call the true crank delta configuration

CGI of JFT with a true crank delta configuration



or the f-16xl

 

farhan_9909

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Aug 30, 2012
Messages
5,895
Likes
497
sorry i have never said LCA is only a 30 years old design but rather even more...nothing bad in this though

the design is most likely borrowed from mirage and saab viggen

 

farhan_9909

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Aug 30, 2012
Messages
5,895
Likes
497
courtesy BlueDot in Space

Tejas wing design is opposite of F16XLs design as shown in the Figure below. Tejas leading edge is low sweep, where as in XL its high sweep



Also,the design of Tejas is called compound delta, while that of XL is called cranked arrow. Tejas has a compound delta wing design with a unique low sweep leading edge crank. This crank is different from that of XLs. Tejas crank is only visible in the side view.
 

farhan_9909

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Aug 30, 2012
Messages
5,895
Likes
497
courtesy free soul

TEJAS and manouveribility/agility both are never possible.
the below masterpiece is not wrriten by internet fanboy like you and me.but rather someone already into this flying business.i will try to find the gambit post about why LCA is a raw design with no hope for super manouveribility like Gripen,JFT,m2k and f-16 of its class.



Where Tejas falls behind

The purpose of this article is to evaluate the wing structure of IAF Tejas LCA, compare it with current 4th generation and beyond aircrafts.
With what information we have in regards with Tejas LCA's airframe diagrams, dimensions of the wings, aerodynamics.
We would keep the subject matter to manoeuvrability as this is one of the most important aspects of any fighter aircraft.
The purpose is not to ridicule but try to understand the reasons behind design decisions taken and to explore the short comings noticed/assumed.

We would compare the wing structure of Tejas with proven top of the line aircrafts.

Please note We are not discussing BVR detection/missiles BrahMos, Atomic bombs etc. so please refrain from off topic posts.

AoA and its importance.
Angle of Attack (AoA α) is the angle between the Vector representing the motion of the body and the aerofoil - represented by Alpha α. In aerodynamics the AoA would be the angle between the chord line of the wing of a fixed-wing aircraft and the vector representing the relative motion between the aircraft and the air/atmosphere. Simply put AoA is an angle at which a wing meets air flow.




Turn:
Turn of an aircraft dictates how manoeuvrable an aircraft is. Turn is achieved by a combination of roll and lift. The faster the roll and better the lift the better turn/turn rate an aircraft achieves.
Generating lift force wing plays the primary role; there are specific ways of creating Lift Force. Air Foil Sections (the shape of a wing or blade) + increase of AoA.. Airfoil section and increased angle of attack. α determines the turn of an aircraft
The prominent feature of all top of the line proven combat – Air superiority and Light Combat Aircrafts is a Leading Edge Extension / Wing Root Glove.
Prominent in F-16, F-15, F-18 Hornet, SU-27, MiG-29, MiG-35, SU-27, SU-30 ..... etc. etc. etc.

Leading Edge Root Extension, Root Glove Extensions

In regards with SU-27 development, the wing root extension in SU-27 and all above mentioned aircrafts played a large part in achieving additional lift, airfoil sections were used in additional parts of the aircraft. A 'Wing Root Glove' / 'Leading Edge Extension' played a large part in creating lift force.



During SU-27 development the designers initially could not see the advantages of the wing root extension and such technical innovation.
The idea with the wing root extensions was to increase aircraft stability at supersonic speeds.
After a number of wind tunnel tests, the true potential of Root Leading edge extension / Wing Root Glove was realized.
Below quoting Georgiy Byushgens - one of the giants of Russian aeronautical engineering.

Georgiy Byushgens
Deputy Director of the Central Hydro-Aerodynamic Institute 1961-1991
Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences
Hero of Socialist Labour
Lenin Prize Laureate
Laureate of the USSR State Prize.

'If The Wing Root Glove is made pointed – which means if the tip is sharp – a very powerful vortex was induced with this sharp tip. This effect made it possible to increase lift force by at least 50%.'

Pointed Leading edge extension in the root of the wing merging with the fuselage transforms the airflow into a powerful air vortex, this vortex creates a stable vacuum zone above the wing – resulting in deferential pleasure increase and casing additional lift.



With AoA increase the intensity of the vortex above the wings grows – this allows the aircraft to fly at high Angle of Attack without losing stability of stalling into a spin. Thus Directly proportional to High Manoeuvrability. A combat turn can be performed more vigorously and aggressively – The intensity of the vortex is so great that the vortices can be seen with a naked eye.





On a modern fighter aircraft root glove extension provides important airflow over the wing at high angles of attack, this greatly delays the stall and improves lift. At high angles of attack, as often encountered in a dog fight, the vortex generated by Leading edge root extension/ root glove extension becomes a must for any competent manoeuvrable Dogfighter


IAF Tejas LCA.

So lets have a look at the wing structure of Tejas.



Note that on Tejas the line of the wing from the edge to the root of the wing at fuselage is not straight.
There is no leading edge root extension, rather to compensate the low angle of the overall leading edge of the wing with the fuselage it cuts short and joins the fuselage at a steeper angle.
In modern day design Pure Delta wing is not considered a great design for manoeuvrability.
Looking at modern day Delta wings (cropped deltas) such as the JAS Gripen, the Eurofighter Typhoon and the Dassault Rafale use a combination of canards and a delta wing to counter this specific phenomenon.
So Canards help generate vortex lift over the main wings.
Pure delta-wings fell out of favour somewhat due to their undesirable characteristics, notably flow separation at high angles of attack (swept wings have similar problems), and high drag at low altitudes. This limited them primarily to high-speed, high-altitude interceptor roles.

This fact is further strengthened by the fact that Pure Delta Wing Fighter aircrafts were primarily used as high speed interceptors not light combat manoeuvrable aircrafts. Example being Mirage III Family lightweight, all-weather interceptor capable of climbing fast.

ICAS 2004 study in delta wing and LEX configuration to achieve better AoA.
DELTA WING WITH LEADING EDGE EXTENSION AND PROPELLER PROPULSION FOR FIXED WING MAV
High α on Delta wing with leading edge extension. Better Alpha results.



First Contact:

A very import aspect of aerodynamic design in the wing and leading edge design is construction of first contact surface.
Further up the wing – modifications to the leading edge of the wing would have relatively lesser impact on the lift.

In a canard design the air flow will pass through forward canards first, in case of leading edge root extension the air flow would pass the root extensions of wing first.
Not having a sharper/pointed first contact surface at the leading edge of the wing root combined with Delta wing would cause additional Drag on Tejas.
The wing configuration of Tejas looks more like Reverse Compound Delta

Compound Delta.
The inner part of the wing has a very high sweepback, while the outer part has less sweepback, to create the high-lift vortex in a more controlled fashion, reduce the drag and thereby allow for landing the delta at acceptably slow speed

The wing Design of Tejas is reverse of above where first contact surface of the wing has bigger angle with fuselage than the rest of the wing's leading edge.


This would result in additional drag.
Naval Version:
As per news pieces the only Naval version of Tejas would have leading edge vortex controller to reduce the fighter's required speed on approach to the vessel. This is to compensate for the delta wing limitation in low speed manoeuvrability approaching an aircraft carrier.


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

From the above it would appear that Tejas would be subpar when in terms of achieving high AoA.
The choice of wing configuration is different to any of the current top of the line fighter aircrafts, and some aerodynamic features suggest that Tejas might not be best suited for roles where manoeuvrability and agility is paramount.
 

farhan_9909

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Aug 30, 2012
Messages
5,895
Likes
497
Now JF-17 turn and what makes it a super manouverible fighter with just 0.95twr

i would recommand watching this video before entering into the detail aerodynamics configuration of JFT posting from najam book about JFT


JFT design features(only the bolded features..will post in even more detail later)

Air Inlets Design:






The Divert-less Supersonic Inlets DSI's relatively small size helps in reducing the radar cross section thus help in decreasing the radar cross section of the aircraft. Safety markings for ground crew are also visible on both sides of the intake.




A detailed view of JF-17 radome, antennas and air inlets.




JF-17 uses BUMP intake technology, which provides enhanced performance to the aircraft. The presence of various cooling points above the intake increases the airflow through the aircraft.



A close up of electronics bay cooling air inlet (present on the intake BUMP). The prominence area is ground cooling point. During ground testing aircraft is connected to ground cooling unit, which keeps the aircraft components from getting hot.

Leading Edge Root Extension (LERX) :



A close up of Leading Edge Root Extension (LERX) of the JF-17. LERX provides great lift to the aircraft and enhances the high Angle of Attack (AOA) maneuvering of the aircraft.

Forward ailerons and backward flaperons:




A view of forward ailerons of JF-17, when aircraft is on the ground these leading wing edges face few degrees downward. Just like LERX, they also provide more lift to the aircraft.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

farhan_9909

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Aug 30, 2012
Messages
5,895
Likes
497

A complete view of JF-17"²s wing, with PL-5E II missile on its tip


JF-17 has fowler flaperons, which bend down to increase the amount of drag. They blend with the wing, forming one large surface hence increasing the lift.


A JF-17 photo with ailerons and flaperons labeled. A JF-17 piloted by Wing Commander Khalid Mehmood lifts off during the Zhuhai Air Show in 2010. The Chinese photographers did an outstanding job in capturing the Thunder.

Twin ventral fins





Two ventral fins are located under the rear fuselage and flaps joint. These fins increase the maneuverability of the aircraft. During greater weapon load take off and loose handling, these fins serve as the last option to save the aircrafts rearward belly from hitting the ground. The area along the side of fuselage is coated with Radar Absorbing Material (RAM), which decreases the radar signature of the aircraft. JF-17 is one of the fewest aircraft with smaller visual/IR and radar signature.

so would be better if you accept that LCA being a raw compound delta will never be as much manouverible as much the rest of 4th generation fighter aircraft
because this is not bollywood where everything india has is best..but reality.and the only people to be blamed for this design are the french not the HAL guys
 

ersakthivel

Brilliance
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2011
Messages
7,029
Likes
8,763
Country flag
courtesy free soul

TEJAS and manouveribility/agility both are never possible.
the below masterpiece is not wrriten by internet fanboy like you and me.but rather someone already into this flying business.i will try to find the gambit post about why LCA is a raw design with no hope for super manouveribility like Gripen,JFT,m2k and f-16 of its class.

Note that on Tejas the line of the wing from the edge to the root of the wing at fuselage is not straight.
There is no leading edge root extension, rather to compensate the low angle of the overall leading edge of the wing with the fuselage it cuts short and joins the fuselage at a steeper angle.

Only high wingloading small winged fighters like JF-17 need LREX for better lift and control at high AOA.

SInce deltas have low wingloading and big wing area they don't need a LREX.

No one can put an separate LREX on a large wing area design like Tejas.

Only thing that can be put on deltas in Levcons, canards and compound or cranked delta.

It is for this reason that Tejas and F-16 XL went for cranked or compound or double delta with fully relaxed stability super agility aerdynamic layout.

In the following wind tunnel image I posted the crank does the same job of Vortice generation like canard or LREX on a small wing high wing loading fighter.
In modern day design Pure Delta wing is not considered a great design for manoeuvrability.
Looking at modern day Delta wings (cropped deltas) such as the JAS Gripen, the Eurofighter Typhoon and the Dassault Rafale use a combination of canards and a delta wing to counter this specific phenomenon.
So Canards help generate vortex lift over the main wings.
Pure delta-wings fell out of favour somewhat due to their undesirable characteristics, notably flow separation at high angles of attack (swept wings have similar problems), and high drag at low altitudes. This limited them primarily to high-speed, high-altitude interceptor roles.
ha ha ha,
Shoddy Bullshit piece written as anlysis,

The cranked delta performs the exact function of the canards and LREX or root glove extension,lift inducing vortices.

When a cranked delta with twist at the wing root does the same job , why you need LREX.

You don't even have this basic understanding means , what is the purpose of debate?

Only high wing loading low swept ordinary wing forms like JF-17 need LREX to generate

This is an experimental proof from NAL test published in a PDF.


Post the following analysis from PDF in other forums you post and for explanations.

It will be funny how aerodynamic illiterate called free soul,who posted the above mentioned master piece scoot the moment you post stuff like this!!!!!


in Fig. 6 for angle of attack a = 13° and 18° . A fairly goodcomparison is observed. The vortical flow field capturedin calculations is presented in Fig. 7. The particle tracesillustrate the detailed structure of the rolled-up vortices.It is seen that the leading edge vortices are strengthenedas the flow develops progressively away from the leading-edge of the win
ha ha ha ha'.............
A crank at the bottom of the wing is a crank and a crank at the top of the wing is NOT A CRAKN. Some noble prize winning analysis!!!!!!!!!

The purpose of the crank at the top of the wing is to generate lift inducing vortices as shown in the wind tunnel PDF released by ADA.What else you need this.




if you look closely the F-16 because it is very big has two cranks ,l one at the wing FORWARD ROOT and another one at the wing bottom.

Just because your friend blue dot didnot put a red box on the wing FORWARD ROOT crank that is visible to the naked eye in the F-16 XL DOES NOT MEAN THERE IS NO CRANK AT THE wing FORWARD ROOT FOR f-16 XL


SInce Tejas is a smaller fighter one crank at the wing top is enough according to the PDF posted above.
 
Last edited:

farhan_9909

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Aug 30, 2012
Messages
5,895
Likes
497
ha ha ha,
Shoddy Bullshit piece written as anlysis,

The cranked delta performs the exact function of the canards and LREX or root glove extension,

This is an experimental proof from NAL test published in a PDF.
so this is your response?

what is bad in accepting the fact that lca always will remain a fighter aircraft with design flaws and a very limited design with no future at all

meanwhile like i am ready to accept that JFT structural material build is not as much as good lca but is to be addressed in the Block 2
JFT also doesnt has a dedicated pylon for pods like lca
 

farhan_9909

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Aug 30, 2012
Messages
5,895
Likes
497
Please watch this video only in HD.
also watch the awesome manouver by JFT onwards 4:00

 
Last edited by a moderator:

ersakthivel

Brilliance
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2011
Messages
7,029
Likes
8,763
Country flag
Please watch this video only in HD.
also watch the awesome manouver by JFT onwards 4:00



Turn of an aircraft dictates how manoeuvrable an aircraft is. Turn is achieved by a combination of roll and lift. The faster the roll and better the lift the better turn/turn rate an aircraft achieves.
A sustained turn on horizantal axis is actually a vertical loop on the knife edge position for fighters.
That is why I asked whether there is any video to show JF-17 achieved below 20 seconds vertical loop!!!!

Tejas achieved this under 20 second vertical loop even with restricted 6G partially opened flight envelope and 22 deg AOA.

SO it will improve once it reaches it's true 24 deg AOA and it's true 8G potential of the fully opened flight envelope. The flight envelope will be fully opened for FOC only after the spin test to study the near stall performance at AOA s beyond 24 deg is validated by the LSP-6.

Generating lift force wing plays the primary role;
This is where the large wing area low wing loading fighter like Tejas will excel.
there are specific ways of creating Lift Force. Air Foil Sections (the shape of a wing or blade) + increase of AoA.. Airfoil section and increased angle of attack. α determines the turn of an aircraft
I am not here for you tube video watchin , What is the time taken by JF-17 to complete one full vertical loop?

has it ever done that till to date?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

farhan_9909

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Aug 30, 2012
Messages
5,895
Likes
497
I am not here for you tube video watchin , What is the time taken by JF-17 to complete one full vertical loop?

has it ever done that till to date?
well you are very much right..JFT has not performed a complete vertical loop in any of its performance so far.
so cant tell the time

but you can compare JFT 360 with even your MKI.and is almost comparable while beat the f-16 even at prototype stage


i think the LCA design configuration gives better performance in straight vertical pulls
 

farhan_9909

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Aug 30, 2012
Messages
5,895
Likes
497
if you look closely the F-16 because it is very big has two cranks ,l one at the wing FORWARD ROOT and another one at the wing bottom.

Just because your friend blue dot didnot put a red box on the wing FORWARD ROOT crank that is visible to the naked eye in the F-16 XL DOES NOT MEAN THERE IS NO CRANK AT THE wing FORWARD ROOT FOR f-16 XL


SInce Tejas is a smaller fighter one crank at the wing top is enough according to the PDF posted above.
you deny everything while post things without any soilid proof

LCA and F-16XL completely different

LCA design dates back to saab viggen.

Cant you get this simple?low and high sweep edges are not cranks.

Though the design of Naval lca with levcons seem to have a good future.and i am sure navy will accept the naval lca..but the AF lca has serious design flaws and can never become a manouverible fighter when compared with fighters of its class like grippen,jft or f-16
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top