LCA News and Discussions

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 15 Feb 2011 12:18

In addition to what Singha and Austin says, system integration is a technical, monetary and effort-wise pain.

Slaving a short range R-73E is easy. For LOBL, it gets its initial cues from the HMDS &/or radar computer while still on the pylon. After launch, the weapon places itself in a position where the target is within IR seeker FoV. Thereafter the IR seeker takes over. For LOAL, it is launched with the target in +/- 45 degree elevation/azimuth FoV, and the IR seeker takes over. This mode was displayed during the Vayushakti exercises.

Long range missiles use a datalink. Typically, mating an Israeli radar to Russian missile datalink is a huge pain. The Russians have designed a mating pack to integrate R-77 with western radars. The pack uses a separate datalink pod to transmit mid course upgrades to R-77. Not a very efficient system.

However, Russian missiles are mated to Russian radars during development, and so are Israeli. That is why Sea Harrier and Tejas, that use 2032, find it cheaper & hassle free to use Derby.

Both R-77 and Derby are legacy missiles, vis-à-vis Astra that uses open system architecture. I believe Astra should be able to receive datalink updates from both Israeli or Russian datalink transmitters.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 15 Feb 2011 12:24

if we go EU with the MRCA, I would consider Meteor a distinct possibility for Tejas Mk2 if the Astra mk2 does not enter IOC within 5 yrs which is quite likely unless they are working in parallel on the two astras.

in 2015 we should have the astra mk1 FOC'ed....a Tejas with 6 of these should be scary enough in AD roles. Meteor would be more useful to hunt down high value targets or raise a scare by knocking off inbound ac long before they get within effective range for their own missiles - the scare factor.

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 15 Feb 2011 12:41

Austin wrote:AFAIK Meteor will be available post 2014 and did MBDA claimed that they would integrate Meteor with Elta or Indian Radar or will they insist buying an European radar and then integrate Meteor with it for a peremium ?
..

Well there is already work going on an F-35(which of course has an american radar) version of the Meteor, I think they are quite keen on selling the missile beyond the European borders.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 15 Feb 2011 13:39

abhik wrote:Well there is already work going on an F-35(which of course has an american radar) version of the Meteor, I think they are quite keen on selling the missile beyond the European borders.

Quite Nice but I will believe it when it see it , Integrating AMRAAM with any thing other then American system for a Non-NATO country will be any thing but painful.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 15 Feb 2011 13:55

Check it out folks..
http://kedar.smugmug.com/AeroIndia2011/ ... ttR2-X2-LB

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 15 Feb 2011 14:01

Society Of Experimental Test Pilots

jamwal · Post by **jamwal** » 15 Feb 2011 14:22

What is this grey thing in the middle ?

http://kedar.smugmug.com/AeroIndia2011/ ... 8Pve-X2-LB

and is that "black thing" about a meter behind the cockpit an air intake ?

Excellent pictures Kedar jii

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 15 Feb 2011 14:25

Thats the closest shot i have seen of tejas

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 15 Feb 2011 15:17

normally an auxillary air intake, could be for a number of purposes - most probably cooling air intake for avionics. ram air turbine intakes (other option) tend to be facing into the airflow

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 15 Feb 2011 17:13

Lalmohan wrote:normally an auxillary air intake, could be for a number of purposes - most probably cooling air intake for avionics. ram air turbine intakes (other option) tend to be facing into the airflow

The big grey thing in the middle is the LCA itself.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 15 Feb 2011 17:29

its an aerial, question is for what?

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 15 Feb 2011 17:47

Lalmohan wrote:its an aerial, question is for what?

According to my unkal it may be a UHF blade antenna
http://flytparts.com/index.php?main_pag ... 3_12_29_42

Dileep · Post by **Dileep** » 15 Feb 2011 18:16

Austin wrote: From what I have read most of the RF A2A missile makers be it Russia or US are not keen to integrate RF guided missile with 3rd party radar , because of not any interface or money issue but because these interface will need close integration between Main Radar and RF guided missile which will mean parting some of the codes modes/ECM features of RF missile to the 3rd party radar developer making it easy for them to develop counter measures to defeat the RF missile , bottom line is they want to guard their core technologies that will make it easy to defeat the missile.

For an ARH missile, only the datalink matters. the radar frequency/code doesn't matter. Of course, the datalink is critical, because it can be jammed.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 15 Feb 2011 19:53

Could sending burst of giga speed bits reduce jamming? Of course given t/r is available for this.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 15 Feb 2011 19:56

Dileep wrote:For an ARH missile, only the datalink matters. the radar frequency/code doesn't matter. Of course, the datalink is critical, because it can be jammed.

But datalink for any BVR missile can be jammed provided you have the right resource to do it isnt it ? Isnt DataLink then a Achilles Heel of BVR missile ?

Juggi G · Post by **Juggi G** » 15 Feb 2011 20:13

Dileep · Post by **Dileep** » 15 Feb 2011 20:15

^^Of course, but the ready antidote is to switch to passive mode and home on the jamming signal.

You don't need gigahertz bandwidth to pass guidance info. A single burst of less than 200 bits (not bytes) would easily do the trick. Jamming OTOH needs continuous emission, which can be homed on by the missile.

But don't let that miss the original point. There is NO relationship between the radar's RF and the missile. If you can get the datalink LRU, integration of it with the FCS is not much of a problem.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 15 Feb 2011 21:10

IN is now on its way to have a considerable AF of its own - Mig29K (30), Tejas (19), Tejas2 (46) comes to nearly 100. it already has around 12 Jag-IM on call. and KA31 AEW helis more are being laid in. the fixed wing AEW will complete the circle. and brahmos equipped MKIs are coming.

yes sir by 2020 we shall be ready to kick some a$$

Avid · Post by **Avid** » 16 Feb 2011 00:32

Singha wrote:IN is now on its way to have a considerable AF of its own - Mig29K (30), Tejas (19), Tejas2 (46) comes to nearly 100. it already has around 12 Jag-IM on call. and KA31 AEW helis more are being laid in. the fixed wing AEW will complete the circle. and brahmos equipped MKIs are coming.

yes sir by 2020 we shall be ready to kick some a$$

Wasn't there some information about some numbers of MKI-maritime to be inducted. As with the Jag-IM, I thought these too were going to be under IAF.

Anurag · Post by **Anurag** » 16 Feb 2011 01:16

Correction, the number of Mig-29K's ordered are 45 not 30. So the carrier based fighters coupled with land based fighters (Jag + Su-30) puts the fighter aircrafts numbers well over 120+. Then you have the transport + heli's, that's quite a potent force structure for a Navy in the world, let alone Asia!

A Sharma · Post by **A Sharma** » 16 Feb 2011 02:11

Tech Focus on LCA Technologies

vina · Post by **vina** » 16 Feb 2011 03:51

Dileep wrote:You don't need gigahertz bandwidth to pass guidance info. A single burst of less than 200 bits (not bytes) would easily do the trick. Jamming OTOH needs continuous emission, which can be homed on by the missile..

Well, it would be possible for the jamming platform to send a equally short burst of 200bits of false guidance signal to mislead (if they knew the communication codes, protocols and data encryption and protection schemes)

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 16 Feb 2011 04:17

We should be safe since LCA may not participate in any international ops. If we do so, then can buy separate comm equipments just for those missions alone, and replace them back for our other ops.

I am thinking chances of eves-dropping is very very low unless some mole steals and sells them to other nations. Misleading is one aspect, but jamming the frequency is entirely a different game is my understanding. When I am quick enough to communicate, and shut off my systems, me think I am safe in la LPI mode. Where is the chance the other radar to track me down?

Not sure, say if a raptor detects LCA, and sends powerful high frequency bursts to damage its communication equipments? is that possible, have we protection against such attack?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 16 Feb 2011 04:49

A Sharma wrote:Tech Focus on LCA Technologies

This is the most comprehensive exposition of the LCA to date. Hats off to the team that worked on the project and brought it to completion despite the many ups and owns.

Great job!!!

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 16 Feb 2011 05:06

Dileep · Post by **Dileep** » 16 Feb 2011 07:39

vina wrote:
Dileep wrote:You don't need gigahertz bandwidth to pass guidance info. A single burst of less than 200 bits (not bytes) would easily do the trick. Jamming OTOH needs continuous emission, which can be homed on by the missile..
Well, it would be possible for the jamming platform to send a equally short burst of 200bits of false guidance signal to mislead (if they knew the communication codes, protocols and data encryption and protection schemes)

Nope. You need to know/guess the encryption key, which is impossible. There is no time to brute force the key either.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 16 Feb 2011 07:59

If anyone not noticed, height of LCA Mk1 is 4.4 m and for Mk2 is 4.6m.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 16 Feb 2011 08:10

Yes ... I thought it was because the rudder had to grow taller with the lengthening of the fuselage.

I may be wrong.

Arunkumar · Post by **Arunkumar** » 16 Feb 2011 08:12

Nope. You need to know/guess the encryption key, which is impossible. There is no time to brute force the key either.

Thats right. Also to mention techniques like random number generation, 64 bit encryption algorithm, device authentication etc. And these are nowadays implemented on cheap memory chips to keep lines secure on a printed circuit board (PCB).

nits · Post by **nits** » 16 Feb 2011 09:13

HAL orders 24 additional F404-GE-IN20 Engines for Tejas fighter jet

Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) has ordered an additional 24 F404-GE-IN20 afterburning engines to power the first operational squadron of Tejas fighter aircraft for the Indian Air Force. Value of the order is in excess of $100 million and follows an initial 2004 purchase of 17 F404-GE-IN20 engines to power a limited series of operational production aircraft and naval prototypes.

nits · Post by **nits** » 16 Feb 2011 09:14

Kaveri engine to be installed in 2018

The Indian-built engine for the country’s Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) may be ready for installation in 2018, a senior official of the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) has said.“The gas turbine engine Kaveri will replace the GE-404 engines which are now being put in the LCA,” DRDO’s chief controller of research and development Prahlada told reporters here.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 16 Feb 2011 09:47

ramana wrote:
A Sharma wrote:Tech Focus on LCA Technologies

This is the most comprehensive exposition of the LCA to date. Hats off to the team that worked on the project and brought it to completion despite the many ups and owns.

Great job!!!

Thanks Ramana !

so the LCA has been designed keeping in mind the RCS of the aircraft and apparently some parts have been designed to minimize the RCS. This is probably the first confirmation of that. Plus machines that can transfer Indium-tin-oxide on the windshield and canopy to reduce cockpit RCS reflections. So maybe later on when production Tejas' join squadron service, they'll have golden shaded canopies !

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 16 Feb 2011 10:22

So does this mean, that the order for LCA-Mk1 is now around 60 ? 20 + 20 for IAF and + 19 for Navy ? We are already at 59 for MK-1's till 2015/2016 time frame.

Arya Sumantra · Post by **Arya Sumantra** » 16 Feb 2011 10:52

Kartik wrote: Plus machines that can transfer Indium-tin-oxide on the windshield and canopy to reduce cockpit RCS reflections. So maybe later on when production Tejas' join squadron service, they'll have golden shaded canopies !

Some colour not necessarily gold. Colour depends on film thickness and refractive index of the film material(ITO here). The gold shaded canopies looked golden from every angle so they have to be metallic gold thin films, thin enough to be translucent. Acco. to someone on keypubs those were polycarb impregnated with gold. ITO is a smarter choice.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 17 Feb 2011 01:19

Kartik, Also ponder about the whole system engineering capability displayed in those charts! The comprehensive requirements planning and verification displayed. Every para in that report has gobs of info for those who know what it means! A pointer on the software process achieved is in line with Capability Maturity Matrix level 3 or above.

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 17 Feb 2011 01:24

Cybaru wrote:So does this mean, that the order for LCA-Mk1 is now around 60 ? 20 + 20 for IAF and + 19 for Navy ? We are already at 59 for MK-1's till 2015/2016 time frame.

No. Navy will only use mk2 AFAIK.

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 17 Feb 2011 01:28

Gaur wrote:
Cybaru wrote:So does this mean, that the order for LCA-Mk1 is now around 60 ? 20 + 20 for IAF and + 19 for Navy ? We are already at 59 for MK-1's till 2015/2016 time frame.
No. Navy will only use mk2 AFAIK.

Suman sharma report above alludes to 19MK-1's. Am I reading it wrong ?

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 17 Feb 2011 01:29

Cybaru wrote:So does this mean, that the order for LCA-Mk1 is now around 60 ? 20 + 20 for IAF and + 19 for Navy ? We are already at 59 for MK-1's till 2015/2016 time frame.

has navy ordered Mk1 specifically ? all I saw was a 46 Mk2 order from IN. Mk1 orders could be trainer though

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 17 Feb 2011 01:42

Kartik wrote: so the LCA has been designed keeping in mind the RCS of the aircraft and apparently some parts have been designed to minimize the RCS. This is probably the first confirmation of that. Plus machines that can transfer Indium-tin-oxide on the windshield and canopy to reduce cockpit RCS reflections. So maybe later on when production Tejas' join squadron service, they'll have golden shaded canopies !

Kartik,
Marketting angle aside, how much partial LO characteristics really matter? I mean, the fighters like Su-30 MKI and F-22 can practically act as mini AWACS while the firing range of most BVRs is still realistically under 50-60 km (optimistically speaking). So, whatever rcs reducing measures the fighters like Rafale, Typhoon, SH or even LCA incorporate, is not there a limit till which one should go? Admitiddly, any reduction in rcs is welcome. It certainly has "some" value. But are golden canopies even needed? My knowledge regarding the engineering process behind this is less than zero, but if F-22's canopy is anything to go by then it will be horrifyingly maintainance intensive.

My point is that I sometimes get a little baffled regarding the excessive LO measures taken (or demanded) in 4 gen fighters.

PS: Yes, we will not be fighting against against BARS or APG-77, but tejas will be in service for 40 years and it has been more than a decade since those radars were made.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 17 Feb 2011 02:00

Gaur it's not the golden canopies that make the F-22 maintenance heavy. even F-16's feature those.