LCA News and Discussions

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 25 Jun 2012 22:42

what do you mean by "attack through"?

I can think off necessary additions for carrier landing on to the HUD, especially on the HUD, get how close you are to touch down! it is fantastic help for pilot.

or the arrester hook just failed to latch on to the HUD, so no jamming breaks... and take off.

suryag · Post by **suryag** » 25 Jun 2012 22:48

My guess is that the MK2 HUD would be an integrated version where the mode can be changed. IT is too much work to bring in integrated version so late in MK1 program but i think it should be in time for MK2. To be taken note of, is the fact that the AF version of HUD was designed before the NAval version was conceived therefore will have some shortcomings when used in naval environments. The processing backend will also be definitely newer than the AF version; one more reason to not bring in something new when the AF version is undergoing IOC-2 testing where the HUD plays an important role

SBajwa · Post by **SBajwa** » 25 Jun 2012 23:48

Do the Air force fighters also attack the sea going enemy vessels or not? If Yes Then don't they also need the "special" HUD?

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 25 Jun 2012 23:57

Normally not... but such doctrines are classified information. JMT.

from a logical angle, why not?

from target acquisition perspective naval radar to detect surface targets is simpler than IAF's version of tracking and lock on the ground.. due to heavy clutter and target identification logic. But naval radar for sub-surface detection is a challenge however.

From a HUD perspective, it is only few minor changes I think., that is specific to naval requirements.

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 26 Jun 2012 01:14

What does HUD have to do with attacking anything. It is just a information display unit. The naval version is probably shaped differently and may support symbology that may be specific to the naval radar version if it is different. I think its probably just wider and probably allows a larger FOV.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 26 Jun 2012 01:19

The HUD modifications for naval version might be for providing additional assistance to the pilots for carrier landings.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 26 Jun 2012 01:48

right the HUD has nothing to do with "attacking" anything.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 26 Jun 2012 08:06

nachiket wrote:The HUD modifications for naval version might be for providing additional assistance to the pilots for carrier landings.

mostly it has to do with the fact that the stresses of landing on a carrier are far more than landing on an airfield. It has to withstand the heavy jarring forces of the "controlled crash" that is a carrier landing. Additional Field of View is a welcome feature too and will definitely be there on the Tejas Mk2 for the IAF.

The additional assistance that you talk about can be displayed by current HUDs too; after all it will display whatever symbology the on-board computer will generate

suryag · Post by **suryag** » 26 Jun 2012 10:48

Tejas completes weapon trials at Pokhran - on tarmak

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 26 Jun 2012 11:06

Unlike airfields carriers roll and pitch up and down and sail away from the point that the pilot is aiming at. For an airfield landing the pilot can point his nose at the beginning of the runway and look away (at some instruments - say fuel or temp or RPM or oil pressures) for a moment and the airfield will remain where it was when he took his eyes off. In the case of a carrier landing the pilot cannot do that and probably requires additional symbology on the HUD so he can keep his eyes fixed on the moving, pitching, rolling, postage stamp target that he has to land on and still have all the information he wants. All HUDs probably have artificial horizon, heading, speed and rate of climb/descent. Maybe the naval one has more.

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 26 Jun 2012 11:40

suryag wrote:Tejas completes weapon trials at Pokhran - on tarmak

Different trials of sensors included testing of radio-altimeters, baro altitude, radars and laser. “Tejas' limited series production (LSP) variants LSP-2, LSP-3 and LSP-5 are part of the current campaign. All modes of weapon releases and all types of sensors were tested at various points in flight envelope. The campaign team is now heading for sea trials,” sources said. The Tejas variants flew at speeds between 900-1000 KMPH during the weapon trials, logging in total of 25 flights.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 26 Jun 2012 14:01

shiv wrote:Unlike airfields carriers roll and pitch up and down and sail away from the point that the pilot is aiming at. For an airfield landing the pilot can point his nose at the beginning of the runway and look away (at some instruments - say fuel or temp or RPM or oil pressures) for a moment and the airfield will remain where it was when he took his eyes off. In the case of a carrier landing the pilot cannot do that and probably requires additional symbology on the HUD so he can keep his eyes fixed on the moving, pitching, rolling, postage stamp target that he has to land on and still have all the information he wants. All HUDs probably have artificial horizon, heading, speed and rate of climb/descent. Maybe the naval one has more.

once you're committed on finals, all parameters are stable including airspeed (i.e. the pilot has set it up that way) - but airspeed is probably the only thing you do watch. even on a non moving airfield, the wind has a tendency to move the plane around, so the pilot remains quite focused on the runway and its relative position to the plane. on a carrier landing, it is always directly into the wind so your don't have to worry about that, but the deck is going to be moving up and down and roll around - and it is very very tiny - that tends to focus the attention!

the naval HUD may just be a more advanced version of the current HUD, it may have improved landing aid symbology, but is not otherwise expected to be all that different

varunalh · Post by **varunalh** » 26 Jun 2012 14:16

^^^^^^

This article (http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=AD0755736) gives a pretty detailed report on HUD design considerations in general and this is dated back to the 70s

Vinit · Post by **Vinit** » 26 Jun 2012 16:02

Lalmohan wrote:
Singha wrote:it seems to me most rafale and EF weapons and even radar mode integration took place after they entered IOC service with the AF. the tornado ADV also apparently flew for a few years with ballast in the nose until the foxhunter radar was fixed.
there was a joke going around british military circles that the tornado adv radar was code named "blue circle" there had already been "blue fox" etc., for other fighter radars (seaharrier i think) and blue circle was a brand of cement

Yes indeed. The ballast that Singha refers to was cement - since the radar was not ready in time, the Tornado flew with a cement plug in the nose cone (instead of the foxhunter radar) for quite some time.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 26 Jun 2012 17:37

taking the cue from symbology, I was wondering of the possibilities to automatically dis-engage break, and rev up to take off on auto-piolot mode from a carrier while landing... would be a nice naval-UCAV feature, and the symbology could be wire transferred on to a remote pilot display.

/OT.

sum · Post by **sum** » 27 Jun 2012 12:20

Tarmak has couple of pics of fully loaded Tejas in closeup.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 27 Jun 2012 12:35

i wonder if the drop tanks are rated for supersonic flight. looks less pointy than the ones M2K uses.

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 27 Jun 2012 13:03

Singha wrote:i wonder if the drop tanks are rated for supersonic flight. looks less pointy than the ones M2K uses.

Yes...

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 27 Jun 2012 19:00

sum wrote:Tarmak has couple of pics of fully loaded Tejas in closeup.

Doesn't look like the center pylon is loaded.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 27 Jun 2012 19:44

I would like to see a triplet brimstone/quad nag rack on one of the pylons.

Gurneesh · Post by **Gurneesh** » 27 Jun 2012 21:09

IIRC center pylon became a victim of LCA being overweight.

On another note, the LGB on right side (of the pic) is Griffin while the left side seems to have paveway. This possibly means two types of LGB's have been tested on LCA

pragnya · Post by **pragnya** » 27 Jun 2012 22:14

Gurneesh wrote:IIRC center pylon became a victim of LCA being overweight.

well not really.

here -

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 27 Jun 2012 22:45

Gurneesh wrote:IIRC center pylon became a victim of LCA being overweight.

On another note, the LGB on right side (of the pic) is Griffin while the left side seems to have paveway. This possibly means two types of LGB's have been tested on LCA

That is a very awesome development. It's one thing to see a static display during an airshow, its another thing to see it configured for real drops. Both LGB's seem like 500 pounders. So at the moment, the LCA is as good as the JAG/Mig-27 (or perhaps even better, since the MMI is probably superior). When the radar comes online, it will surpass both these and the mig-21 in terms of truly being multirole. One more step towards FOC.

Prem Kumar · Post by **Prem Kumar** » 27 Jun 2012 23:13

Gurneesh wrote: On another note, the LGB on right side (of the pic) is Griffin while the left side seems to have paveway. This possibly means two types of LGB's have been tested on LCA

Gurneesh: how can you tell the difference? Both LGBs look the same to me

Gurneesh · Post by **Gurneesh** » 28 Jun 2012 00:24

^^^ Look at the seeker details (near the nose). Griffin has small fins while paveway has an annulus

suryag · Post by **suryag** » 28 Jun 2012 02:36

Cybaru wrote:
Gurneesh wrote:IIRC center pylon became a victim of LCA being overweight.

On another note, the LGB on right side (of the pic) is Griffin while the left side seems to have paveway. This possibly means two types of LGB's have been tested on LCA
That is a very awesome development. It's one thing to see a static display during an airshow, its another thing to see it configured for real drops. Both LGB's seem like 500 pounders. So at the moment, the LCA is as good as the JAG/Mig-27 (or perhaps even better, since the MMI is probably superior). When the radar comes online, it will surpass both these and the mig-21 in terms of truly being multirole. One more step towards FOC.

Hasnt it been confirmed multiple times that the radar/Litening pod has been integrated and is in use in all the current trials?
http://tarmak007.blogspot.com/2012/06/t ... ls-at.html

“During the just-concluded weapon trials at the forward areas of Pokhran Ranges, practice, dumb and live bombs were released. A laser-guided bomb (LGB) was also tested. The trials are important as the platform is now being tested for its conversion as a fighting machine from a successful flying platform,” sources said.
Different trials of sensors included testing of radio-altimeters, baro altitude, radars and laser. “Tejas' limited series production (LSP) variants LSP-2, LSP-3 and LSP-5 are part of the current campaign. All modes of weapon releases and all types of sensors were tested at various points in flight envelope. The campaign team is now heading for sea trials,” sources said. The Tejas variants flew at speeds between 900-1000 KMPH during the weapon trials, logging in total of 25 flights. In September 2011, Tejas had conducted weapon trials in Chandan and Pokhran Ranges, looked into accurate positions and target parameters

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 28 Jun 2012 03:07

The cheetah version should get its 4th leg by next year, nearing FoC.

Then, when the AESA MMR arrives, it should get a leopard tag too.

rajanb · Post by **rajanb** » 28 Jun 2012 12:50

Flight test update

LCA-Tejas has completed 1904 Test Flights successfully. (27-June-2012).
(TD1-233,TD2-305,PV1-242,PV2-222,PV3-348,LSP1-74,LSP2-223,PV5-36,LSP3-63,LSP4-56,LSP5-95,LSP7-3,NP1-4)

LCA-Tejas has completed 1903 Test Flights successfully. (22-June-2012).
(TD1-233,TD2-305,PV1-242,PV2-222,PV3-348,LSP1-74,LSP2-223,PV5-36,LSP3-63,LSP4-56,LSP5-95,LSP7-3,NP1-3)

So, only NP1 has flown in the last week. The rest getting ready for sea trials, as reported earlier?

krisna · Post by **krisna** » 29 Jun 2012 06:32

India's Tejas Completes Bombing Trials From Uttarlai

news similar to tarmak posted by suryag except for.

LSPs 2 and 5 were fielded again this year, but LSP4 used last year was replaced with LSP3 for this year's tests.

Over-sea trials are expected to ensue shortly. Remember, the Tejas is yet to testfire a BVR missile -- the Rafael Derby or the Vympel R-77.

SBajwa · Post by **SBajwa** » 29 Jun 2012 21:08

http://www.tribuneindia.com/2012/20120629/main5.htm

Tejas completes weapons test
Ajay Banerjee/TNS

New Delhi, June 28
Indigenous warplane Light Combat Aircraft Tejas is “inching ahead” on its path to enter the operational service with the Indian Air Force (IAF). The single-engined fighter has just completed a crucial weapons test at a firing range in western Rajasthan. The test was one of the last few important milestones that Tejas has to be cover before it gets to be in the operational service with the IAF.

The test aimed at checking combat capabilities of the plane under extreme weather conditions. Daytime temperatures in the deserts of Rajasthan can go up to 50°C nowadays. The outcome of the test and the IAF assessment would be known over the next few weeks. The fighter carries weapons in its underbelly.

suryag · Post by **suryag** » 29 Jun 2012 23:38

SBajwa wrote:http://www.tribuneindia.com/2012/20120629/main5.htm

The test aimed at checking combat capabilities of the plane under extreme weather conditions. Daytime temperatures in the deserts of Rajasthan can go up to 50°C nowadays. The outcome of the test and the IAF assessment would be known over the next few weeks. The fighter carries weapons in its underbelly.

D shivering starts when i think of the upcoming IAF assessment

rajanb · Post by **rajanb** » 01 Jul 2012 10:43

^^^ Not to worry SuryaG.
If they thought that the LCA was not a suitable platform, they would have not gone in for the GE414s. Or for the initial order for MK1.

So I do expect that in its current form MK1 will fit into the IAF's doctrine and the MK2 will be a bigger salwar and silk pajama shiverer. MK1 for CAS and CAP.

e.g: MK1 would have proved more than adequate in a Kargil type situation with its LGBs.

nash · Post by **nash** » 01 Jul 2012 11:00

Next is sea trial at Goa and then winter trial at leh around end of the year.

I think that's it of weapon testing on tejas for IOC-2, the whole lot of missile firing(A2A & A2G) and high AoA left for FoC.

So probably we gona see the same routine,pokhran-goa-leh next year and hopefully we should get FOC by beginning of 2014.

srai · Post by **srai** » 01 Jul 2012 11:07

suryag wrote:...

http://tarmak007.blogspot.com/2012/06/t ... ls-at.html
“During the just-concluded weapon trials at the forward areas of Pokhran Ranges, practice, dumb and live bombs were released. A laser-guided bomb (LGB) was also tested. The trials are important as the platform is now being tested for its conversion as a fighting machine from a successful flying platform,” sources said.
Different trials of sensors included testing of radio-altimeters, baro altitude, radars and laser. “Tejas' limited series production (LSP) variants LSP-2, LSP-3 and LSP-5 are part of the current campaign. All modes of weapon releases and all types of sensors were tested at various points in flight envelope. The campaign team is now heading for sea trials,” sources said. The Tejas variants flew at speeds between <a href="tel:900-1000">900-1000</a> KMPH during the weapon trials, logging in total of 25 flights. In September 2011, Tejas had conducted weapon trials in Chandan and Pokhran Ranges, looked into accurate positions and target parameters

If one watches the videos of Vayu Shakti 2010, IAF aircrafts dropped bombs in three main ways: (1) low-level run drop (anti-runway/100kg/250kg bombs), (2) 20 degree dive (rockets/1,000lb bombs), and (3) high altitude standoff level drop (PGMs).

rajanb · Post by **rajanb** » 01 Jul 2012 11:19

nash wrote:Next is sea trial at Goa and then winter trial at leh around end of the year.

I think that's it of weapon testing on tejas for IOC-2, the whole lot of missile firing(A2A & A2G) and high AoA left for FoC.

So probably we gona see the same routine,pokhran-goa-leh next year and hopefully we should get FOC by beginning of 2014.

Do they really need to wait for winter to do the Leh trials? IOC1 proved that the Tejas could take off from Leh in winter and it was loaded appropriately?

nash · Post by **nash** » 01 Jul 2012 13:38

rajanb wrote:
Do they really need to wait for winter to do the Leh trials? IOC1 proved that the Tejas could take off from Leh in winter and it was loaded appropriately?

May be not but they might think of weapon testing in extreme condition like month of july in pokhran.

Kakarat · Post by **Kakarat** » 01 Jul 2012 14:11

Does anybody now if Tejas has at least flown with BVR and unguided rockets? Something similar to captive trials

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 02 Jul 2012 16:30

Saw a yellow primer painted LCA take off today? Which one is yellow? NLCA is grey innit?

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 02 Jul 2012 16:33

how did the canopy appeared? dual seat?

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 02 Jul 2012 16:34

LSP-8 ?