Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

ashishvikas
BRFite
Posts: 511
Joined: 17 Oct 2016 14:18

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby ashishvikas » 28 Mar 2018 10:13

Link to watch zee news video.

Tejas video starting around 32:00.

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_ ... 8048596429

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 1418
Joined: 26 Aug 2016 19:14

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby Gyan » 28 Mar 2018 11:43

Let's hope for 6 to 8 LCA next year 2018-2019

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby shiv » 28 Mar 2018 13:00

Tejas going apeshit over Bengaluru today...

ashishvikas
BRFite
Posts: 511
Joined: 17 Oct 2016 14:18

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby ashishvikas » 28 Mar 2018 13:34

Gyan wrote:Let's hope for 6 to 8 LCA next year 2018-2019


IR told target is 12.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8203
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby Pratyush » 28 Mar 2018 15:33

shiv wrote:Tejas going apeshit over Bengaluru today...



Being in Delhi I am so jealous of you.

nash
BRFite
Posts: 876
Joined: 08 Aug 2008 16:48

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby nash » 28 Mar 2018 17:15

shiv wrote:Tejas going apeshit over Bengaluru today...


Yes it is, I saw it with two drop tanks also.
are they doing kind of stress testing.

mody
BRFite
Posts: 642
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Mumbai, India

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby mody » 28 Mar 2018 17:21

Uttam is still a few years away from being fully operational. Being ready for testing on an air platform, does not mean it is ready for deployment.

MK1A was proposed so that we could get numbers for the IAF as soon as possible and with the doable changes to the MK1 platform.
Either the 2052 from Israeal or the Thales Aesa radar should be ordered for the 73 MK1A, ASAP. The balance 10 planes are supposed to be 2 seat trainers. We do not need the Aesa for these planes.
The plan is to also upgrade the 20 IOC and 20 FOC standard MK1 Tejas to MK1A standard eventually. We should target to get the Uttam MK-1 for these 40 birds. By then the radar should have finished the testing and we will have some leeway on the time lines.

DRDO can then aim for Uttam MK-2 for the Tejas MK-II. They can go for GaN based TR modules, updated software and higher TR modules, if the power and cooling requirements can be met.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby shiv » 28 Mar 2018 17:27

nash wrote:
shiv wrote:Tejas going apeshit over Bengaluru today...


Yes it is, I saw it with two drop tanks also.
are they doing kind of stress testing.

Trees testing. They are stress testing me because they are flying over just when they know that I am under trees

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3844
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby kit » 28 Mar 2018 17:28

mody wrote:Uttam is still a few years away from being fully operational. Being ready for testing on an air platform, does not mean it is ready for deployment.

MK1A was proposed so that we could get numbers for the IAF as soon as possible and with the doable changes to the MK1 platform.
Either the 2052 from Israeal or the Thales Aesa radar should be ordered for the 73 MK1A, ASAP. The balance 10 planes are supposed to be 2 seat trainers. We do not need the Aesa for these planes.
The plan is to also upgrade the 20 IOC and 20 FOC standard MK1 Tejas to MK1A standard eventually. We should target to get the Uttam MK-1 for these 40 birds. By then the radar should have finished the testing and we will have some leeway on the time lines.

DRDO can then aim for Uttam MK-2 for the Tejas MK-II. They can go for GaN based TR modules, updated software and higher TR modules, if the power and cooling requirements can be met.


I would say spend those billions building up the critical infrastructure to mass produce AESA radars ..it's so crucial for further development (and further orders) Buy token numbers of 2052 if needed.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby Singha » 28 Mar 2018 17:55

Saw a couple of fast loops over sarjapur road 5:10 pm

nash
BRFite
Posts: 876
Joined: 08 Aug 2008 16:48

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby nash » 28 Mar 2018 17:57

shiv wrote:
nash wrote:
Yes it is, I saw it with two drop tanks also.
are they doing kind of stress testing.

Trees testing. They are stress testing me because they are flying over just when they know that I am under trees


:lol:

Whenever we got new vehicle , we take it for ride. Now since the numbers are good for current batch of pilots , all of them want to ride with this machine.
Last edited by nash on 28 Mar 2018 18:45, edited 1 time in total.

suryag
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3552
Joined: 11 Jan 2009 00:14

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby suryag » 28 Mar 2018 18:44

yeah it was sp9 or sp8 because of the aluminium strips

Kakkaji
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3276
Joined: 23 Oct 2002 11:31

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby Kakkaji » 28 Mar 2018 19:15

Shouldn’t such stress testing be done away from a crowded urban area like Bangalore? :eek:

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby Singha » 28 Mar 2018 20:06

well it doesnt mean the wings are meant to fall apart, but the "stress gauges" are supposed to measure minute things and feed data into some progressive fatigue model that defines the airframe life .... ? the F-18 for instance has a astonishingly long air frame life. at the end of this life, the airframes are heavily refurbished, taken apart, lot of new parts put in and "zero houred"

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8569
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby brar_w » 28 Mar 2018 20:12

The F-18 has a 6000 hour design life that can be extended to 9000 via SLEP. I wouldn't call this astonishingly long by western standards.

Zynda
BRFite
Posts: 1835
Joined: 07 Jan 2006 00:37
Location: J4

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby Zynda » 28 Mar 2018 20:17

USN clocks around an average 300 hrs per year of flight time on their Hornets? That would give 30 years of life by the time 9000 hrs is up...not bad. Complete OT...brar_w, what is the rated life for F-35?

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby shiv » 28 Mar 2018 20:33

Singha wrote:well it doesnt mean the wings are meant to fall apart, but the "stress gauges" are supposed to measure minute things and feed data into some progressive fatigue model that defines the airframe life .... ? the F-18 for instance has a astonishingly long air frame life. at the end of this life, the airframes are heavily refurbished, taken apart, lot of new parts put in and "zero houred"

..er there was no stress test. Only I was under stress. They were just flying over and doing their thing. Maybe 2G turn. Please read the posts..

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4522
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby JayS » 28 Mar 2018 20:42

Singha wrote:well it doesnt mean the wings are meant to fall apart, but the "stress gauges" are supposed to measure minute things and feed data into some progressive fatigue model that defines the airframe life .... ? the F-18 for instance has a astonishingly long air frame life. at the end of this life, the airframes are heavily refurbished, taken apart, lot of new parts put in and "zero houred"


There is no "zero houring" of airframes.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4522
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby JayS » 28 Mar 2018 23:41

---deleted--- for now

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5152
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby Kartik » 28 Mar 2018 23:53

some more data points:

After every 100 hours of flight, the Tejas requires 20 hours of maintenance. They claim that F-16 requires only 3.5 and Gripen 6 hours of maintenance after every 100 hours of flight.

The video showed footage of SP-9 just a day before its first flight. SP-10 was under assembly and didn't seem like it would be ready before the end of March 2018. As one of gentlemen interviewed said, it would take approximately 1 month from then, to be delivered to the IAF. So, I'd expect SP-10 to fly in the 3rd week of April

One of the SPs (seemed like LA 5006) seemed to have been retrofitted with the quartz radome in place of the earlier kevlar radome. This is apparently going to be done for all the SPs delivered to the IAF.

Image

One more thing became obvious- the Martin Baker Mk16 ejection seat is reclined, which improves the pilot's ability to handle G loads. Prior to this video, I had not really noticed this. Seems to be reclined quite a bit. Need to find out exactly how much the angle is.

HUD made by CSIO Chandigarh. Couldn't catch the name of the company that builds the Multi Function Control Panel just below the HUD.

Approximately 10 months to assemble 1 Tejas from start to end. Approx 12,000 parts and 40km of cabling in 1 Tejas fighter.

Gp Cpt (retd.) KK Venugopal mentioned that it would take ~2-3 years to develop the Mk1A version- tie that in with Dr Christopher's statement that Mk1A design was almost ready except for the AESA and EW equipment.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8135
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby Indranil » 29 Mar 2018 00:31

By the way, that 18 degrees STR is of the best F-16. The latest blocks of F-16s cannot reach those values.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5152
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby Kartik » 29 Mar 2018 00:44

From the video:

"HAL has responded to the IAF's RFP for Tejas Mk1A on March 13, 2018."

Without the choice of the AESA radar or the EW equipment, since the choice has not yet been made. Now MoD and HAL have to begin contractual negotiations before the final contract is signed for 83 Tejas Mk1As.

About 2,00,000 man hours go into assembling a single Tejas. And the video reinforces the fact that extremely tight tolerances of 80 microns. Could also see SP-14 on the assembly line.

And confirmation of ASRAAM for Mk1A. And an assembly line to build 4 more Tejas will be ready by next year.

Rampy
BRFite
Posts: 277
Joined: 25 Mar 2003 12:31
Contact:

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby Rampy » 29 Mar 2018 00:56

Very good and detailed reporting by ZEE Sudhir. Not sure if its been posted here. Tejas reports starts at 32 Mins and @54 mins they shows inside parts etc.

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_ ... 8048596429

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4536
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby srai » 29 Mar 2018 02:17

Kartik wrote:Interesting snippet from the ZeeNews video



F-16's STR is 18 deg/s.


Interesting titbit about F-16 vs Mirage-2000 -> ITR vs STR.
http://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=12736
A coversation with a former Hellenic Air Force pilot in WAFF

Q:the Mirage 2000 is slicker than the Viper but less powerful.

A: This true.

Q : With good pilots on both sides, they are probably equal in dogfight

A: This is wrong. A good pilot in an M2K will kill a good pilot in an F-16 9 out of 10 times (1 provided for launch failure).

I served in an M2K fighter squadron in HAF. We analyzed tactics and combat scores against HAF F-16 squadrons all the time.

The M2Ks higher INSTANTANEOUS turn rate gives it an advantage during the first pass. The F-16 cannot outturn the Mirage. It has to climb in hopes of avoiding the lock. A good M2K pilot will end it right there (the Magic 2 is a better IR weapon than the AIM-9L/M).

A rookie in the M2K, however, will probably lose the F-16's climb. The more powerful viper will escape and will then gain the advantage because of 1) Altitude 2) Higher SUSTAINABLE turn rate.

As for turn rates, altitude differences are purely theoretical and in practice make no difference EXCEPT for sea level manuevers where the more powerful Viper starts gaining the advantage.

Q: Would you agree with the statement that F-16 is a better choice for multi role missions than Mirage 2000 ?

Absolutely. The M2K is a multi-role fighter also, but its performance varies greatly among roles - whereas the Viper performs almost all missions at a very satisfactory level.

HAF M2Ks are specialized. 331's (where I served) primary role is now TASMO (naval strike with AM-39 Exocet) and 332's primary role will become Deep Strike (with SCALP EG). CAP & Air Supremacy are their secondary roles.

The F-16 sqdns OTOH undertake a number of roles such as SEAD, CAP, CAS, and numerous specialized strike missions (enemy AFBs, enemy C&C centers etc). The Viper is a much more volatile weapons system

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54247
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby ramana » 29 Mar 2018 03:03

ArjunPandit wrote:
Indranil wrote: By the way, that 18 degrees STR is of the best F-16. The latest blocks of F-16s cannot reach those values.

why sad?


You don't want actual capability reported.

ragupta
BRFite
Posts: 349
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby ragupta » 29 Mar 2018 03:05

In the video all the cables are using same color tape. it would be nice to use color coded tapes to reduce error and make it easier on the assembly Engineers.
In fact they should use colored cables too.
Hope this is introduced with Mk1A. I am sure this will bring down the maintainance time as well.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7555
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby nachiket » 29 Mar 2018 05:03

Indranil wrote:By the way, that 18 degrees STR is of the best F-16. The latest blocks of F-16s cannot reach those values.

Wow! I hope after the No. 45 squadron aircraft go up against IAF's M2Ks and Mig-29s during training we get an article like the one by Air Marshall Harish Masand who described the experience of the M2k vs Mig-29 flyoff that the IAF had in the 80's.

OT: Does anyone have a link to that article? It seems to have disappeared from Scribd.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4522
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby JayS » 29 Mar 2018 06:58

Kartik wrote:some more data points:

After every 100 hours of flight, the Tejas requires 20 hours of maintenance. They claim that F-16 requires only 3.5 and Gripen 6 hours of maintenance after every 100 hours of flight.
.


The first part when the Tejas related stuff starts seems to have been taken from some of those MSM reports which we have been trashing here. Dont look like Zee actually ran it by HAL folks. I wouldnt take that part too seriously. I mean the way the anchor was trying to highlight lenght of cable as some extremely important fact and mentioned STR with a straight face, I would take anything from him with a pinch of salt.

Funny enough, until the first part of Tejas was over, the anchor himself was talking about LCA with an unsure and gaurded manner like "if its not the best, its at least at par with other competitors" and stuff like that. But he went on to say how we undersell our own systems and distrust them in a good long speech. His own unsure tone describing Tejas, belies his scripted words sadly. While they can come up with stupid cheesy lines on those subtitles that flash below during reporting, why cant they just write a better script and talk with little enthusiasm about Tejas, is beyond me. At the same time they sound impressed by Gripen or F16 or some such foreign bird.

I saw the video until the first part. All credit to Zee for showing this. But I am disappointed a bit. It could have been far better report. The report by local BLR channel last year was much better.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby Singha » 29 Mar 2018 07:18

>> They claim that F-16 requires only 3.5 and Gripen 6 hours of maintenance after every 100 hours of flight.

I call BS on that right away.

srin
BRFite
Posts: 1911
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby srin » 29 Mar 2018 07:25

Indranil wrote: By the way, that 18 degrees STR is of the best F-16. The latest blocks of F-16s cannot reach those values.


STR is supposed to be one of the weak points of a delta wing, rt ?

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby shiv » 29 Mar 2018 07:45

ragupta wrote:In the video all the cables are using same color tape. it would be nice to use color coded tapes to reduce error and make it easier on the assembly Engineers.
In fact they should use colored cables too.
Hope this is introduced with Mk1A. I am sure this will bring down the maintainance time as well.

You believe that HAL does not know this? Or are you saying that you also know what every electrician also knows?

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby shiv » 29 Mar 2018 08:23

Singha wrote:>> They claim that F-16 requires only 3.5 and Gripen 6 hours of maintenance after every 100 hours of flight.

I call BS on that right away.


The other thing that we need to do is to understand that "maintenance" requires spares and a logistics chain that is built up after years or exoerience in flying a plane under operational conditions. After 1-2 years it becomes clear which components need service/maintenance after every 5 hours of flying, which ones last 20 hours; which ones last 100 hours etc. But in general even educated Indians are technically fairly dumb - which is easy to see in a population where maybe 4% are college educated.

I recently discovered on twitter how American "hawa" affects Indian non technical minds. Please pardon my digression. Just before Rahul Gandhi visited Mysore - a floating balloon that was being inflated for him exploded causing burns to several people. Unlike Western countries, I know for a fact that in most public melas in India the balloon sellers have a tank that generates (or delivers) hydrogen. If you ask for "floating balloons" for your kids birthday party in a party hall the balloons have Hydrogen. However if you look at Wiki it will tell you that hydrogen has been replaced with helium. This is is not true of India. In India lighter than air balloons are unsafe abut most educated Indians imagine that helium is used. In fact I am yet to come across a helium cylinder available for public use in India - but it is so easy to generate hydrogen using low tech and it is freely available in tanks. I think Helium is a byproduct of mining - it is probably more expensive than Hydrogen.

Again - apologies for the digression

Image

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2371
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby John » 29 Mar 2018 08:45

Singha wrote:>> They claim that F-16 requires only 3.5 and Gripen 6 hours of maintenance after every 100 hours of flight.

I call BS on that right away.

That is not right direct man hours of maintenance per flight hour is around 6-10 for F-16. Not sure where they got those 3.5 for 100 hours of flight from.

suryag
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3552
Joined: 11 Jan 2009 00:14

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby suryag » 29 Mar 2018 08:48

One other aspect on maintenance that might consume additional time when it comes to Tejas is the caution the Ground staff is subjecting itself to. In the sense that they are probably being conservative and checking everything in the checklist before clearing the aircraft. This is progressively going to get better.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby Singha » 29 Mar 2018 08:50

true...it is in same range for all modern fighters...around 5 people in ground crew inspect and work on the plane for an hour each after every typical 1 hr mission

ks_sachin
BRFite
Posts: 1064
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby ks_sachin » 29 Mar 2018 09:20

kit wrote:
mody wrote:Uttam is still a few years away from being fully operational. Being ready for testing on an air platform, does not mean it is ready for deployment.

MK1A was proposed so that we could get numbers for the IAF as soon as possible and with the doable changes to the MK1 platform.
Either the 2052 from Israeal or the Thales Aesa radar should be ordered for the 73 MK1A, ASAP. The balance 10 planes are supposed to be 2 seat trainers. We do not need the Aesa for these planes.
The plan is to also upgrade the 20 IOC and 20 FOC standard MK1 Tejas to MK1A standard eventually. We should target to get the Uttam MK-1 for these 40 birds. By then the radar should have finished the testing and we will have some leeway on the time lines.

DRDO can then aim for Uttam MK-2 for the Tejas MK-II. They can go for GaN based TR modules, updated software and higher TR modules, if the power and cooling requirements can be met.


I would say spend those billions building up the critical infrastructure to mass produce AESA radars ..it's so crucial for further development (and further orders) Buy token numbers of 2052 if needed.

Not sure I understand this statement kit.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4522
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby JayS » 29 Mar 2018 09:23

ragupta wrote:In the video all the cables are using same color tape. it would be nice to use color coded tapes to reduce error and make it easier on the assembly Engineers.
In fact they should use colored cables too.
Hope this is introduced with Mk1A. I am sure this will bring down the maintainance time as well.


And how many colors you propose to be used..?? :wink:

Those are not mere tape. They are numbers tags. What's the point of using same color tape everywhere anyway..? LOL

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4522
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby JayS » 29 Mar 2018 09:28

suryag wrote:One other aspect on maintenance that might consume additional time when it comes to Tejas is the caution the Ground staff is subjecting itself to. In the sense that they are probably being conservative and checking everything in the checklist before clearing the aircraft. This is progressively going to get better.


Why are you even trying to give reasoning for idiotic and baseless statements..? (3.5hours for 100hr flight itself it downright stupid. 3.5hrs per hour of flight sounds more reasonable anyway).

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8135
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby Indranil » 29 Mar 2018 09:30

srin wrote:
Indranil wrote: By the way, that 18 degrees STR is of the best F-16. The latest blocks of F-16s cannot reach those values.


STR is supposed to be one of the weak points of a delta wing, rt ?

For early deltas: yes. The aerodynamics of modern aircrafts well past that point. FCS driven active control surfaces like close couple canards, multi slotted slats etc. can hel pa lot in overcoming those difficulties.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8135
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Tejas Mk.1 & Mk.1A News & Discussions: 09 February 2018

Postby Indranil » 29 Mar 2018 09:43

srai wrote:http://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=12736
A coversation with a former Hellenic Air Force pilot in WAFF
I served in an M2K fighter squadron in HAF. We analyzed tactics and combat scores against HAF F-16 squadrons all the time.

The M2Ks higher INSTANTANEOUS turn rate gives it an advantage during the first pass. The F-16 cannot outturn the Mirage. It has to climb in hopes of avoiding the lock. A good M2K pilot will end it right there (the Magic 2 is a better IR weapon than the AIM-9L/M).

A rookie in the M2K, however, will probably lose the F-16's climb. The more powerful viper will escape and will then gain the advantage because of 1) Altitude 2) Higher SUSTAINABLE turn rate.

As for turn rates, altitude differences are purely theoretical and in practice make no difference EXCEPT for sea level manuevers where the more powerful Viper starts gaining the advantage.

Q: Would you agree with the statement that F-16 is a better choice for multi role missions than Mirage 2000 ?

Absolutely. The M2K is a multi-role fighter also, but its performance varies greatly among roles - whereas the Viper performs almost all missions at a very satisfactory level.

This is how people with real experience talk. No matter how many pilots you talk to, or DACT accounts you read of, it is always like this. Good pilots can anticipate what the opponent is about to do and that gives the edge. I am yet to read any account where pilots have said I got into a turning fight and won because my plane turned faster than his.

There is another key take away. F-16 is a better multirole fighter because of its better TWR. This is absolutely true. There are some things where you need brute force. That is one of the reasons why Tejas's Mk2 is not gunning for much larger payload capacity. Mk1 starts to get stretched at full load of about 4 tons. Think about it, the Su-30 with 8 tons of payload is described as a bomb-truck. If a Gripen NG with nearly 1/3rd the thrust is asked to carry 6 tons of payload, what would it be? Another way to look at it: without using AB, the TWR is similar to that of an airliner. So...


Return to “Mil-Tech Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests