LCA news and discussion

[symontk]

I remember the Airforce display, it was around 1988.

Regarding todays display the LCA was grey coloured and it had two fuel tanks too

[shiv]

Anybody have a video of that?

I have a video of that. In fact it may already be online - let me look through my uploads (106 of them) - will post the link if it is online. Not sure if the LCA is capable of that.

Added later - OK its here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ctuY5LxN_18

[krishnan]

Bad news

LCA Tejas will be a dummy on static display and there will be no fly past of the aircraft.

as per

Code: Select all

http://chhindits.blogspot.com/2010/01/first-timers-in-r-d-parade-debutants.html

Not sure how true this is

[Rahul M]

this close to IOC when they are making up for lost time I don't think they can spare a couple of airframes (one for display, one back-up) to send to far-off dilli. an event like this takes a lot of planning and effort which they shouldn't waste at this moment. I'm happy with this decision.

better do a full formation fly-past next year, as part of IAF No45 sqdn !

[Sid]

^^
yup, I think we will see more of a dummy being displayed here just like LCA full mockup we saw during aero-india. But I hope they show up with a twin seat instead (fingers crossed).

[nash]

i think it might be TD-1 or 2

[nirav]

^^^ Saw the jahaj-e-kufr (patent and copyright-Vina Garu) today afternoon.....amazing stuff.....single aircraft.....as for the tight turns and stuff....Vina garu..saw the plane pull the same stunts during the HAL Day...actually had bolted tha day from office to the road next to HAL Airport to have a dheko.......

the best part is that the way west-east runway is alinged, the jagaj-e-kufr actually passes right over head on the landing run...awesome sight and the sound is music to these ears...

Isnt it possible for the It Vity Jingos to capture a video of the jahaj-e-kufr doing its moves !??

Would be much appreciated by us un-privileged jingos !!

[KrishG]

i think it might be TD-1 or 2

IIRC TD-1 has already been disassembled.

[nachiket]

Anybody have a video of that?

I have a video of that. In fact it may already be online - let me look through my uploads (106 of them) - will post the link if it is online. Not sure if the LCA is capable of that.

Added later - OK its here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ctuY5LxN_18

Thanks shiv!

[Nihat]

It's definetly a dummy we'll be seeing on 26th , albeit armed with the Astra abd R 73 ( again dummy)

[jai]

One can see the mockup from the road while crossing the India Gate - Parked along with the other fauzi displays. The R73 (could not confirm from the distance) is also visible.

[KrishG]

LCA Tejas Tableau For Republic Day Parade



Well it is better than last years Phalcon AWACS mock-up !

[Nihat]

Good news is that atleast we'll see the real Phalcon this time on.

[negi]

Dilli is hit by the worst fog in last 7 years , don't know if IAF demo will take place .

[Kartik]

LCA Tejas Tableau For Republic Day Parade



Well it is better than last years Phalcon AWACS mock-up !

huh my prediction was right ! the wooden mockup shown at AI-07 and 09. Anyway, makes sense that the TDs and PVs and LSPs be at Bangalore for flight testing rather than for a parade. When its in service, it'll make sense to have a fly-past and a display as well.

[VijayKumarSinha]

huh my prediction was right ! the wooden mockup shown at AI-07 and 09. Anyway, makes sense that the TDs and PVs and LSPs be at Bangalore for flight testing rather than for a parade. When its in service, it'll make sense to have a fly-past and a display as well.

From Broadsword :

Sorry, I just assumed that people who visited this blog knew that a single-engined fighter was not permitted to participate in fly-pasts and aerobatics over Delhi.

Well, now you know!

So, the Tejas will never fly in any republic day parade. Makes sense because I have never seen a flypast of Mirage-2000 or Mig-21 bison on Republic day either. Its probably for security because a single engined, aerodynamically unstable plane would not go very far if there was an engine failure on the other hand a twin-engined one will still be able to fly.

[negi]

^ I guess you meant aerobatic display and not fly past for Mirage-2000 and Mig-21 have been a part of fly past on almost every occasion since their induction . And as for aerobatics well I remember before MKI arrived on to the scene a group of 3 M2Ks used to do a small demo , iirc the one in center pulls up and does a vertical charlie.

[shiv]

So, the Tejas will never fly in any republic day parade. Makes sense because I have never seen a flypast of Mirage-2000 or Mig-21 bison on Republic day either. Its probably for security because a single engined, aerodynamically unstable plane would not go very far if there was an engine failure on the other hand a twin-engined one will still be able to fly.

MiG 21s used to fly regularly in R Day parades, as did Hunters, Mysteres and Vampires. Tejas and Mirage are not aerodynamically unstable. They are stable because of FBW. The relationship between FBW and instability is the same as the relationship between a brick and an aircraft. Bricks don't fly, But aircraft do. And engines are not so unreliable as you make them out to be.



and

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/IAF/Histo ... resh04.jpg


and see the last 6 seconds of this video

http://www.youtube.com/user/cybersurg#p ... RGfg-EBAfM

The last issue of Vayu carries an article of a 4 MiG 21 loop performed over Hindon I thing. In the same show a MiG 21 had an open eye painted on one side of the nacelle and a closed eye on the other side and as the MiG 21 rolled over in front to the spectators it cave the appearance of a winking eye. I have a photo of my late cousin Suresh sitting on the nose of that MiG with the painted eye. I guess - now that he is no more I can upload it - he had forbidden me from doing so.

The Tejas gives regular displays over Bangalore and so have F 16s . So much for instability, single engines and cities.

[VijayKumarSinha]

^ I guess you meant aerobatic display and not fly past for Mirage-2000 and Mig-21 have been a part of fly past on almost every occasion since their induction . And as for aerobatics well I remember before MKI arrived on to the scene a group of 3 M2Ks used to do a small demo , iirc the one in center pulls up and does a vertical charlie.

So, the Tejas will never fly in any republic day parade. Makes sense because I have never seen a flypast of Mirage-2000 or Mig-21 bison on Republic day either. Its probably for security because a single engined, aerodynamically unstable plane would not go very far if there was an engine failure on the other hand a twin-engined one will still be able to fly.

MiG 21s used to fly regularly in R Day parades, as did Hunters, Mysteres and Vampires. Tejas and Mirage are not aerodynamically unstable. They are stable because of FBW. The relationship between FBW and instability is the same as the relationship between a brick and an aircraft. Bricks don't fly, But aircraft do. And engines are not so unreliable as you make them out to be.

No sirs, I was just commenting on Mr. Ajai Shukla's comments on Broadsword. As you can see, he said a single engined fighter was not permitted in fly-pasts and aerobatics over Delhi. I have no clue whether they do fly-pasts because unfortunatley and sadly I have not seen the 26 Jan parade in 6 years. And when I used to I had no interest in the details of our air forces inventory. Just the thought that we had something good to kick some paki pichwada was enough for me. Also, I have no doubt over our engine's capabilities. I am just trying to think what might be the reason for such a decision if indeed such a restriction exists. Maybe, if their is no fog then you can tell me if the 21's and the M2k did take part in the fly-past this year? Or, if you have a picture or video of republic day parade of last year then you can tell me that these planes did indeed participate in fly-past last year?

[Gagan]

Of the helos, the chetaks and cheetahs are single engined.

There is a rule where a PM or President can't board a single engined aircraft. There was an incident when President R venkataraman (I think) on a visit to the andamans on his ship felt seasick and requested that he be airlifted to shore.
There was only a chetak helo around, and there was a controversy later with an inquiry being ordered on the officers who allowed him to be transported on that helo, because of this rule. I think the controversy was that the president had said that he was willing to travel on a single engined aircraft inspite of being made aware of the rule.

[shiv]

No sirs, I was just commenting on Mr. Ajai Shukla's comments on Broadsword.

The problem is Ajai Shukla's comment, not fly by wire or engines.
Either he is wrong or some stupid babu has come up with this idea.

OTOH I think all RD flypasts should be cancelled in favor of local airshows all over the country.

OT alert - this is the LCA thread

[Kersi D]

^^^ Saw the jahaj-e-kufr (patent and copyright-Vina Garu) today afternoon.....amazing stuff.....single aircraft.....as for the tight turns and stuff....Vina garu..saw the plane pull the same stunts during the HAL Day...actually had bolted tha day from office to the road next to HAL Airport to have a dheko.......

the best part is that the way west-east runway is alinged, the jagaj-e-kufr actually passes right over head on the landing run...awesome sight and the sound is music to these ears...

Hey
Looks like I am our of touch.

WTH is jahaj-e-kufr ??? Is it PAF's name for Tejas ? Please educate the ignorant.

K

[Nihat]

It's a refrence to LCA onleee , a rather amusing one at that.

[krishnan]

The mockup was well made

[sum]

The mockup was well made

Yup..agree on that.

The inner pylon mentioned Astra and the outer one R-73. So, no Derby/Python's on the initial LCAs?

[rpraveenkum]

why covering panels for the hinges of elevon - wing attachments is huge?

[Raveen]

why covering panels for the hinges of elevon - wing attachments is huge?

Just a guess, but could be serving as a wing fence in addition to a cover (atleast the layout seems to suggest that) which would explain the size and layout.

[putnanja]

in this image of LCA, the IFR probe appears to be fixed and is protruding outside the airframe. Most of the current generation aircraft have IFR probes which hug the frame more tightly. Is this design because the IFR was a late ask by IAF?

[jaladipc]

why covering panels for the hinges of elevon - wing attachments is huge?

Just a guess, but could be serving as a wing fence in addition to a cover (atleast the layout seems to suggest that) which would explain the size and layout.

those hinge caps are replaceable.when weapons are needed,the hugee hinge caps go out while welcoming the pylons in at the same time covering the hinges.

Have a look at the below picture to get a clear idea

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_zUe7sq7m3h0/S ... 180183.JPG

[Kartik]

cross-posting a reply to Philip's post here since it mostly concerns the LCA.

The past is rife with annual returns of funds lying unused by the MOD.Approval for critical acquisitions takes years,like the Hawk-more than two decades,the Scorpene,and the search still goes on for the LCA's engine .Why did we not pursue with better vigour the LCA? It developed in fits and starts and even after roping in the IAF ,not done earlier,placing orders,finalising all matters required for the MK-2 development on a war footing.This appears suspicious in the haste to finalise the MMRCA deal by April as we have been told! Will the decision on the LCA's engine be taken only after finalisation of the MMRCA?!

I just received the book by Air Marshal Philip Rajkumar, Tejas Story, something I’ve been wanting to read for a long time now. I really recommend this book to any jingo interested in the LCA program. It’s a must-have.

Was stunned to see a picture of him in the UK after an evaluation flight in a Hawk AJT, and the picture dated back to 1986! Talk about apathy towards defence procurement. That single picture in a nutshell explained just how wrong the Indian procurement process really was (I'm hoping that it’s improved now).

The problems related to LCA development were obviously not to be blamed on just any one decision, but a host of factors, all of which seemed to conspire to create delays for the LCA.

The first chapter itself pin-points the biggest mistake made in the LCA program in a way, and I’m referring to the part about Dassault's offer for a 3 digital plus 1 analog channel digi-ana hybrid FCS being rejected by one section of more influential scientists and engineers for a more cutting-edge quadruplex digital FCS from Martin Marietta. They clearly underestimated the scale of the effort and thought that the LCA should have the best technologies available in the world at that time, a way to somehow close the gap of 2 decades that had opened up between Indian aeronautics and the West. This was despite IAF reservations about enlisting US help.

Dassault and other Euro design houses of those days did not have so much confidence in all-digital systems, and wanted an analog backup just in case. Because of those decisions by Euro design houses, the Rafale and Gripen to date still carry a 3-digital plus 1-analog channel FCS. Dassault wanted to develop a fully digital FCS later on when they were more confident about the technology, but as we see to date the Rafale still carries its original FCS, so in one way the Tejas became obsolete-proof in this sphere (i.e. if FCS that gives good performance but belongs to an older generation can be considered obsolete), but it was a single decision that pretty much led to all these major delays in the LCA program (excepting the Kaveri which is un-related). Otherwise, looking at the time it took for KAI, a relatively inexperienced design house, to come up with the T-50 with Lock Mart as a partner, we can see how the LCA might’ve been ready a long time ago.

Those decisions were all taken by people who obviously had India's best interests at heart, men and women who wanted to build a world-class aeronautics industry in India, but pragmatism seems to have been lacking with the singular aim being somehow to get their hands on the best technology available anywhere. Instead of keeping Dassault as a partner in the program when Dassault was very keen to be one, to let them leave the program and then go it alone with US assistance was a big leap of faith. The sanctions that were imposed for 3 years by the US basically proved that it was a big gamble and it failed. However, to their credit, earlier the US did give a lot of assistance as well and it was they who offered the GE F404 engine to power the initial prototypes which ADA accepted (11 were bought for $11 million).

Then time was lost due to the fact that Dr. Arunachalam, who was the Scientific Adviser to the Raksha Mantri had to re-create interest in the program from the V.P. Singh sarkar after Rajiv Gandhi lost the 1989 election, and then followed the oil-crisis after Iraq's invasion of Kuwait followed by the foreign exchange crisis of 1991. 2 full years were lost in those tumultuous years with very little development happening in the LCA program during this period. That made it clear that without clear political direction and support, major defence programs will not make headway.

One more thing became clear after reading AM Rajkumar's account (although I’ve known about it from earlier thanks to other posters and articles in Bharat-Rakshak). That the dates that are being bandied about by DDM and uninformed people on various forums about the LCA having started in 1983 and so on is a load of crap, to be polite. I'll be putting some sort of a date-line for the Tejas as I read through the book, and then post it here on BRF. There may be other articles that have made it clear as well, but somehow this word needs to be spread, that the LCA program only really began around 1989 with the Project Definition Phase being completed in assistance with Dassault. Before that, it was only a set of ideas that hadn’t even been put into a fully formulated plan. How people can say that the LCA program began in 1983 when even ADA did not exist then and only was set up as an Agency in 1985 is beyond my understanding. And the people chosen to work on the LCA were drawn from ISRO, HAL and NAL, with nearly 500 HAL designers moving to ADA.

And those who say that HAL should’ve built the LCA because they had the capability- well, AM Rajkumar clearly states that HAL was very under-confident about the LCA when it saw the first IAF Air Staff Target (AST) that set the performance requirements from the LCA. They clearly realized that they did not have competence in any of the 4 key areas of technology that were required which were, FBW FCS (to achieve the kind of flight performance required from a fighter that would be inducted in mid-1990s), glass cockpit, composite airframe and micro-processor based avionics. That they realized this was good in fact, because it made clear that this was a project that would require harnessing the entire national industrial and scientific skill base and knowhow. There is a wonderful list in a BR article that lists down the public and private sector enterprises and educational and research institutions that were all involved in developing components and technology for the LCA. To manage so many cross-institutional projects must’ve been one huge exercise in Project Management and to ADA’s credit they seemed to have done a good job at that.

There are other fallacies that need to be set straight as well- like how one old Hindu article derogatorily claimed that the LCA had Italian composite wings implying that they did all the design work and ADA hogged the glory. The truth as stated by AM Rajkumar was that the first 5 shipsets of LCA wing skins were built, not designed by Alenia ONLY BECAUSE the indigenous auto-clave (it’s used to cure composites by exposing them to high temperature and pressure) was in the process of being built. If anything, this was pragmatism- to hell with what chutiya DDM journos write, if taking foreign assistance speeds up timelines, then its best to do it. Then make sure that there are indigenous options coming down the line and competency is built up along the way.

The worrying tendency of the average Indian journalist to heap shame on DRDO and other R&D orgs when they take help from foreign agencies, or when any problems arise while being blissfully ignorant of how other similar things happen even in countries with far more advanced technological bases, is one of the reasons that there is such a negative image for indigenous defence product development in India. The Team LCA (as AM Rajkumar refers to it) took on a huge task, one on a scale that was never attempted before in aeronautics in India, and with some delays that are attributable to lack of foresight, bad luck and some other reasons (like personality clashes), have managed to produce one heck of a little fighter. There is every reason for every Indian to be proud of the Tejas. The cover of AM Rajkumar’s book that has 3 Tejas peeling off one by one itself will make you swell with pride. 

[Kartik]

in this image of LCA, the IFR probe appears to be fixed and is protruding outside the airframe. Most of the current generation aircraft have IFR probes which hug the frame more tightly. Is this design because the IFR was a late ask by IAF?

There are basically 3 configurations possible to use for an IFR probe
1) Recessed- like on the Gripen C/D, where the probe is placed on top of the air-intake and it requires a hydraulic mechanism to push the telescoping probe outwards to within the pilots eyeline. The advantage of this is the reduction in drag and RCS since the probe is hidden at most times. The drawbacks are it uses up internal volume, and is heavier than a fixed probe as it requires a hydraulic mechanism to make it work.
2) Semi-recessed- like on the MiG-29K or Su-30MKI- this requires a mechanism to push it outwards, but doesn’t use up as much internal volume. Generally positioned close to the cockpit so the pilot has a good view without requiring a telescoping mechanism.
3) Fixed probe- easiest to install, easiest to maintain as its one less hydraulic system to worry about. Drawbacks are added drag and RCS.

The LCA has a fixed probe and this was known before this mockup was paraded. The probe needs to be positioned as far away from the canopy as possible, because there is a real danger that as a pilot approaches the drogue dangling at the edge of the fuel pipe, if he makes even a small mistake in judgement or a gust of wind suddenly moves him, the drogue could hit the canopy and smash it. To make it safer, the probe is deliberately kept more distant, allowing for safer attempts at contact with the drogue.

[Kartik]

Yup..agree on that.

The inner pylon mentioned Astra and the outer one R-73. So, no Derby/Python's on the initial LCAs?

As per an interview that PS Subramanyam gave in mid-2008, the IN has decided on the Derby for its N-LCA. the IAF had not yet (at that time) made up its mind on which BVR weapon it wanted on the air force version. IMO, it might go with the R-77 which has a longer range, for the FOC Tejas Mk1 since the IOC Tejas Mk1 will be not have BVR capability as per PS Subramanyam. However, the Derby, being lighter and having a smaller diameter, is more suited to be carried on dual rails at the mid-wing hardpoint of the LCA if required to increase the A2A weapons load. We've seen the dual-rail being used on IN's LUSH SHar recently with a Magic-II next to a Derby.

[KrishG]

As per an interview that PS Subramanyam gave in mid-2008, the IN has decided on the Derby for its N-LCA. the IAF had not yet (at that time) made up its mind on which BVR weapon it wanted on the air force version. IMO, it might go with the R-77 which has a longer range, for the FOC Tejas Mk1 since the IOC Tejas Mk1 will be not have BVR capability as per PS Subramanyam. However, the Derby, being lighter and having a smaller diameter, is more suited to be carried on dual rails at the mid-wing hardpoint of the LCA if required to increase the A2A weapons load. We've seen the dual-rail being used on IN's LUSH SHar recently with a Magic-II next to a Derby.

But an Israeli radar on LCA would make it harder for the integration of R-77 and R-73 or any russian weapons. In that case Python-5 and Derby would be the obvious options.

[SaiK]

could have a combo, perhaps dedicated rails for Indian, Russian, and Israeli ones, if one hardware design does not fit for all?

or the rails themselves could be LRUs.

[Kartik]

But an Israeli radar on LCA would make it harder for the integration of R-77 and R-73 or any russian weapons. In that case Python-5 and Derby would be the obvious options.

But its not an Israeli radar. Its the MMR antenna with some elements of the Elta 2032 being used. R-73 has been test-fired already and generally, integrating an IR missile is not that difficult. India owns the source code for the MMR so any missile that the IAF identifies can be integrated.

[Craig Alpert]

If anything, this was pragmatism- to hell with what chutiya DDM journos write, if taking foreign assistance speeds up timelines, then its best to do it.

damn Tik, you b wailing out playa....You oughta seriously consider becoming a journalist... Your post are long as hell, well detailed, always to the point, wut the hell is stopping you from becoming the next male version of "Burka Dutt" in print that is?
keep giving the synopsis for us lesser mortals dawg... appreciate the effort you put into your writing!!

[Rahul M]

but somehow this word needs to be spread, that the LCA program only really began around 1989 with the Project Definition Phase being completed in assistance with Dassault. Before that, it was only a set of ideas that hadn’t even been put into a fully formulated plan. How people can say that the LCA program began in 1983 when even ADA did not exist then and only was set up as an Agency in 1985 is beyond my understanding.

I have posted the timeline both at keypubs and here, in MRCA thread. perhaps it's time to kick-start the FAQ thingy we discussed ?

[NRao]

I have posted the timeline both at keypubs and here, in MRCA thread. perhaps it's time to kick-start the FAQ thingy we discussed ?

What is your email?

[viveks]

Something off topic for us jingos....I met 2 ground electrical engineers from pune AFB on a train...they were pretty much talking about indigenization of almost every software/electronic module of Su-30 in the coming 1-3 yrs. Their job dutys included inspection of all electrical systems of the aircraft including integration. They showed me some interesting pictures that were taken through their mobile phones. They would not give them to me.....mostly those things were out of my understanding....

[rad]

I would love to see a 2052 Aesa radar , derby,astra , or a newer misile with a python 5 on the lca .It would be easy to do it along with the lightning pod that could be used as a flir or an IRST combined with the DASH HMS that has been already integrated .I have heard of unreliability and poor shelf life of the aa-12 archer missile which would be a nigtmare to integrate into the LCA , morover the russians wold never give us teh code or help us . I heard that the r-73 was missile integrated by our peolpe after the russians refused to help .