LCA News and Discussions

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
Yogi_G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2400
Joined: 21 Nov 2008 04:10
Location: Punya Bhoomi -- Jambu Dweepam

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby Yogi_G » 19 Oct 2012 11:50

Help this Abdul understand. With an under-powered engine shouldn't the mk1 be an out and out point defence fighter (and also) with high altitude bombing capabilities only? For a bombing run with dumb bombs wouldn't the LCA be vulnerable to ground fire as it tries to pull up albeit slowly just like the problems the Marut had?

nakul
BRFite
Posts: 1251
Joined: 31 Aug 2011 10:39

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby nakul » 19 Oct 2012 11:54

under-powered engine


is a relative term. Today's underpowered engine is actually overpowered engine of yesteryears. The LCA does not have to pull cobra's & S turns for its role as a fighter bomber. Just compare to the super duper underpowered Jaguar which is going to remain in service till 2040. The LCA looks underpowered because it will operate in the air force that has Su30 MKIs & Rafales. On its own, it is sufficient for air to ground roles.

Yagnasri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9918
Joined: 29 May 2007 18:03

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby Yagnasri » 19 Oct 2012 12:22

There is no reason we go for a good orders for present MK1 AC with about 6 Sq which should be sufficient in point defence role. As it is we are short of AC and remember we have both Paki land and Panda is take care and may be both at once. LCA even at Mk1 level should be more than a match.

Can any Guruji compare LCA Mk1 with the rubbish Pigs and Lizards got? I feel it should be ok as for as most of their non frontline (did they got any???) AC.

krishnan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7342
Joined: 07 Oct 2005 12:58
Location: 13° 04' N , 80° 17' E

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby krishnan » 19 Oct 2012 12:24

Has any aircraft been first inducted in A2G role and then later on to A2A role ???

Yagnasri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9918
Joined: 29 May 2007 18:03

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby Yagnasri » 19 Oct 2012 12:49

Most I know like f15, su 27 are first a2a and then a2g but I know only a very little in this area. But I remember f16 is suppose to be bomb truck when first made and then proved to be a goof a2a ac also.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8164
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby nachiket » 19 Oct 2012 12:55

vina wrote:
Singha wrote:with full radar A2A modes and better engine, it should be able to hold its own against the upg M2K in air superiority mission

With a far better t:w ratio, it will trounce it in the A2A role as far as field performance goes. Not just the M2K , but the Mig 29 upg as well.

T:W ratio is not the whole and sole of air combat. The MKI's T:W ratio for example is nothing to write home about. More comparable to that of the underpowered M2k than the ultra high t:w fighters like the Mig-29, F-15, Typhoon etc. Yet neither the Mig-29 nor the LCA mk2 will find it easy to beat an MKI in a dogfight. Same is the case with the LCA vs M2k. The M2k may be underpowered but it has it's strengths. The Rafale has a much lower T:W ratio than the typhoon. But the few times it's gone up against the typhoon in exercises it has performed quite well if the reports are to be believed.
That said, the LCA's radar will hopefully be much better than the RDY-3 that comes with the m2k5. Derby vs MICA is anyone's guess.

The LCA MKII really is the replacement for the Mig29, Mig 21 air defence platforms.

Agree. Although it can fill in for the Mig-27's CAS role as well if need be. The early focus on testing the A2G capability seems to indicate that.

The AMCA is the replacement for Jags and M2K (which in India are largely ground strike and not air superiority).

Well that's not exactly true. The m2k's reputation in the IAF of being an excellent ground attack aircraft came about only after Kargil. They were originally inducted to counter paki F-16s and till the MKI's started entering in large numbers it was IAF's best air-superiority fighter along with the Mig-29. The role may have changed a bit now that it's avionics have aged and the MKI is available in numbers. But after the RDY-3 + MICA upgrade it'll become a potent air-superiority fighter once again.

mody
BRFite
Posts: 794
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Mumbai, India

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby mody » 19 Oct 2012 13:41

This unofficial update ties in with the speculation.

The Radar for the A2A role has not yet been fully integrated into the platform and the flight envelope has not been opened up enough to reach the baseline performance numbers required for the A2A role.
Integration of the Radar for the A2A role and mating with BVR missiles, as well opening up of the flight envelope to allow the aircraft to have AoA of about 26-28 degrees and 8g turn rates is seriously posing a problem. I say seriously, as the ADA guys don't seem to have a quick fix for these issues and it is going to add another 18 month delay to the program, at the very least. The earlier target was for final IOC by about right now and FOC by 2013 end.

The bit about Air to Air refueling is new, unless I have missed out on it before. I was under the impression that MK1 does not have this incorporated as yet and was going to be retrofitted later on. Seems that have utilized the time, during the delays to incorporate this in the current series of aircrafts.

FOC in 2015 is really a dampener. This would mean that the production for the Mk1 will start from 2015 onwards and end near about 2020. Hopefully the MkII will be ready by 2020 and the production for the same can start thereafter.

The MkII I reckon, would prove to be more then a match for M2K-upg. Should actually stack up nicely against the Gripen-NG, if all the features being talked about are incorporated successfully.

Will
BRFite
Posts: 637
Joined: 28 Apr 2011 11:27

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby Will » 19 Oct 2012 19:20

Much as I hate to say it :( :( :( this seems more and more of a dead program now.

member_22605
BRFite
Posts: 159
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby member_22605 » 19 Oct 2012 21:12

[/quote] Yet neither the Mig-29 nor the LCA mk2 will find it easy to beat an MKI in a dogfight.[/quote]
Not sure about the MkII sir, but i seriously doubt it will be as tough for the MiG-29 to take it against the MKI, in fact if its an RD-33OVT equipped MiG then you can kiss your MKI goodbye as soon as you've decided to enter into a dogfight :wink:

PratikDas
BRFite
Posts: 1927
Joined: 06 Feb 2009 07:46
Contact:

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby PratikDas » 19 Oct 2012 21:52

Will wrote:Much as I hate to say it :( :( :( this seems more and more of a dead program now.

Half a page of posts and the program seems dead? News is certainly sparse and progress seems slow, but we're talking about a supplier meeting delivery terms for their customer - IAF, and as much as it bothers me, letting outsiders know which LCA features will be approved for operation first and which later is really a luxury that we wish for but is not a necessity. It doesn't mean the program is dead.

Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2636
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby Cybaru » 19 Oct 2012 22:51

How does idrw expect all the LCA avionics to be same? There is still testing proceeding. Once that is done, perhaps ADA might update all of them to the same level. For now this has come a long way from its first roll out in 2001. There are atleast a dozen LCA's flying around. 40 to be produced by 2016/2017.

Are we hurting by not having A2A mode in these aircraft? With MKI/Mig-29/Mirage/mig-21/Awacs, there are enough A2A platforms to deter any intrusion.

With more MKI added every year, Rafale being procured, revamp of the Mirage and mig-29 fleet, there is enough breathing room to get this right. Once the software gets working right, the hardware can be incrementally changed without it being such a huge endeavor, but the first time around, this is going to present it's own set of challenges.

With the A2G mode, most of your needs will be met. for now air superiorty role may remain with MKI/29/mirage and Rafales for a bit, till they iron out this new platform and get comfortable with it. The 40 mk-1 builds should outperform the mig-27 is almost all roles and once the radar gets online with A2A mode, perhaps more can be expected from LCA.

rajanb
BRFite
Posts: 1945
Joined: 03 Feb 2011 16:56

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby rajanb » 19 Oct 2012 23:48

^^^
Keep the faith Pratik.

Remember, the LCA program is the equivalent to the first shaky steps of a baby. Plagued by sanctions. And though we should have continued after we did the Marut, it is history that all agencies concerned did no progress our Marut shaky steps into firm strides.

I look back to the dogfight at Kalaikunda in 1965. Being an aviation enthusiast along other friends in our hostel, we wondered how the Hunters and Canberras would stack up against the "best" F86 at the time. Words cannot translate the what happened that day except to say that the IAF won that days battle with the lowly Hunter.

gnair
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 76
Joined: 19 Aug 2008 03:15

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby gnair » 20 Oct 2012 04:59

[quote][/quote]
Help this Abdul understand. With an under-powered engine shouldn't the mk1 be an out and out point defence fighter (and also) with high altitude bombing capabilities only? For a bombing run with dumb bombs wouldn't the LCA be vulnerable to ground fire as it tries to pull up albeit slowly just like the problems the Marut had?

I believe, on the contrary this would be an ideal close air-support, ground assault platform. For it's all up weight and size, it has an established payload weight of 4 tonnes in ordinance and that is impressive. Maybe a little less if there's a center line fuel load. Of the 6 hard points available on wing, 2 for wing tip self-defense missiles, 4 for a combination of anti-armor, cluster, free-fall and rocket pods of various caliber, a PGM or two depending on mission profile, and last but not the least increase the belt/rounds of the GSH-23 gun, if possible. All of this is definitely possible with the existing F-404 at 18,000 lbs thrust and with the flight envelop at current status quo. It sort of reminds me of an ultra modernized A-4 skyhawk, that did so well for it's self in the SE Asia theater.
Re-engined, upgraded A-4's flew around with the F-404's for more than a decade with the RSAF and RMAF, if i am not mistaken and there were no issues there, except for aging air frames. I am glad the Mig-27's are being removed from inventory, and we need a quick replacement, with either new build Jags or the LCA.

mody
BRFite
Posts: 794
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Mumbai, India

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby mody » 20 Oct 2012 12:29

Cybaru,
Its not the question as to what we feel is the IAF's most pressing requirement, whether a ground attack aircraft or a multirole aircraft.

The more important point is how to get the aircraft to reach its baseline performance specs, so that it can be incorporated into the IAF.

If the plane is supposed to be a replacement for the Mig-21s, it has to exceed the performance of the Mig-21 Bison.
IAF will not accept the aircraft in IAF service, if it cannot operate the aircraft for A2A roles. IAF will not accept the aircraft as a replacement for say Mig-27s and use it only for ground attack duties. At the very least, for the MK1 to be accepted by IAF, it will have demonstrate the full range ground attack capability, plus full integration of the MMR radar and associated avionics, ability to fire BVR and WVR missiles and atleast an incremental improvement in the turn rates and AoA. I would speculate that IAF will require the aircraft to improve its AoA from its present 22 degrees to atleast 26 degrees, and demonstrate performance upto atleast 7g (more like 8g) for it to be accepted. Further improvements will then be left for the MK-II version to achieve.
If MK-1 fails to reach these benchmark by end 2014 or early 2015, then I suspect the enthusiasm and support for Mk-II will go down significantly and we might see IAF pushing for increasing the numbers of the MMRCA program.

The MKII will have the minimum bar set at 28 degrees AoA, and 9g sustained turn rates, to be accepted.

Kakarat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2135
Joined: 26 Jan 2005 13:59

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby Kakarat » 23 Oct 2012 00:56

Photos of LCA Tejas Weapons Trials 2012

http://gallery.tejas.gov.in/Gallery/Det ... &k=xDxcKg9

Image

Image

Image

Image

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36417
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby SaiK » 23 Oct 2012 07:48

8->9g with full MTOW is something that needs to be verified.. i hope the simulations and wind tunnels had these calculated, plus de-rated for permissible variances.

I am not really concerned on the radar integration.. which is a phase moving slow, given our nature of operation (methodology) and setup.

so, no hopes lost, but it is definitely hurting, when people only keep talking chai-wala talks.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8263
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby Indranil » 23 Oct 2012 10:09

SaiK wrote:8->9g with full MTOW is something that needs to be verified.


Which plane does this?

member_20292
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2059
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby member_20292 » 23 Oct 2012 11:30

perhaps some future technology projection by saik!

vcsekhar
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 100
Joined: 01 Aug 2009 13:27
Location: Hyderabad, India

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby vcsekhar » 23 Oct 2012 12:44

I dont know where you got this information Narayana but the F16 was always designed to be the ultimate lightweight dog-fighting aircraft. In fact, the F16 embarrassed the F15 in the initial stages and that caused a great deal of heartburn among the F15 proponents in the USAF.
This was among the biggest reasons why they started putting bombs on the F16 to justify the status of the F15 as the premier air superiority aircraft in the USAF.
If you want to know more about the F16/F15 story read the Boyd book.
Here is one link: http://www.aviation-history.com/airmen/boyd.htm
here is another http://www.arlingtoncemetery.net/jrboyd.htm

cheers.

Narayana Rao wrote:Most I know like f15, su 27 are first a2a and then a2g but I know only a very little in this area. But I remember f16 is suppose to be bomb truck when first made and then proved to be a goof a2a ac also.

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

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby shiv » 23 Oct 2012 14:47

indranilroy wrote:
SaiK wrote:8->9g with full MTOW is something that needs to be verified.


Which plane does this?


Hmm a load of 2000 kg on each wing will be 18,000 kg per wing at 9G. Only Superman's pubic hair can withstand such stresses.

sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10113
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby sum » 23 Oct 2012 15:20

:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8380
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby Pratyush » 23 Oct 2012 16:01

Shiv Ji,

But the yell ceeeeeeee yaaaa is not superman. :P

Running away and ducking for cover in my kabe komplex.

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13262
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby Lalmohan » 23 Oct 2012 16:06

shiv, that is ridiculous. everyone knows that the loading in this case is strain and not stress...
unless the aircraft is upside down ofcourse...
mind you during transition... i guess it moves from strain to stress...
besides, have you ever seen superman's pubic hair?
no, because he doesnt have any
why do you think he wears his chaddi over his tights?
hain ji?

krishnan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7342
Joined: 07 Oct 2005 12:58
Location: 13° 04' N , 80° 17' E

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby krishnan » 23 Oct 2012 17:48

his pants are torn ???

member_20292
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2059
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby member_20292 » 23 Oct 2012 22:01

^^^^

LCA is the greatest plane in the world,

all other planes are flown by little girls.

LCA is made up of 100% composites,

All other planes use inferior composites.

(sung to the tune of Borat's "Kazhakstan's national anthem")

pentaiah
BRFite
Posts: 1671
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby pentaiah » 23 Oct 2012 22:26

krishnan wrote:Has any aircraft been first inducted in A2G role and then later on to A2A role ???



Its like asking WG engine ( designed for broad guage freight hauling) be used as engine for expres train which WP ( aka Canadian Pacific) designed to do.

Image

VS

Image

If tornado or F-111 were used as interceptor aia to air then Su-24 could also be used.

the nearest case is the use of Phantom F-4 as ground attack and air to air as well by Israelis in 1973 Yom Kippur war.

I think F-14 Tomcat can also do A to A
F-8A super hornet can also do A to G and A to A

A air craft designe to A to A can be converted to A to G
but A to G conversion to A to A will have limitation of speed.

Can tractor engine be used to demo a Race car possile but come last in the race.

***
LCA will be another Kaveri eternal

The end user doesnt want, the team LCA wants to give what they have to see how will it is and learn from there.....
For sure its better than MiG 21 with Bulgarian Butter milk spares which are sour by the time its reched into the aircraft and the the MiG 21 falls some times falls sick (that is fish bed ridden for want of new blood of spares)

Induct LCA let pilots play with it so that there is commitment by IAF

Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2636
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby Cybaru » 23 Oct 2012 22:57

mody wrote:Cybaru,
Its not the question as to what we feel is the IAF's most pressing requirement, whether a ground attack aircraft or a multirole aircraft.

The more important point is how to get the aircraft to reach its baseline performance specs, so that it can be incorporated into the IAF.

If the plane is supposed to be a replacement for the Mig-21s, it has to exceed the performance of the Mig-21 Bison.
IAF will not accept the aircraft in IAF service, if it cannot operate the aircraft for A2A roles. IAF will not accept the aircraft as a replacement for say Mig-27s and use it only for ground attack duties. At the very least, for the MK1 to be accepted by IAF, it will have demonstrate the full range ground attack capability, plus full integration of the MMR radar and associated avionics, ability to fire BVR and WVR missiles and atleast an incremental improvement in the turn rates and AoA. I would speculate that IAF will require the aircraft to improve its AoA from its present 22 degrees to atleast 26 degrees, and demonstrate performance upto atleast 7g (more like 8g) for it to be accepted. Further improvements will then be left for the MK-II version to achieve.
If MK-1 fails to reach these benchmark by end 2014 or early 2015, then I suspect the enthusiasm and support for Mk-II will go down significantly and we might see IAF pushing for increasing the numbers of the MMRCA program.

The MKII will have the minimum bar set at 28 degrees AoA, and 9g sustained turn rates, to be accepted.



I think it will happen good over time. This is a first for so many sub systems. We will work it out eventually.

arijitkm
BRFite
Posts: 137
Joined: 12 Oct 2009 23:23

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby arijitkm » 23 Oct 2012 23:31

Effort to make Tejas more ‘Indian’

In a concerted effort to reduce the percentage of foreign components in the Indian LCA Tejas fighter, the Aeronautical Development Agency has drawn up a comprehensive list of 111 aircraft line-replacable units (LRUs) that will be indigenised and built by Indian companies within the country. The ambitious list includes 21 avionics components (including gyro reference unit, tactical navigation antenna and GPS antenna), 27 environmental control components, 14 electrical components (including under-carriage display unit, integral drive generator and ground power receptacle), ejection seat, nine components in the flight control area (left and right air data sensors, angle of attack sensor, sensor assembly rate).

The list also includes several key LRUs in hydraulics, landing gear, propulsion and fuel, and the aircraft’s health and utility management system. In a statement announcing it’s interest, the ADA has said, “There are 358 LRUs (components) in the Tejas aircraft, out of which 53 per cent of total LRUs are indigenously developed within India. In view to reduce the remaining 47 per cent of the import LRUs, ADA has initiated the indigenous development programme for indigenisation of the import LRUs.”

PratikDas
BRFite
Posts: 1927
Joined: 06 Feb 2009 07:46
Contact:

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby PratikDas » 24 Oct 2012 02:50

That article should've focused on "Effort to make more Tejas".

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

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby shiv » 24 Oct 2012 05:43

PratikDas wrote:That article should've focused on "Effort to make more Tejas".

Pratik Das please recheck your Saras photo in the aircraft recognition thread. 8)

Dmurphy
BRFite
Posts: 1543
Joined: 03 Jun 2008 11:20
Location: India

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby Dmurphy » 24 Oct 2012 20:27

Found this on FB

Image

sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10113
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby sum » 25 Oct 2012 08:22

^^ Was browsing through Discovery on Tuesday and there was a programme on LCA ongoing. Was very good with lots of interviews with designers, piolts etc and good footage. Was this the one related to DRDO series on Discovery?

nakul
BRFite
Posts: 1251
Joined: 31 Aug 2011 10:39

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby nakul » 25 Oct 2012 21:04

An excellent post about the LCA program on keypubs by Teer. It is worthy of being an article of its own.

http://forum.keypublishing.com/showpost ... stcount=67

nash
BRFite
Posts: 893
Joined: 08 Aug 2008 16:48

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby nash » 25 Oct 2012 21:32

nakul wrote:An excellent post about the LCA program on keypubs by Teer. It is worthy of being an article of its own.

http://forum.keypublishing.com/showpost ... stcount=67


Almost all the point are echoed by many members here many time . but indeed a gem of writing by Teer.

Info about OAC is new to me.I Hope DRDO can indigenize more LRU,which will be further help full to bring down the cost and logistic issue.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8164
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby nachiket » 25 Oct 2012 22:01

pentaiah wrote:If tornado or F-111 were used as interceptor aia to air then Su-24 could also be used.

The Tornado was used as an interceptor. That version was called the ADV. Before the Typhoon came along, that was pretty much all the RAF had for a-to-a. Its foxhunter radar was apparently pretty good.

I think F-14 Tomcat can also do A to A

The F-14 was designed to do A to A from the start. It had a big radar, an ultra-long range AAM and good maneuverability.

F-8A super hornet can also do A to G and A to A

It had to replace botht he F-14 as well as the original F-18 in the USN. So both modes were equally important for it.

A air craft designe to A to A can be converted to A to G
but A to G conversion to A to A will have limitation of speed.

This doesn't apply to the LCA. It was never designed as an A to G fighter. It was in fact designed as an agile interceptor with a decent sized radar. So just because it cannot do A-to-A so well right now because the radar and BVRAAM integration isn't complete doesn't mean it will have problems later. The IAF can start re-equipping their Mig-27 squadrons with it (they recently said they would retire all of them by 2017) as soon as IOC-2 is obtained even if the a-to-a capabilities aren't fully ready.

member_23360
BRFite
Posts: 152
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby member_23360 » 25 Oct 2012 23:09

nakul wrote:An excellent post about the LCA program on keypubs by Teer. It is worthy of being an article of its own.

http://forum.keypublishing.com/showpost ... stcount=67


An excellent post, +1.

vina
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6046
Joined: 11 May 2005 06:56
Location: Doing Nijikaran, Udharikaran and Baazarikaran to Commies and Assorted Leftists

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby vina » 26 Oct 2012 13:44

nakul wrote:An excellent post about the LCA program on keypubs by Teer. It is worthy of being an article of its own.

http://forum.keypublishing.com/showpost ... stcount=67


Why do you guys bother going to that forum at all, and more importantly posting links from there to here. That forum is largely populated by cretinous Pakis and half baked retards, especially in the India related threads. Not worth your time to look at it and I dont' know why folks like Teer even bother trying to talk sense to them. The best answer , if at all you want to waste your time is to post a couple of links from Benis threads there!

karan_mc
BRFite
Posts: 700
Joined: 02 Dec 2006 20:53

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby karan_mc » 26 Oct 2012 14:09

Teer Jumps to the conclusion even before reading articles properly , IDRW report mentioned that since LSP are delivered years a part , This is leading to differences in aircraft , which is a problem since older aircrafts ( LSP-1/2/3 compared to LSP-7 ) will need to be pulled out from flights for upgrades effecting flight tests , He is trying to defend that LSP are supposed to be different but the Question is why HAL was able to deliver only 6 Aircrafts (LSP-1/2/3/4/5/7) in last 5 Years ?? , aren't PV Tejas supposed to be different but also LSP ? will IAF accept Difference in batches of SP Tejas ??

nakul
BRFite
Posts: 1251
Joined: 31 Aug 2011 10:39

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby nakul » 26 Oct 2012 14:15

From poison extract nectar; wash, reclaim gold even if filthy,
Get knowledge from all – as a good girl in bad family may be

-Chanakya

Teer Jumps to the conclusion even before reading articles properly , IDRW report mentioned that since LSP are delivered years a part , This is leading to differences in aircraft , which is a problem since older aircrafts ( LSP-1/2/3 compared to LSP-7 ) will need to be pulled out from flights for upgrades effecting flight tests , He is trying to defend that LSP are supposed to be different but the Question is why HAL was able to deliver only 6 Aircrafts (LSP-1/2/3/4/5/7) in last 5 Years ?? , aren't PV Tejas supposed to be different but also LSP ? will IAF accept Difference in batches of SP Tejas ??


Isn't having differently configured aircraft the reason behind so many LSPs? They could have stuck with 2-3 planes if the configuration was to be indentical. My understanding that different components are tested with different LSP aircraft. An aircraft configured for flight aerodynamics will be different from the one for bombing runs. These are just prototypes and they are supposed to be different.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19862
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: LCA News and Discussions

Postby Karan M » 27 Oct 2012 04:29

karan_mc wrote:Teer Jumps to the conclusion even before reading articles properly , IDRW report mentioned that since LSP are delivered years a part , This is leading to differences in aircraft , which is a problem since older aircrafts ( LSP-1/2/3 compared to LSP-7 ) will need to be pulled out from flights for upgrades effecting flight tests , He is trying to defend that LSP are supposed to be different but the Question is why HAL was able to deliver only 6 Aircrafts (LSP-1/2/3/4/5/7) in last 5 Years ?? , aren't PV Tejas supposed to be different but also LSP ? will IAF accept Difference in batches of SP Tejas ??


Hmm, that keypublishing link is not opening for some reason. Might be an ISP issue.

But IDRW is accessible and my adaware program says thanks but no thanks! Good then, that it is copied on this forum.

Their claims just dont make sense though. They clearly don't know much about the LCA, allusions to inside knowledge apart.

First, the LCA is in development & there are multiple reports stating that only the last few LSPs will be the standard the MK1s will be designed to! What talk of HAL taking time to make the LCAs when the aircraft are undergoing so many design revisions and tech insertions, which is after all the very basis of the program. That is, to develop a local aerospace industry.

We know that ADA/HAL effectively redesigned the entire fuel system after issues regarding possible flight safety concerns & leakage, and this was completed last year. We know that NAL supplied an autopilot which was incorporated into the LCA recently. Ajai Shukla's blog had the so called hush hush pics corroborating the MOD note that the LCA was receiving the local EW suite (a derivative of the MiG-27 suite). We know that an advanced OBOGs (MK2/3) is due for the LCA as well. That the radar issue was fixed just a couple of years back, and clearly Elta managed to deliver a functioning set with all the Indian components only recently since its now making its appearance on the LCAs..LSP 7 PR mentions it has an ILS as well.

Of course having different LSPs with different fits challenges the program. That is exactly the problem a country will face when developing subsystem after subsystem for the first time. With no program prior to have developed all these systems already, which could just be fit into the initial prototypes itself. And then making improved systems.

And limited funds to make a limited number of prototypes. Otherwise, yes HAL could have made 2-3 of each LSP-1, LSP-2 etc, but the advantages may not have accrued linearly. Take a look at the F-35 program. Concurrent engineering, build-fly-fix-fly, is proving more challenging than expected. So production rates have been slowed down, to fix all the issues to begin with, or as many as possible, and only then launch the aircraft.

Having said that ADA clearly adopted best in class procedures from worldwide programs where they could.

http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pu ... /R3687.pdf

Mentions that TDs were used by Rafale & EAP (austere prototyping), Lavi & Gripen went for fully missionized test aircraft with sensors developed concurrently.

Lets go to the LCA.

So, the TDs were the austere aircraft to demonstrate aircraft functional capability, after which "Full Scale Development" aka FSED in Tejas parlance was granted, and these comprise of both the PVs and LSPs, which have full weaponization & sensor suites being iteratively added. It was the IAF which basically set the pre-condition that FSED would only be launched after the TD phase was demonstrated to their satisfaction. Add sanctions etc, and its a wonder the program continued.

No airframe is being wasted. PVs & LSPs are being used for A2G trials, while PV-1 took the full internal EW suite, and LSP-7 took off with a sensor fit close to the IOC standard. LSPs & SPs will be used to get to FOC as well, if PVs run out of airframe hours by that time.

So lets look at IOC/LSP intent.

LCA Tejas LSP-7 Flies

DRDO Statement:

Tejas Limited Series Production - 7 (LSP-7) aircraft took-off for its maiden flight from HAL airport at 4:27 pm on 9th March 2012. This test flight is significant for the program, as LSP -7 build-standard is close to the initial operational clearance (IOC) standard. Accordingly LSP -7 aircraft, along with LSP - 8 will be offered to the Indian Air Force for user evaluation trials (UET).

The flight was also significant considering the fact that for the first time “Production Test Schedule” was used for the first flight of an LSP aircraft in this program. This is also the first time that maiden flight of the aircraft was not accompanied by the customary ‘chase’ aircraft, which is an indicator to the level of confidence in the machine.

Flight lasted 28 minutes with Gp Capt KK Venugopal at the controls in the cockpit and Wg Cdr Kabadwal of the National Flight Test Centre (NFTC) as Test Director in the telemetry. During the test flight, performance of the aircraft systems including Multi-mode Radar (MMR), Helmet Mounted Display System (HMDS), Auto-pilot and Instrument Landing System (ILS) was satisfactory, providing a moment of pride for all the stake holders which include ADA, HAL, IAF, CEMILAC, DG AQA, ADE and NAL among others.

No new Tejas airframe has flown since November 2010 flight of the LSP-5 (the LSP-6 is a special airframe to achieve envelope expansion). Now, with final ground tests nearing completion, the airframe is finally ready for its first flight. The LSP-7 and LSP-8 will be the final two limited series production aircraft. They will be followed by series production (SP-1, 2 etc) aircraft.


They have kept LSP-6 for increasing the flight envelope & achieve maximum possible AoA with the current configuration. Makes sense to do so with an aircraft of the LSP series, which approach as closely as possible (with iterative development) to the IOC/FOC standard, then with the PV's, which will have differing aero-mass characteristics, different handling etc.

Next, IDRW claim that the current performance is no great deal or some such thing. Did they even do some basic comparison of weapons loads, sensor performance versus other IAF aircraft like the MiG-27 etc? They dont even appear to know the well known by now fact that full A2A capability is slated for FOC, as it always was! So what is new?

Looks like it is another publicity hungry site like that 8AK one which used to manufacture news to get publicity.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 9 guests