LCA News and Discussions

[jahaju]

LCA-Tejas has completed 2349 Test Flights Successfully. (18-Oct-2013).
(TD1-233,TD2-305,PV1-242,PV2-222,PV3-375,LSP1-74,LSP2-286,PV5-36,LSP3-162,LSP4-94,LSP5-220,LSP7-65,NP1-4,LSP8-31)

From

LCA-Tejas has completed 2332 Test Flights Successfully. (28-Sep-2013).
(TD1-233,TD2-305,PV1-242,PV2-222,PV3-371,LSP1-74,LSP2-286,PV5-36,LSP3-157,LSP4-94,LSP5-220,LSP7-60,NP1-4,LSP8-28)

[srai]

^^^

Need to be on the watch for PV1-EW flight!

[jamwal]

I always thought that EW was an integral part of Tejas program. Now there is this news that no plane as ever flown with it This gives already reluctant IAF a huge stick to beat this program. Not saying that IAF wasn't aware of it.

Are these guys so unsure of their own capabilities or am I missing something about how planes are designed ? If plane crash was an issue, then how they'll fit the system on to later LSP models after testing it on the one which has been grounded for 8 frigging years ?
Something is really effed up

[srai]

This is the first time a fully integrated EW (warning, jamming, decoy and associated software/hardware) is being tested on a LCA platform. Various EW components have been tested out over the years as separate and partially integrated pieces. Some examples of this are various LCA test platforms sporting RWR (or something like it) on their tails and completing chaff/flare release trials in Goa and in recent training operational exercise.

[negi]

Well EW suite integration is a big deal the pace of the testing does not bother me; the way I see things fighter platforms today have more or less stagnated in terms of core capabilities (honestly if Tejas was a wee bit bigger it would have been pretty much in same class as any of the MMRCA contender and for anyone's first/second fighter that is as good as one can get); apart from the engine (there again not everyone makes their own ) , LPI and appropriate shaping of fuselage to reduce RCS below 0.0X m^2 all other areas are covered under the Tejas program so given our MIL industrial prowess and infra in this field it does not really hurt us if we are 10 years late because what we are doing is the hardest part . In fact I would say more than the LPI and low RCS thingy we need to just get one more piece right i.e. the engine and then we would have truly arrived on the big table.

[vic]

Does reference to emitter in LCA electronic warfare suite mean DIRCM?

[Karan M]

I always thought that EW was an integral part of Tejas program. Now there is this news that no plane as ever flown with it This gives already reluctant IAF a huge stick to beat this program. Not saying that IAF wasn't aware of it.

Are these guys so unsure of their own capabilities or am I missing something about how planes are designed ? If plane crash was an issue, then how they'll fit the system on to later LSP models after testing it on the one which has been grounded for 8 frigging years ?
Something is really effed up

You are mixing up things. EW in the LCA program was via the 8th pylon - "special pylon", which is where an external EW pod would be carried. Now, they are moving the EW system internal, which is always a challenge with a tightly packed design like the LCA. As matter of fact, even the Su-30 MKI cannot fit in an internal EW suite and can carry only wingtip mounted pods.

As regards the plane crashing stuff - thats a bit of hyperbole from the journalist. If you put in a powerful EW system within an aircraft, obviously there will be EMI/EMC concerns. But India does have the facilities and technical acumen to check this out. It would be more a case of don't gild the lily - i.e. dont focus on putting in an internal EW suite until and unless the customer asks for it, and sufficient engineering resources are available after more critical requirements have been met.

[Karan M]

Does reference to emitter in LCA electronic warfare suite mean DIRCM?

RF emitter, jammer.

[putnanja]

Will the integrated EW suite be offered only in Mk-II? I would expect the config to be frozen for Mk-1 serial production now.

[nikhil_p]

I was just discussing the EW/ECM . Thingy with a friend who works with aerospace systems. He said that integrating that into a highly electronic FBW a/c which has FADEC controlled through inputs from FBW system does pose problems. Most a/c are externally strengthened against RF emissions. It is when emissions are internally generated and also within a certain range of other Unshielded electronics that it can interfere with systems esp. the FBW.
Carrying an ECM pod will mean that the system is external to a/c which the skin of the a/c will protect against. But internal pose a new challenge. It also affects the dynamics of the a/c as it may add weight to the tail or nose both of which affect the pitch and yaw of the aircraft.

Don't know how much of this is accurate though I do trust his knowledge. Guru log please advise.

[Karan M]

He is correct. Putting any new high power RF emitter within the aircraft will require a fair amount of checking and also shielding nearby equipment (their packaging may need to be redesigned - which may mean additional weight concerns, provided their is space to include these items). Also, its an issue of time and money.
Basically, a risk averse program (like the LCA) would not proceed with this, until there was a fair degree of confidence that they could pull this off without having any adverse event
Has this been done before? Yes, with the MiG-27, but it is not really an electric aircraft and also, many of its systems were already designed to be robust against EMI/EMC issues.

[Karan M]

Will the integrated EW suite be offered only in Mk-II? I would expect the config to be frozen for Mk-1 serial production now.

Its meant for MK-2.
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/217/tejasmk2.jpg/

[A Sharma]

Ajay Shukla in 2011 had mentioned about PV-1 on Broadsword.He was also specific that its is not an "EW suite" being fitted on the LCA but PV-1 being modified for an EW role.

[Karan M]

Ajai gets good info, but sometimes does make mistakes. Amongst his slightly meandering reports are his reportage of Astra ranges (misleading) ..

He does attempt to convey what he is told, without masala, which makes him better than 90% of the reporters out there, but he is not infallible.

Anyways, if you still want more confirmation, see this:
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ZwHf70wl1x8/T ... 1+LCA+.jpg

Note, that even MiG-27s equipped with EL/L-8222 SPJ are being used for "EW" by IAF. Whereas technically, EL/L-8222 is a Self Protection and not escort jammer, so you can make the case that the LCA can be used likewise (the RWJ is easily equivalent to the 8222 pod and actually better

[A Sharma]

Thx Karan. May be they are turning PV-1 into Growler. Just my guess or hope should I say.

[Karan M]

Growler is a platform with dedicated EW role, which means a lot of extra wiring, power and the ability to carry a range of pods across many bands bar those typically involved in a/c self protection. In our case the LCA will be very effective at protecting itself and by virtue of its small size/lower RCS and this powerful EW suite can play a EW role. But can it perform full strike package/escort jamming /protection like Growler is meant to? Not really, it's not meant for that. For that we will have dedicated escort jammers.

[SaiK]

so, a combination of LCA + MKI can be used on certain mission specific strike squad combination. when mk-2 comes, the envelope can go deeper.

it would be a big report for someone to come up with an article post-EW testing phase of LCA. lots of interesting times ahead.

I hope LCA makes an impressive show at ADEX-2013!

==

btw, q @karan m: on the misattribute to flight safety, I think that DH link points to the fear of flight safety after fitting the EW suite. can you explain what would be such a cause of worry? is it the additional weight or the integration with mission computer that might not handle the other functioning of a/c?

well.. don't really understand if that was not part of the models that V&Ved on simulations.

[chackojoseph]

I was just discussing the EW/ECM . Thingy with a friend who works with aerospace systems. He said that integrating that into a highly electronic FBW a/c which has FADEC controlled through inputs from FBW system does pose problems. Most a/c are externally strengthened against RF emissions. It is when emissions are internally generated and also within a certain range of other Unshielded electronics that it can interfere with systems esp. the FBW.
Carrying an ECM pod will mean that the system is external to a/c which the skin of the a/c will protect against. But internal pose a new challenge. It also affects the dynamics of the a/c as it may add weight to the tail or nose both of which affect the pitch and yaw of the aircraft.

Don't know how much of this is accurate though I do trust his knowledge. Guru log please advise.

That's correct. Have you installed anti virus in your PC and it blocks internet. Imagine PC is the aircraft and internet is FBW. It is only a way to make you understand. The configuration, shielding etc have to be correct.

If a LCA prototype had crashed in past, there were great possibilities that the project would have been shelved.

[pragnya]

Karan M,

actually even i got the impression that SP series prod will have internal EW as Putnanja thought. however i note you have been saying LCA mark 1 will only carry external EW Pod and that the internal will only happen with Mark 2.

You are mixing up things. EW in the LCA program was via the 8th pylon - "special pylon", which is where an external EW pod would be carried. Now, they are moving the EW system internal, which is always a challenge with a tightly packed design like the LCA. As matter of fact, even the Su-30 MKI cannot fit in an internal EW suite and can carry only wingtip mounted pods.

to the highlighted, that simply means LCA mark 1 will carry either the LDP or EW pod depending on the mission profile. so in a group of flight (LCA being omni role) few may carry LDPs and a few EW pods and the datalinks on all will allow them to communicate with each other wrt the coordinates of target etc..??

[Singha]

imo given our large nos of su30, perhaps 24 of the oldest ones can be divided into 3 desi growler squadrons (8 each) and modified with whatever is needed - no lack of WSO, pylon space or power being a twin engine. assign one each to western/SWAC , northern and eastern commands. being long range, each sqdn could fly from its own base but provide support to strikes emanating from other bases in the region. put in a ventral external tank if need be. could be part of composite ELINT/EW sqdns with the EMB145 and other biz jets for Elint role being tendered for.

its time to get creative with the su30 just as the cheen are always tinkering with it adding their own missiles and pods now.

infact we could have done that with the Su30's we sent back to Russia and now sold to algeria refurbish the airframes and put in the kit.

[Kartik]

Singha, small correction- those Su-30Ks got sold to Angola not Algeria. Algeria is a Su-30MKA operator.

[Singha]

Rus already has this huge pod for centerline pylon of flanker family
http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Su-35S-Flanker.html

The heavyweight high power KNIRTI SAP-14 Support Jammer ECM pod is a Russian analogue to the US ALQ-99E pod carried on the EA-6B Prowler and EA-18G Growler. It was developed for Flanker family aircraft and is carried on a large centreline pylon. To date little has been disclosed about this design, but it has been observed on the Su-30MK Flanker G/H and Su-34 Fullback. It operates between 1 GHz and 4 GHz (© 2009 Vitaliy V. Kuzmin).

--
take a look, even the new wingtip SAP-518 pods are as meaty as ASMs!

--
from deagel:

Description: The SAP-14 is an advanced jamming pod intended for heavy strike fighters such as Russian Air Force Sukhoi Su-30MK, and Su-32/34 and Indian Air Force Su-30MKI. Its primary mission is to jam advanced air defenses during ground attack missions imitating electronic signatures of various aircraft while generating false targets within enemy sensors. The SAP-14 covers NATO surface-to-air and air-to-air threats in the D-F bands and is deployed in one large, centerline pod. Installed on a single aircraft along with two SAP-518 jamming pods is considered similar to the United States ALQ-99 jamming system installed on the EA-6B Prowler and EA-18G Growler electronic attack aircraft. The electronic warfare system has been developed and manufactured by the Kaluzhsky Scientific Research Radio-Technical Institute (KNIRTI). Its existence was revealed at the MAKS 2009 airshow.

--
aviation week
http://www.aviationweek.com/blogs.aspx? ... 04eb28a9aa

The SAP 14 has already been exported, according to a Knirti brochure. The brochure shows the pod fitted to what it describes as an Su-30MKI (pictured below). The aircraft, side number 02, is believed to have been involved in the Su-30MKI development for India, suggesting that the SAP 14 may have at least been on offer.

[SaiK]

I am viewing from various integration angle, and trying to understand the safety concern aspect.
for example: http://www.terma.com/media/105013/integ ... ochure.pdf

not really narrowed to any particular area of concern for flight safety with a decision support system - largely speaking... unless the EW does some automatic piloting.

[Karan M]

Pragnya, ideally each and every LCA should carry an EW pod. If not at the "special pylon", then on one of the wing pylons ... In recent days, the 8th pylon has only been seen with a LDP. So by having an internal suite, no need to have additional pods or manage those logistics
Which is why having an internal EW fit makes so much sense..

[Indranil]

Time for new thread guys. Here's the link to the new thread. Click