LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 09 Dec 2013 00:37

indranilroy wrote:I am aware of this and and some other ones too. I was not trying to be exhaustive. My point was the end-game would always be at subsonic speeds. No plane is agile at supersonic speeds.

One of the interesting things possible is if they integrate the TFR mode into an aircraft with the highspeed dive and some preplanned maneuvers. Will have to be as automatic as possible. Without TFR, a pilot going supersonic at low level would be very risky.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 09 Dec 2013 00:42

also, the end game need not be subsonic. it can be supersonic, since for every limited g the aircraft pulls, the missile will have to pull many many more to turn within the aircraft (especially if it needs to keep aircraft within seeker FOV). the big issue though, is fuel. going supersonic and maintaining it will empty the tanks like lightning.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 09 Dec 2013 00:53

^^^ Some years ago Rao Sahab you and I argued when I had said that LCA is the defacto MMRCA. Glad to see you accepting it.

LCA for MMRCA. : lol :

AMCA. To me the LCA IOC-2 is the rebirth of the AMCA.

LCA is nice (would be better if IAF gets 150-200 of them, that would be serious stuff), but AMCA is the real deal. Kill the MMRCA, pour the funds into some LCAs and the AMCA. Actually I would like to kill the FGFA too.

Unlike the combat proven Rafale

At $20+ billion? I will take it $10-12 billion and at $15 billion with armament.

srai · Post by **srai** » 09 Dec 2013 03:17

RKumar wrote:
Kersi D wrote:
Hey I am anxiuosly waiting fro an answer.

K
IAF begins establishing first LCA squadron

The first squadron of LCA will be the IAF’s 45th squadron, the Flying Daggers. They would first be based in Bangalore before being stationed at Sulur, near Coimbatore, where the IAF wants the first squadron positioned.
Cheers,

A senior retired IAF Official said that a squadron would, generally comprise of 18 pilots and will have a service aircraft, a standby platform and a trainer. However, he added that the number could vary depending on the aircraft and other variables.

This clarifies that typical number of aircrafts assigned to a squadron is 21:

18 x active aircrafts
1 x aircraft in servicing
1 x standby aircraft
1 x trainer aircraft

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 09 Dec 2013 05:40

Abhi - fool and his money are easily parted. I hope they still teach that in India. And with the rupee at record lows, there isn't enough money to keep splurging on phancy phoren toyz!! The LCA provides a huge opportunity to the IAF and the IN. It will be a pity if they pass this one by.

sivab · Post by **sivab** » 09 Dec 2013 07:39

http://www.business-standard.com/articl ... 025_1.html

Tejas LCA sprints towards IAF's frontline squadron

If the indigenous Tejas Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) has taken decades for completion, it is now in a record-breaking sprint to the finish line. The Tejas has flown an unprecedented 450 test flights this year towards a splashy ceremony in Bangalore scheduled for December 20, where Defence Minister A K Antony will preside over its induction into the Indian Air Force (IAF).

That landmark event will be the award of the Tejas' Initial Operational Certificate (IOC), which will allow the country's first indigenous modern fighter to be flown by regular pilots of the Indian Air Force (IAF). The first Tejas squadron (18-20 fighters) will be based at Sulur, near Coimbatore.

So far, only highly qualified test pilots of the National Flight Testing Centre (NFTC) in Bangalore have flown the Tejas. In the 2,400 test flights since it took to the air in 2001, the NFTC has incrementally flown the Tejas higher, faster and carried out increasingly difficult manoeuvres and weapon firings to test it meets the IAF's requirements.

On Saturday, Group Captain Suneet Verma, a veteran NFTC test pilot, fired an air-to-air missile from the Tejas at an airborne target off the Goa coast, striking the target and taking the Tejas a step closer towards IOC.

While awarding the IOC, Antony will ceremonially hand over to the IAF boss, Air Chief Marshal N A K Browne, the fighter's "Release to Service Document (RSD)", which specifies the capabilities the Tejas has already demonstrated during flight testing.

This includes aerodynamic capabilities like speed, acceleration, climb rate and angle of attack; and also the basic weapons operations already tested on the Tejas, and the fighter's proven radar and sensor capabilities. The Tejas flight-testing programme has been a prolonged and painstaking exercise, since this is India's first modern fighter. The Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA) - a special purpose vehicle of the Defence R&D Organisation (DRDO), set up to manage the Tejas programme - worried that a crash during flight-testing might be a fatal blow to the project itself, and so has handled flight testing cautiously, taking twice the time that experienced countries do.

Once the IOC is awarded, Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL) will build the IAF's first 20 Tejas fighters on a brand new production line in Bangalore. HAL has told Business Standard that it aims to roll out the first two fighters by March 2014, deliver eight fighters by end-2014, and then enhance the production line's capability to 16 fighters a year.

So far, the IAF has committed to just 40 Tejas fighters. Of these, 20 will be built to IOC standards, and the next 20 ordered when Final Operation Clearance (FOC) is obtained. The defence minister has ordered the DRDO to ensure the FOC is not delayed beyond end-2014.

Avinash Chander, the DRDO chief, tells Business Standard the FOC will involve firing a range of different weapons, including missiles and bombs, and testing the fighter for mid-air refuelling.

"With the IAF now enthused about the Tejas, and participating actively in the project, we will surely obtain FOC next year. We could not have completed over 450 test flights this year without close cooperation between the IAF, ADA and HAL," says Chander.

After obtaining FOC for the Tejas, ADA will start work on the Tejas Mark II. The key change is replacing the General Electric F-404 engine that powers the Mark I with the larger, more powerful GE F-414 engine. This will involve re-engineering the Mark I to fit in the bulkier F-414, a technological challenge for ADA.

ADA has also briefed Business Standard that the Tejas Mark II would have more fuel capacity for added range; a retractable mid-air refuelling system; a DRDO-built Airborne Electronically Scanned Array radar; world beating air-to-air missiles; an on-board oxygen-generating system, and a state-of-the-art Electronic Warfare suite to confuse enemy radars and sensors. "Eventually, the IAF is very likely to have at least 200 Tejas fighters in its fleet," says Chander.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 09 Dec 2013 08:06

^that is quite emphatic victory to what we have been saying all over the years by now (at least a decade).. that a strong stakeholder participation can convert even a Bandar to a Sundar weapon system. well, fantastic news about publicly referenced AESA radar now for Mk2 and retractable fueling system.

deep strike squadrons is a surety and definitely a growler variant as well.

nash · Post by **nash** » 09 Dec 2013 08:36

sivab wrote:http://www.business-standard.com/articl ... 025_1.html

After obtaining FOC for the Tejas, ADA will start work on the Tejas Mark II. The key change is replacing the General Electric F-404 engine that powers the Mark I with the larger, more powerful GE F-414 engine. This will involve re-engineering the Mark I to fit in the bulkier F-414, a technological challenge for ADA.

So IF LCA achieve FOC by 2014 then only work on MkII will start and if it get delayed then MkII will also get delayed. But i think work on MkII should done parallely.

All go well then by 2016 we can see first flight of MkII and hopefully by 2018 induction in IAF.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 09 Dec 2013 08:50

sivab wrote: Tejas LCA sprints towards IAF's frontline squadron

"Eventually, the IAF is very likely to have at least 200 Tejas fighters in its fleet," says Chander[/b].

BEST news ...............................

Now they are talking.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 09 Dec 2013 09:14

Congrats to ADA, NFTC, HAL and DRDO for meeting the IOC-2 deadline. Now keeping my fingers crossed that HAL meets all the timelines for the 40 Tejas Mk1 fighter production.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 09 Dec 2013 09:16

nash wrote: So IF LCA achieve FOC by 2014 then only work on MkII will start and if it get delayed then MkII will also get delayed. But i think work on MkII should done parallely.

All go well then by 2016 we can see first flight of MkII and hopefully by 2018 induction in IAF.

It is going on in parallel. The first prototype of MkII is being built now.

pragnya · Post by **pragnya** » 09 Dec 2013 09:40

great news. congrats ADA/DRDO/HAL.

sivab wrote:http://www.business-standard.com/articl ... 025_1.html

................

Avinash Chander, the DRDO chief, tells Business Standard the FOC will involve firing a range of different weapons, including missiles and bombs, and testing the fighter for mid-air refuelling.

interesting. LCA mark 1 will have IFR probe?? doesn't it need plumbing?? won't it add weight penalty and affect the CG?? or has the ADA accounted this for?? what timeline before it is operationalised?? it is known for a fact Cobham was supposed to retrofit it.

srai · Post by **srai** » 09 Dec 2013 10:23

The IAF should order another 20 LCA Mk.1 to keep the production line of 16 aircraft/year humming till Mk.2 variant is ready sometime around 2018. Current order of 40 Mk.1 will be fulfilled by 2016 end.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 09 Dec 2013 11:09

they could just go with a fixed probe for the Tejas Mk1. Would be much easier than having to find space for the probe and actuator system for the retractable probe along with a change in the panel into which the probe would snugly fit..the IAF is alright with the MRCA winner having a fixed probe, so that shouldn't be an issue. Even our Mirages have fixed probes, so really minor difference visibility, RCS and drag wise shouldn't make much of a difference as opposed to the ease of integration.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 09 Dec 2013 11:10

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 09 Dec 2013 11:13

srai wrote:The IAF should order another 20 LCA Mk.1 to keep the production line of 16 aircraft/year humming till Mk.2 variant is ready sometime around 2018. Current order of 40 Mk.1 will be fulfilled by 2016 end.

My guess is that once the IAF gets its hands on the Tejas Mk1 and actually has operational pilots and technicians who've been on MiG-21s of various vintages using it, the IAF will begin to convert into a believer. At that point, more orders may be forthcoming, if HAL doesn't manage to screw it up with delays for the first 20.

Neshant · Post by **Neshant** » 09 Dec 2013 11:40

It will really boost the morale of all Indians if this project works out.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 09 Dec 2013 12:30

Now that the IAF is firmly embedded in the programme as the most important stakeholder,and from all the year's statements by the chief and other senior officers,waiting and working with the other agencies for the LCA's induction,the tide has turned in its favour. Once the aircraft is in IAF hands,any glitches,improvements ,etc. ,will be identified and passed on to HAL for modifications for series production aircraft. Much of the work can even be done by the BRDs,frist familiarising themselves with the aircraft which will serve us for 3-4 decades if 200 are to be eventually procured. Perhaps one reason why Sulur was chosen as the base for the first sqd. is because it is close to BLR,plus is already a designated BRD ,which should be able to carry out any work at the base itself under HAL's guidance.

Coming in the same week where the first lot of MIG-21 FLs are being phased out is a great way to pass on the baton to the Tejas.
There is a lot of work to be done before MK-2 reaches the same status,as major modifications are planned.If the same pace and focus given to getting Mk-1 for IOC is maintained for the MK-2,then hopefully we can see MK-2 production also start before the decade's end and as the remaining MIG-21s are phased out,the LCAs will replace them in turn.This will relieve the IAF of crisis efforts in keeping vintage MIG-21s still flying to maintain its flee strength.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 09 Dec 2013 16:28

Karan M wrote:also, the end game need not be subsonic. it can be supersonic, since for every limited g the aircraft pulls, the missile will have to pull many many more to turn within the aircraft (especially if it needs to keep aircraft within seeker FOV). the big issue though, is fuel. going supersonic and maintaining it will empty the tanks like lightning.

An aircraft generally can't pull many Gs while travelling supersonic. On the other hand, A2A missiles have airframes specifically designed for this. Most modern missiles can pull in excess of 30 Gs. Coupled with TVC, they can keep the aircraft within their FOV, even when they are skidding into the turn.

Actually, if you want to get out of the FOV, you should gun for the speed at which you can change your angular velocity at the fastest rate wrt to the missile. That speed is subsonic for all planes that I know of. There are two contradictory effects in play here. 1. Lift (+/- gravity) provides the centripetal force required for the turn, which increases non-linearly with speed. 2. For a given centripetal force, angular velocity falls proportionally to the increase in linear peed. Of course drag and power have rolls to play too, but let's not get there today.

srin · Post by **srin** » 09 Dec 2013 16:36

Even if the airframe allows maneuvering an aircraft to break the lock, the pilot can only sustain so many G's. They typically blackout at around 12G's. A missile doesn't have that handicap.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 09 Dec 2013 16:51

indranilroy wrote:An aircraft generally can't pull many Gs while travelling supersonic. On the other hand, A2A missiles have airframes specifically designed for this. Most modern missiles can pull in excess of 30 Gs. Coupled with TVC, they can keep the aircraft within their FOV, even when they are skidding into the turn.

checking my scribbled notes, if the aircraft is pulling x g's, the missile has to pull the same G's X difference in speed squared. missiles can't throttle (Meteor supposedly can to a limited extent), so higher speed, higher G's, higher turn radius. which is why the aircraft can go at much lower g's but the missile by default has to put in extra effort.

Actually, if you want to get out of the FOV, you should gun for the speed at which you can change your angular velocity at the fastest rate wrt to the missile. That speed is subsonic for all planes that I know of. There are two contradictory effects in play here. 1. Lift (+/- gravity) provides the centripetal force required for the turn, which increases non-linearly with speed. 2. For a given centripetal force, angular velocity falls proportionally to the increase in linear peed. Of course drag and power have rolls to play too, but let's not get there today.

the issue is whether you know where the missile is targeting you and whether you are in its FOV or not. so what you'll do is try and maximize several factors at once. try to break lock (assuming you are in the FOV of the radar and or missile) and maximize distance between yourself and the missile and attempt to waste missiles energy (since most of these use Proportional navigation and "lead" the target, so rapid changes in direction will help) and also put excess strain on the seeker (for RF, receding targets even without ground clutter have acquisition ranges at a third of approaching ones; for IR afterburner signatures are higher). while all this going on, soft kill is working too (ECM of whatever kind). so tactics will have to take all these factors into account at the same time.

modern sraams using IIR seekers are another complication. no way to jam them.

imo, given how complex these things can get, i bet IAF (and all AF) have a predetermined set of maneuvers taught for certain criteria and for maximum safety, they will automatically follow these maneuvers given a function of range (1st criteria, since it determines time available) and missile type (2nd- determines soft kill measures - automatic assumption, that BVR/SAM is RF, WVR is IR and also whether speed and airframe heating is avoidable).

in short, subsonic will work, if you are far away and have an early detection (more time to play cat and mouse) OR you got taken by surprise and have to react instantly (instead of waiting for the engine to spool up). not necessary that it will be ineffective. but timing is critical, and that depends on pilot skill. in ODS, Iraqi pilots with limited training repeatedly tried subsonic evasion, and failed due to a variety of factors.

supersonic will be used for maximum safety (take a rapid turn at subsonic speed, tight turns possible, more G's can be piled on) and then go supersonic - either diving towards the ground or after a second change in direction. aim being to break doppler radar lock and also missile lock.
all this possible, if your missiles have already gone active or you are willing to escape rather than stick on and pursue.

taken in combination, these would result in a rapid change in direction, plus speed (adding further energy so as to give more options)

the EF has an interesting pilot friendly solution. maneuvers display on the MFD with verbal cues for the pilot to initiate.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 09 Dec 2013 17:28

Kartik wrote:they could just go with a fixed probe for the Tejas Mk1. Would be much easier than having to find space for the probe and actuator system for the retractable probe along with a change in the panel into which the probe would snugly fit..the IAF is alright with the MRCA winner having a fixed probe, so that shouldn't be an issue. Even our Mirages have fixed probes, so really minor difference visibility, RCS and drag wise shouldn't make much of a difference as opposed to the ease of integration.

Drag is precisely the issue for which they're going with a retractable proble. Mirage, Sea Harrier, Rafale dont have the drag problem. Tejas turned out more draggy than expected. http://drdo.gov.in/drdo/pub/dss/2009/main/2-CEMILAC.pdf Page 8

Based on released images, they'll use something very similar to the Jaguar retractable probe, if not the same probe itself. More than probe, internal plumbing inside the small fighter is where the real design challenge lies.

RKumar · Post by **RKumar** » 09 Dec 2013 17:30

Step 2: FOC and Fast Tracking Tejas MK-2 Development

Good summary ... Realistic to expect 4 SP planes any more in 2014 beside LSP)

It took almost 3 years and record breaking test flights of 450 for Drdo along with HAL to achieve IOC-2 for Lca Tejas Aircraft; Tejas which achieved Partial IOC-1 in January 10, 2011, will be granted IOC-2 on 20th December of this month, which will also lead to formal induction of Tejas into Indian air force after almost 13 years in testing after its first flight in 2001.

IOC-2 clearance also gives Tejas operational capability to use WVR (Within Visual Range) AAM (Air to Air Missile) like Russian made R-73 in Active combat roles and recent test conducted in Ins Hansa base in Goa over Arabian sea confirms that Tejas now has ability to track and destroy aircrafts Within Visual Range .

IOC-2 also clears Tejas to be used for Ground attack roles and have cleared tests for use of laser-guided 1000-lbs bombs and unguided bombs. DRDO plans to achieve FOC by end of 2014 , FOC certification will include integration and Successful firing of Rafael Derby or the Vympel R-77 for BVR ( Beyond Visual Range ) AAM (Air to Air Missile) Roles and also will require clearance of High Altitude Bombing runs which will be carried out in Leh next .

FOC will also see Demonstration of Inflight Air-to-Air refueling capability by Tejas aircraft , Fixed Refueling probes in past have been successfully integrated and tested on ground and current LSP ( limited Serial Production) Tejas Aircrafts already have required Piping and plumbing systems integrated in the aircraft so adding Refueling Probes will see lesser time consumption .

FOC will also require higher AOA (Angle of Attack) from current 22-24 degrees to 28 degrees but this also has high risk element of Flame out. usually aircrafts are designed to handle much higher AOA then 28 degrees but Tejas Air-intakes which are smaller and have some design flaws might make it High Risk Test for Tejas , But ADA and HAL are planning to integrate a Backup Power Pack to allow engine restart if flames out does occur has a safety mechanism.

HAL has promised to deliver first SP (Serial Production) 1 and 2 by end of March 2014 and another 2 aircrafts by end of 2014, IAF has placed orders for 20 IOC-2 Certified aircrafts and 20 FOC certified aircrafts based on Tejas MK-1. HAL Plans to start work on first Prototype of Tejas MK-2 next year and have it ready for its first flight by end of 2015, GE will be sending first batch of F414-GE-INS6 which will power Tejas MK-2 in early 2014.

Tejas MK-2 will also have a newly laid out cockpit layout with better computing power since it also be housing new mission control computer, Samtel Display Systems(SDS) is also working on touch based Multi-Function Displays (MFD) for Tejas Mk-2 , which will later find its way in AMCA too .

Tejas Mk-2 will also see structural changes in the aircraft which will be noticeable in wider wing span to carry extra weapons load along with extra fuel, aircraft will also have large air intakes to let the high thrust engine generate additional power for the aircraft, engine change for Tejas Mk-2 will result in the rear fuselage being changed too.

Commonality between Tejas Mk-1 and Tejas MK-2 will be digital Fly by Wire (FBW) Flight Control System (FCS) along with some avionics which both aircraft will share, but sources also told us that FBW Software will require some modification in them to support structural changes which Tejas MK-2 will have.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 09 Dec 2013 17:57

Karan,

I suggest you to read about corner speed of an aircraft. In case of an close combat engagement, the thumb rule is if you are going at faster than the corner speed. you pull maximum Gs possible to slow down to your corner speed and then maintain that speed. That speed is dependent on the weight of the plane, and goes up with increase in weight. But typically for most fighter planes they are between 450 and 700 kmph.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 09 Dec 2013 18:08

know about corner speed and structural limits and optimum turn performance obtained at that level, but having read my fair share of combat aviation books and talked to aviators, my understanding is that its clear there is no one size fits all approach. some may prefer slash attacks and avoid getting into a turning fight completely. others with better turn performance may prefer to engage in sustained subsonic maneuvers, where maneuvering at corner speed makes optimal sense.

in fact, makes more and more sense why the movement is towards avionics and weapons in MLUs. after all, with the OML and powerplant defined, physical performance is set to a certain level. but as avionics and weapons packages improve, tactics can change completely and yet give the advantage.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 09 Dec 2013 18:25

tsarkar wrote:Drag is precisely the issue for which they're going with a retractable proble. Mirage, Sea Harrier, Rafale dont have the drag problem. Tejas turned out more draggy than expected. http://drdo.gov.in/drdo/pub/dss/2009/main/2-CEMILAC.pdf Page 8

Based on released images, they'll use something very similar to the Jaguar retractable probe, if not the same probe itself. More than probe, internal plumbing inside the small fighter is where the real design challenge lies.

recent news reports noted that the latest mk1s were deemed acceptable in terms of acceleration and even turn rates (S), validated in the repeat sea level trials and the IAF signed off on them. should be on the forum itself. a component adding to the drag which could have been optimized (without the fuselage plug) seems to be the pylon design.

plus, per the article above, it appears that mk2 will have the more complex retractable probe. mk1 may just have the basic probe.

srin · Post by **srin** » 09 Dec 2013 19:34

For missile vs aircraft effectiveness, there are two types of agility to talk about: kinematic and seeker.

In terms of kinematic agility, a missile wins hands-down if it is in its powered phase (primarily because of airframe and pilot limitations). Once a missile is in its terminal phase, maneuvering bleeds energy, while an aircraft is fully powered.

As for seeker, the FOVs have been increasing. If you look at the Russian development of K-77M with AESA seeker and removing the marketing fluff, the seeker agility is given critical importance. However, an aircraft can mount powerful ECM suite to break the lock.

So - nothing guaranteed

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 09 Dec 2013 19:47

did we link in here earlier on the structural aspects of 9g+, the strains and to what strengths we had tested the airframe pressure simulated on the ground? .. especially the wings, joints etc.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 09 Dec 2013 20:52

srin wrote:For missile vs aircraft effectiveness, there are two types of agility to talk about: kinematic and seeker.

In terms of kinematic agility, a missile wins hands-down if it is in its powered phase (primarily because of airframe and pilot limitations). Once a missile is in its terminal phase, maneuvering bleeds energy, while an aircraft is fully powered. As for seeker, the FOVs have been increasing. If you look at the Russian development of K-77M with AESA seeker and removing the marketing fluff, the seeker agility is given critical importance. However, an aircraft can mount powerful ECM suite to break the lock.

The missile performance is a sum total of both. And hence needs to be qualified. In crude terms, it moves faster and hence has to work harder to permit rapid changes in direction at that speed, and hence with an impact on the distance it takes to make those movements as well.

Hence, the NEZ is of critical importance. This is the envelope where what you note theoretically holds true, where the final outcome is that the missile agility has the critical bearing on the engagement beating the aircraft thoroughly. But thats assuming the tactics till that point have not shrunk the NEZ (by exploiting the missiles dependence on PN method/ via rapid changes in aircraft trajectory etc).

Basically, the performance including the ranges depend on a combination of guidance methods and also altitude/speed combinations (for latter check:http://www.x-plane.org/home/urf/aviatio ... s/aam.html).

Coming to the seeker, at the end of the day, the seeker performance can be classified as a function of available power, FOV and available techniques. Its important to differentiate between the three.

AESA may enhance all three to some degree (better ECCM, more available power than a lossy conventional system, possible provements with rapid beam movement in ESA scan angle limitations but traded off vs limitations in physical scan as array is heavier), but the first factor is limited by onboard batteries. Total FOV of the AESA seeker above may be better than a conventional MSA (lightweight) on gimbals, its ability to steer beams within ESA limits may be better (but we don't know yet). A conformal AESA seeker may offer better FOV for sure, but the K77M does not have that.

So - nothing guaranteed

Yup.

jamwal · Post by **jamwal** » 09 Dec 2013 22:40

Indian Jaguars don't have retractable probes. Do they ?
They were fitted only a few years back.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 09 Dec 2013 22:44

guys, LCA thread.

has there been any confirmation that No 4 sqn will get the LCA, as was reported long back ?

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 09 Dec 2013 22:47

Karan M wrote:
tsarkar wrote:Drag is precisely the issue for which they're going with a retractable proble. Mirage, Sea Harrier, Rafale dont have the drag problem. Tejas turned out more draggy than expected. http://drdo.gov.in/drdo/pub/dss/2009/main/2-CEMILAC.pdf Page 8

Based on released images, they'll use something very similar to the Jaguar retractable probe, if not the same probe itself. More than probe, internal plumbing inside the small fighter is where the real design challenge lies.
recent news reports noted that the latest mk1s were deemed acceptable in terms of acceleration and even turn rates (S), validated in the repeat sea level trials and the IAF signed off on them. should be on the forum itself. a component adding to the drag which could have been optimized (without the fuselage plug) seems to be the pylon design.

plus, per the article above, it appears that mk2 will have the more complex retractable probe. mk1 may just have the basic probe.

Yes, the CEMILAC article mentioned the measures taken.

@Jamwal http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/media/612 ... lay+02.jpg
Removed in the 70/80s, then refitted in the 00's.
Now compare with this one http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/217/tejasmk2.jpg/

jamwal · Post by **jamwal** » 09 Dec 2013 23:36

Thanks. I was not aware of the new probe for Jaguar. The only picture that I saw was a ugly fixed probe attached by rivets.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 10 Dec 2013 03:09

Karan M wrote:know about corner speed and structural limits and optimum turn performance obtained at that level, but having read my fair share of combat aviation books and talked to aviators, my understanding is that its clear there is no one size fits all approach. some may prefer slash attacks and avoid getting into a turning fight completely. others with better turn performance may prefer to engage in sustained subsonic maneuvers, where maneuvering at corner speed makes optimal sense.

Definitely. This discussion started with developing a supersonic target drone. And my perception is that as long as the missile has enough energy, engaging a supersonic target is not the difficult part.

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 10 Dec 2013 11:31

I think it is fair to say that Dr. Chander has been restrained in sharing news and thoughts about the LCA with the press. In light of this, it is really great to see him revealing the possibility of as many as 200 LCA being produced for the IAF. Considering that 160 of those are to be the MK2, which requires the LCA to be modified to accommodate the new engine, it is a vote of confidence.

Keeping fingers crossed for Dec 20. Lots of love and gratitude for all in the LCA project.

Kersi D · Post by **Kersi D** » 10 Dec 2013 12:23

RKumar wrote:
Kersi D wrote:
Hey I am anxiuosly waiting fro an answer.

K
IAF begins establishing first LCA squadron

The first squadron of LCA will be the IAF’s 45th squadron, the Flying Daggers. They would first be based in Bangalore before being stationed at Sulur, near Coimbatore, where the IAF wants the first squadron positioned.
Cheers,

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 11 Dec 2013 02:24

LCA Flight test update:

From :
LCA-Tejas has completed 2431 Test Flights Successfully. (05-Dec-2013).
(TD1-233,TD2-305,PV1-242,PV2-222,PV3-378,LSP1-74,LSP2-288,PV5-36,LSP3-174,LSP4-101,LSP5-236,LSP7-74,NP1-6,LSP8-62)

To:
LCA-Tejas has completed 2439 Test Flights Successfully. (09-Dec-2013).
(TD1-233,TD2-305,PV1-242,PV2-222,PV3-378,LSP1-74,LSP2-289,PV5-36,LSP3-177,LSP4-102,LSP5-237,LSP7-76,NP1-6,LSP8-62)

nirav · Post by **nirav** » 11 Dec 2013 03:23

PratikDas wrote:I think it is fair to say that Dr. Chander has been restrained in sharing news and thoughts about the LCA with the press. In light of this, it is really great to see him revealing the possibility of as many as 200 LCA being produced for the IAF. Considering that 160 of those are to be the MK2, which requires the LCA to be modified to accommodate the new engine, it is a vote of confidence.

Keeping fingers crossed for Dec 20. Lots of love and gratitude for all in the LCA project.

Wasn't the contract for GE F 414 engines for 99 units ?
It could potentially mean larger numbers for Mk.1

Either way, "atleast 200 LCAs" .... This quote by Dr.Chander maketh a Jingo real real happy !!

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 11 Dec 2013 03:36

No guarantees. From orders known in the public domain, we don't have enough 404s for our first 40 Mk1s

.

And I will be completely frank here. No matter how hard I try, I can't have faith in HAL an in its current chairman. I was hoping for a straight talking man whose words have some accountability. And in that respect I find him worse than all the men I have seen of late. In Feb 2013, he says he can't maintain his pool of suppliers. The production rate is 1 aircraft per year, when he was supposed to be half way through setting up the production-line! In mid 2013, reports suggest that the assembly line is non-existent. Then in Dec 2013, he says, he is going to produce LCAs at the rate of 12 aircrafts per year from March/April 2014, climbing to 16 aircrafts per year in 2015. Miracles need to happen for all these statements to be simultaneously true.

I don't know what stops them from being honest about their efforts. If you are working hard to get the assembly line going but the project is running late, say so. I for one would respect you much more, rather than saying things which are not possible. It seems like a trend with the HAL chairman recently. I can see HAL is really working hard with the IJT. But IOC by Dec'2014. It was just not possible with the number of protos flying and number of test flights required. People can see through these things. Why set oneself up to fail, is something which is beyond me. In my my book, missing a deadline is not okay. Certainly, I and him are not sharing the same book.

I can't desire more of him and HAL to prove me wrong, but ...

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 11 Dec 2013 03:51

Indranil, Is there a comparison of the Grippen and the LCA Mk2 specs?