LCA Tejas: 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.
srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4738
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby srai » 08 Feb 2016 05:16

PratikDas wrote:
prasannasimha wrote:Check out this cool video:
Video of Tejas releasing the Derby missile
https://t.co/1zNGbGera8

Can anyone tell me how to embed the video directly into this page ?

Put it on YouTube :mrgreen:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3kZRQzdSw0

By the way, if you want to warm the jingo heart longer with such a short video clip, click on the YouTube logo and open the video at youtube.com, then you can click the gear icon in the video and set speed to 0.25.



  • BNG
  • Max G Maneuver Launch
  • Max/Min Range & Altitude Launch
  • Dual Mode Guidance
  • Autonomous Mode Guidance
  • Buddy Mode
  • HMS Mode
  • Lock-on Before Launch (LOBL)
  • Lock-on After Launch (LOAL)
  • Max Off-Bore-Sight Launch

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

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Singha » 08 Feb 2016 06:26

i wonder if the manufacturer can provide a recoverable test missile for testing, which instead of a warhead carried ballast and a parachute in the nose which can be commanded to deploy by radio.
sounds quite expensive to fire 10 rounds (if all goes well) , else repeat. once the engagement is over the missile is commanded to make a series of spiral hard turns to lose speed and when its down to parachute suitable speed release the nosecap.

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

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby SaiK » 08 Feb 2016 06:38

how would you determine target destruction?

Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2634
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Cybaru » 08 Feb 2016 08:42

Missile seems to be turning left and out of frame. It doesn't seem to be going down.

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

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby shiv » 08 Feb 2016 09:52

What on earth does "ballistic test" of Derby mean?

Shreeman
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3762
Joined: 17 Jan 2007 15:31
Location: bositiveneuj.blogspot.com
Contact:

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Shreeman » 08 Feb 2016 10:00

we launched it off the rail by pushing a button in the air. didnt crash the plane.

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

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Singha » 08 Feb 2016 10:43

I think it means you burn the motor in lofted trajectory for max range and see if it responds to commands and glides on its expected path thereafter - putting a +ve neuj spin on it.

since the missile is to be used up - might as well command it to do something

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

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Singha » 08 Feb 2016 10:44

looking at dark blue sky it was high-alt test perhaps 45,000ft.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4738
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby srai » 08 Feb 2016 13:21

Video of Tejas releasing the Derby missile


Looks like Litening Pod is also being carried by the LCA.

JTull
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2793
Joined: 18 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby JTull » 08 Feb 2016 16:40

Cybaru wrote:Missile seems to be turning left and out of frame. It doesn't seem to be going down.


Good observation!

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

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Lalmohan » 08 Feb 2016 18:01

or its a pre-planned 'look down shoot down' profile to keep it far away from the launch craft...

member_28990
BRFite
Posts: 171
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby member_28990 » 08 Feb 2016 18:53

Some updates from Tejas FB page.

IFR status

The IFR probe integration has been on and the checks on ground will start soon. The prototype has been identified for the task.



Regarding Mk1A prototypes

Sir, the deliberations are on. Mostly couple of the present prototypes will be serving as the initial one for mark 1a with in-situ mods. Things are unclear at the moment. MOD/HAL/ADA need to take this call asap.


Astra

Astra integration is yet to be put into the test schedule.


On the BVR tests and Iron Fist participation

Mostly yes for iron fist. The thing is, for this exercise, again the effort towards real flight testing gets diluted.
Derby, again is the BVR for navy. So they full envelope expansion and operational testing will be done on navy prototypes.
Python should be fired in this dett.


It was a separation cum integration check which was extremely successful. Derby will be fully tested for naval prototype.


New Radome

sir, the ground integration checks are completed. The prototype will be identified for this as soon as we are back to Bangalore depending upon the task allocations.


Some more armament talk which is very interesting

Sir missiles ( air to ground) will be used for LCA?
(and anti ship missile for NLCA)

Tejas - LCA As of now, no. For navy, the prime task would be to go thru the carrier compatibility testing. The weaponisation will be taken up subsequently. Derby will have to be tested extensively on NLCA.

And one more thing (from Tech focus February 2011) it says that LCA air frame has been shaped for reduction in Radar and infrared signature/hotspot reduction ( within aerodynamic limits) and canopy has ITO coating.... Is it true?

Tejas - LCA Yes




The pace can be faster, but slowly we are getting to the promised land.

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

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby SaiK » 08 Feb 2016 20:33

do they have a full video of derby trajectory ?

Sid
BRFite
Posts: 1654
Joined: 19 Mar 2006 13:26

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Sid » 08 Feb 2016 20:58

maxratul wrote:Some updates from Tejas FB page.

IFR status
.........................

Regarding Mk1A prototypes

Sir, the deliberations are on. Mostly couple of the present prototypes will be serving as the initial one for mark 1a with in-situ mods. Things are unclear at the moment. MOD/HAL/ADA need to take this call asap.

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


So current prototype will become prototype for Mk1A prototype, shouldn't they just pull one SP from the delivery line for this?

Promised dates for full on production is around 2018-2019, lets hope everyone is working towards that goal.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55033
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby ramana » 08 Feb 2016 21:05

Sid, Cant allocate an SP as its a contractual item for delivery.
One more stick to beat ADA and HAL if that happens.

I don't get the FB responses. They start out optimistic and end with delays!

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55033
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby ramana » 08 Feb 2016 21:16

KaranM, Please tell me more about EL/M-2052 Derby?

Range of detection?
Firing range?
How many targets detected?
How many can be engaged BVR?
How many at close range?

All this with normal radome and with quartz radome?

Warhead weight
Derby Pk?

Thanks,
ramana

member_28108
BRFite
Posts: 1852
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby member_28108 » 08 Feb 2016 21:54

Derby[edit]

The Derby missile
Also known as the Alto, the Derby missile is a BVR, medium-range (~50 km) active radar homing missile. Though technically not part of the "Python" family, the missile is basically an enlarged Python-4 with an active-radar seeker.[11] It is similar to the AIM-120 AMRAAM.

Length: 362 cm
Span: 64 cm
Diameter: 16 cm
Weight: 118 kg
Guidance: Active Radar
Warhead: 23 kg
Range: 50 km
Speed: Mach 4


I-Derby-ER[edit]
In June 2015, Rafael confirmed the existence of the I-Derby-ER, an extended range version of the Derby that increases range to 54 nmi (62 mi; 100 km), after a "Python 6" version based on an air-launched Stunner missile was abandoned. To achieve greater range, a dual-pulse solid rocket motor is added, where the secondary pulse of energy as the missile nears the target extends flight time. It also combines the seeker and fuse into an integrated sensor and fusing system to make room for the new motor.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55033
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby ramana » 08 Feb 2016 22:20

Radar EL/M-2052 AESA

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EL/M-2052

The Elta 2052 is an advanced airborne Active electronically scanned array fire control radar for fighter aircraft. It is suitable for F-15, MiG-29, Mirage 2000 and LCA Tejas. The EL/M-2052 is an advanced Airborne Fire Control Radar (FCR) designed for air superiority and advanced strike missions.

The FCR is based on fully solid-state active phased array technology. This new technology enables the radar to achieve a longer detection range, high mission reliability and a multi-target tracking capability of up to 64 targets.[1] The EL/M-2052 radar incorporates operational feedback from Israeli Air Force combat pilots.[citation needed]

The radar introduces improvements to the Air-to-Air, Air-to-Ground and Air-to-Sea operation modes of the aircraft. In the Air-to-air mode, the radar enables a very long-range multi targets detection and enables several simultaneous weapon deliveries in combat engagements.[2]

In Air-to-ground missions, the radar provides very high resolution mapping (SAR), surface moving target detection and tracking over RBM, DBS and SAR maps in addition to A/G ranging. In Air-to-Sea missions the radar provides long-range target detection and tracking, including target classification capabilities (RS, ISAR).[3]


ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55033
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby ramana » 08 Feb 2016 22:24

So Derby has engagement range of 50km and with warhead weight of 23 kg will kill the target dead.
So what's the hit probability?

The El/M -2052 with Kevlar radome has about the same range.
The quartz radome has 10-15 % better range.

Sid
BRFite
Posts: 1654
Joined: 19 Mar 2006 13:26

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Sid » 08 Feb 2016 22:35

ramana wrote:Sid, Cant allocate an SP as its a contractual item for delivery.
One more stick to beat ADA and HAL if that happens.

I don't get the FB responses. They start out optimistic and end with delays!


ramana ji, I agree. But LSPs have already gone through numerous POC iterations, but to incorporate following IMHO can be a bit risky -

1> ~1000KG Weight reduction - > LSPs already have a lot of telemetry h/w and i am sure must have some of them hardwired for daily debugging/data logs.
2> AESA Radar - > Unless its a plug and play type integration, it can cause more trouble. It will also have different power/cooling requirements then current radar.

If anyone here have a misfortune of managing Gov project, they will know following two things are the most risky -
1> Budget approval
2> contract signoff

Unless HAL is ready to commit money from their own, and take ownership of this whole mess we are looking at another 2020-2022 schedule slippage. Israel do not have a spare AESA radars lying around to deliver us at the last moment. If they are still deliberating on what should be MK1A then we are looking at MK2 timelines.

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

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby SaiK » 08 Feb 2016 23:46

the hit probability of saada derby wala is higher with 2052 than 2032 ;) just on the radar range alone. just talking about LOBL onlee. may be only marginally better for launching, but superior on detecting and locking ahead... so a split second extra advantage with 2052s.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55033
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby ramana » 08 Feb 2016 23:52

Sid, Lets see.

Diverting the SP without Govt authorization will give more fodder to Matheswaran types.

Most likely the SP aircraft is being re-jigged with new internal layout.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55033
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby ramana » 08 Feb 2016 23:56

SaiK wrote:the hit probability of saada derby wala is higher with 2052 than 2032 ;) just on the radar range alone. just talking about LOBL onlee. may be only marginally better for launching, but superior on detecting and locking ahead... so a split second extra advantage with 2052s.

That's what counts.

What I am looking for in the end is this.
LCA with 2052 and quartz can spot incoming bandits at xx range.
It can launch its Derby at yy range.
Derby has hit probability of so much.
I think kill probability is 1.0 as Israel doesn't believe in half measures. 8)
LCA with Derby can launch 4 BVRs and has 2 CCMs.

So LCA with Derby/CCMs can out look and out shoot 4 incoming bandits and get 2 more at close range.
Next the 23mm gun.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4738
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby srai » 09 Feb 2016 00:21

^^^

Astra Mk.1 is both a CCM and M-BVR similar to French Mica AAM except for interchangeable IR/RF seeker. So that would be potential of 6 AAMs for air defence up to medium ranges in a normal load out. Although an IR seeker is the norm for CCM, it seems Astra will have its seeker slaved with the HMS and IRST.

Image

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4738
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby srai » 09 Feb 2016 00:43

ramana wrote:So Derby has engagement range of 50km and with warhead weight of 23 kg will kill the target dead.
So what's the hit probability?

The El/M -2052 with Kevlar radome has about the same range.
The quartz radome has 10-15 % better range.


Viewpoint : New Indian HAL Tejas light multirole fighter
...
The radar is mounted in a Kevlar radome which now has a range of 40 km to 50 Km but after the upgradation it would be placed in a quartz radome which would increase the range to 80 KM.
...

Bhaskar_T
BRFite
Posts: 276
Joined: 13 Feb 2011 19:09

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Bhaskar_T » 09 Feb 2016 01:04

Can somebody tell what is the recent most promise by HAL/MOD on the IOC-2 configuration 20 TejasMK1 delivery timeline? I think after failing to keep any of the promises on Tejas delivery, HAL has stopped giving " :oops: time lines".

Can someone ask Tejas FB page also that how is the production line setup going on? How many GE F404 engines, HAL has received for the 20 Tejas IOC-2 MK1 order? What is the current aspired timeline of FOC (including the last slippage for whatever reasons it happened)?

And any Guptachar information, which country showed interest in Tejas in Bahrain airshow?

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55033
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby ramana » 09 Feb 2016 01:08

Many of your questions will get answered in time.
No need for asking what's not needed.

Even IAF has stopped asking/giving milestones.
Its not kike they are in HAL control.
In the end it is all GOI.


srai, Very good blog link. Can you boil his program milestones into one chart summary of LCA program from 1981?

Dileep
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5865
Joined: 04 Apr 2005 08:17
Location: Dera Mahab Ali धरा महाबलिस्याः درا مهاب الي

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Dileep » 09 Feb 2016 05:43

Got a data point from the cemilac auditor folks. The problem with the radome is manufacturability. The 'uneven-ness' is affecting the propagation apparently.

FWIW

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

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby SaiK » 09 Feb 2016 06:58

make it even then! is it then the point pointing to the fact of interference at different material thickness? if it is micro imperfections, then I am concerned at the material itself. [q: what is the variation we get with such uneven-ness? going out of tolerance threshold]

my ranging should not vary to target an enemy using such micro-variations, and should be included in the tolerance logic.

point: i can be accurate, but i may not be precise enough for given specs.

OTOH: i can be uneven, but have the same thickness. [if this is the case, would it still affect the propagation? - i am assuming such uneven-ness does not change lattice struct]

ps: if they had already crossed 80-85% transmission efficiency for the designed bands, then my concern would remain on the material onree.

kvraghav
BRFite
Posts: 986
Joined: 17 Apr 2008 11:47
Location: Some where near the equator

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby kvraghav » 09 Feb 2016 08:23

So if the Derby is further validated on the navy prototypes, the same can be used for the IAF or we have do all this process again for R-77 ?

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

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby SaiK » 09 Feb 2016 08:42

we don't know what IAF is validating against. you might some tech data, but you will never get mission data from any forces.

Hitesh
BRFite
Posts: 793
Joined: 04 Jul 1999 11:31

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Hitesh » 09 Feb 2016 09:49

What is the radar range on comparable fighter planes such as MiG-21s, F-16s, Mirages 2000s, FC-1, Mirages IIIs and IVs, and J-39 Griffen?

If the LCA radar range is drastically shorter than the rest of the above, I can easily understand why the IAF termed it as a three leg cheetah and may not want the LCA at all. What's the use of flying a plane which can't even see the enemy first before they spot you? Sure it may be ameliorated with the use of AWACS but I don't see GoI pony up the dough to buy 28-32 AWACs and 100 tankers to keep those planes flying and vector the LCAs. I understand IAF's great desire to avoid and hesitancy of going into a gunfight with a knife and one hand tied behind your back.

member_28990
BRFite
Posts: 171
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby member_28990 » 09 Feb 2016 10:19

The AN/APG-68 Radar System for the F16 C/D has 105km range for 5m2 aerial target

Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2634
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby Cybaru » 09 Feb 2016 10:21

srai wrote:
ramana wrote:So Derby has engagement range of 50km and with warhead weight of 23 kg will kill the target dead.
So what's the hit probability?

The El/M -2052 with Kevlar radome has about the same range.
The quartz radome has 10-15 % better range.


Viewpoint : New Indian HAL Tejas light multirole fighter
...
The radar is mounted in a Kevlar radome which now has a range of 40 km to 50 Km but after the upgradation it would be placed in a quartz radome which would increase the range to 80 KM.
...


Whooa, 15% better range from existing should be roughly 70km for existing range and 80km for new range.

How does it go to 40 KM?? Reduce desi work, increase foreign vendor number? Thats convenient.

K_Rohit
BRFite
Posts: 186
Joined: 16 Feb 2009 19:11

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby K_Rohit » 09 Feb 2016 10:45

maxratul wrote:Some updates from Tejas FB page.

IFR status

The IFR probe integration has been on and the checks on ground will start soon. The prototype has been identified for the task.



Regarding Mk1A prototypes

Sir, the deliberations are on. Mostly couple of the present prototypes will be serving as the initial one for mark 1a with in-situ mods. Things are unclear at the moment. MOD/HAL/ADA need to take this call asap.


Astra

Astra integration is yet to be put into the test schedule.


On the BVR tests and Iron Fist participation

Mostly yes for iron fist. The thing is, for this exercise, again the effort towards real flight testing gets diluted.
Derby, again is the BVR for navy. So they full envelope expansion and operational testing will be done on navy prototypes.
Python should be fired in this dett.


It was a separation cum integration check which was extremely successful. Derby will be fully tested for naval prototype.


New Radome

sir, the ground integration checks are completed. The prototype will be identified for this as soon as we are back to Bangalore depending upon the task allocations.


Some more armament talk which is very interesting

Sir missiles ( air to ground) will be used for LCA?
(and anti ship missile for NLCA)

Tejas - LCA As of now, no. For navy, the prime task would be to go thru the carrier compatibility testing. The weaponisation will be taken up subsequently. Derby will have to be tested extensively on NLCA.

And one more thing (from Tech focus February 2011) it says that LCA air frame has been shaped for reduction in Radar and infrared signature/hotspot reduction ( within aerodynamic limits) and canopy has ITO coating.... Is it true?

Tejas - LCA Yes




The pace can be faster, but slowly we are getting to the promised land.



Thanks for this, very interesting. Does that mean that the Airforce will have a different BVRAAM? The FB update indicates that Derby is only for the Navy? Will the IAF have to wait for Astra, and does this mean that mk 1 A for IAF will have no BVR till Astra gets integrated?

maitya
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 495
Joined: 02 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby maitya » 09 Feb 2016 10:57

Hitesh wrote:What is the radar range on comparable fighter planes such as MiG-21s, F-16s, Mirages 2000s, FC-1, Mirages IIIs and IVs, and J-39 Griffen?

If the LCA radar range is drastically shorter than the rest of the above, I can easily understand why the IAF termed it as a three leg cheetah and may not want the LCA at all. What's the use of flying a plane which can't even see the enemy first before they spot you? Sure it may be ameliorated with the use of AWACS but I don't see GoI pony up the dough to buy 28-32 AWACs and 100 tankers to keep those planes flying and vector the LCAs. I understand IAF's great desire to avoid and hesitancy of going into a gunfight with a knife and one hand tied behind your back.

What kind of a question is that? All Brochure-claimed values can easily be googled, isn't it?
And after googling it, one can draw their own conclusions and start empathizing with IAF wrt their justification of calling LCA 3-5-20-or-whatever legged cheetah etc.

But why this escape-route-verbiage "if the LCA radar range is drastically shorter ... etc"?
Are you not 400% (a la the mushak next door) convinced about IAF capability in correctly judging operational usefulness of these platforms vis-a-vis LCA, wrt radar ranges and then accurately counting the number of legs of a cheetah (flying or otherwise) and informing us/you about the same.

C'mon say it - LCA is as useless as a 3-legged cheetah as it doesn't have a radar whose range is comparable to the platforms it's either going to replace (MiG-21) or likely to face Mirage-IIIs/F-16 (betw which version A/B/Block-32/Block-60 which one).


=============================================
However, a few "small fry" queries comes to mind - betw:
1) Which range (detection or tracking) and against what radar-cross-section (5 sqm, 3sqm, 0.1sqm, 0.001sqm)? You know the radar range equation, right and what factors influence radar-range etc

2) What happens if somebody simply replaces a PD set with a AESA equipped one as apart of MLU etc?

3) How important are A-G modes and how much one is ready to sacrifice the A-A modes get SAR, TFM, ISAR, MTI etc capability?

4) What about the capability of being able to implement newer modes (called continuous improvement) for the life of the platform?
As against being saddled with a "black box" which wouldn't even allow integrating another supplier BVR missiles/armament etc? How about stuff like programmable ECM and ECCM? How about the radar itself doubling up as a secure-datalink with other friendly platforms flying around?

5) How are the aperture size-constrained by the platform itself and what is the relationship between radar ranges and the aperture size?
How applicable are the brochure claims in real life scenarios wrt having to "optimise" aperture size etc for fitment of it in the radome of the operating platform?
What exactly is that value for a MiG-21 nosecone and why did we have to run to mother Russia to modify the radome to allow fitment of a Kopyo version? Should we not have gone a variant of Zhuk itself (actually Kopyo-I was derived from Zhuk program anyway).

6) How important is MTBO of the shiny-brochure claimed sets? Is it ok to be forced to fly around with the radar switched-off, as something has malfunctioned and needs repair?
Or one needs to ensure there are 3-4 radar sets/aircraft available at all times, given the MTBO figures of some of these shiny-brochure-radars?
What was the MTBO of Kopyo, surely IAF was going ga-ga over it, when it got first implemented in the Bisons? Surely they didn't have to pay anything extra if there were some "minor dip" in the MTBO figure of it, isn't it?

7) And most importantly, what should be the multiplicative factor of the BVR AAM ranges that the platform is supposed to be carrying, for arriving at the "enough" radar range value?
"Enough" to allow a reasonably well-trained-pilot to make up their mind before they actually fire the required missiles?

etc etc etc.
=============================================

But since you ask, and presumably read this far, pls note the shiny brochure of Kopyo-I, is informing me that it, when integrated with a 21-93 (also called Bison), has a detection range of 57Km for a 5sqm target (all aspect).
Pls do compare that figure, with the one that the first couple of the 20 LCA SPs would sport? And while you are at it, do compare what will happen when the Kevlar radome will get replaced with a Quartz one (from Cobham) keeping the radar same as before?

member_28990
BRFite
Posts: 171
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby member_28990 » 09 Feb 2016 11:17

Thanks for this, very interesting. Does that mean that the Airforce will have a different BVRAAM? The FB update indicates that Derby is only for the Navy? Will the IAF have to wait for Astra, and does this mean that mk 1 A for IAF will have no BVR till Astra gets integrated?


Looks like the IAF will continue to use the R77 and induct the meteor and the astra when they are ready

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16884
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby NRao » 09 Feb 2016 11:22

What's the use of flying a plane which can't even see the enemy first before they spot you?


It is a fashion to compare one plane to another. Does that really happen in reality? Do you actually expect one LCA to fly out and depend on only its radar?

It would be very silly on the part of the IAF to expect that.

I am betting that the IAF gets to know pretty much anything that flies within a 150 kms of the border. Pakistan will move most assets to Iran or Afghanistan.

K_Rohit
BRFite
Posts: 186
Joined: 16 Feb 2009 19:11

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby K_Rohit » 09 Feb 2016 11:50

maxratul wrote:
Thanks for this, very interesting. Does that mean that the Airforce will have a different BVRAAM? The FB update indicates that Derby is only for the Navy? Will the IAF have to wait for Astra, and does this mean that mk 1 A for IAF will have no BVR till Astra gets integrated?


Looks like the IAF will continue to use the R77 and induct the meteor and the astra when they are ready


Havent heard of R77 in the test schedule thus far. Its been Derby and Astra

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4738
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: LCA Tejas: News and Discussions

Postby srai » 09 Feb 2016 12:12

Wasn't it the IAF that wanted BVR capability for LCA FOC, but it seems they haven't even selected a BVR missile for integration (if FB posts are accurate)!


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 27 guests