LCA News and Discussions

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 13 Feb 2011 21:47

Shiv , Nice Video of Tejas . Good Stuff

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 13 Feb 2011 23:12

someone may please update wiki on LCA specs?

adarshp · Post by **adarshp** » 13 Feb 2011 23:19

One question for the guru's and experts.

As per Vina's post, empty weight = 6560 and clean = 9800. this means fuel + pylons etc adds 3240 kg. From earlier discussions I remember that the internal fuel is 3000l or 2300 kg. Would the pylons add close to a ton of weight, or is there other equipment we should take into account? Thanks in advance for any inputs.

Avinandan · Post by **Avinandan** » 13 Feb 2011 23:25

shiv wrote:LCA Tejas in Aero India 2011
Reviewing the video gave me a pleasant surprise. The display was good. 3 loops 2 barrel rolls in the video below
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UkM0ZHMv7Gk

Some more Questions for Gurus :-
1. the vortex shape is somewhat different from other fighters that I have in airshows videos, is it something to worry about (This was also mentioned by somebody in the aforementioned youtube link) ?

2. What could be the maximum Gs that LCA Tejascould have pulled in this video ?

3. Were there any low speed passes done by the LCA Tejas this time?

4. Why Wingtip pylons were avoided (instead kept under wing) for LCA Tejas? Any advantages because of it ?
Wingtip missiles seem to the norm for most of the 4G fighters today.

Shiv,
Thanks for the awesome video !!

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 14 Feb 2011 00:54

^^^ that vortex shape is known as "scooter helmet" and is something of great concern
as for wing tip pylons, it increases the width too much, makes it difficult for tejas to hide in narrow dark hangers

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 14 Feb 2011 01:14

Sancho wrote:The point that you still miss is the ratio of load and fuel, because we don't talk about deep penetraiton strikes her, but normal CAS loads of IAF fighters. In your config it was nearly the maximum payload of MK1 with just 1200l fuel, but as you can see in the pic (which should be a normal strike load how IAF plans it), we have 1600l fuel, with a total payload of hardly 2400Kg. That means, with the same strike load, it offers way more range, although 2 fuel tanks and just 400l more fuel, because the total load is less (but also only 2 missiles).
For MK2 I agree, that depending on how much internal fuel can be added, it could mean a single fuel tank could be enough for the same load (at least for the air force), but the higher the load, the more fuel you need and then at least 2 more stations would be a good addition.

err sancho, that is just a loadout done by ADA for photo op, not necessarily what IAF would once it inducts and evaluates the bird. of course, even in that config it can carry 2 BVR AAMs on the centreline pylon, although that would certainly look odd.

in a real war scenario we are hardly likely to see a lone fighter go on a strike mission. it would have at least another LCA escort with it, if not more.

vivek ahuja did a very useful analysis of LCA range, which should make it clear why you are mistaken on this. have a look http://mach-five.blogspot.com/search?q=lca

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 14 Feb 2011 01:19

Lalmohan wrote:^^^ that vortex shape is known as "scooter helmet" and is something of great concern
as for wing tip pylons, it increases the width too much, makes it difficult for tejas to hide in narrow dark hangers

adarshp wrote:One question for the guru's and experts.

As per Vina's post, empty weight = 6560 and clean = 9800. this means fuel + pylons etc adds 3240 kg. From earlier discussions I remember that the internal fuel is 3000l or 2300 kg. Would the pylons add close to a ton of weight, or is there other equipment we should take into account? Thanks in advance for any inputs.

gun ammo, hydraulic fluids etc.

Raja Bose · Post by **Raja Bose** » 14 Feb 2011 01:27

^^^with some leeway included for pilot who didn't have clear motion after a heavy butter chicken dinner.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 14 Feb 2011 01:56

^^^Add the ejection seat to that list as well.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 14 Feb 2011 02:04

Avinandan wrote: 1. the vortex shape is somewhat different from other fighters that I have in airshows videos, is it something to worry about (This was also mentioned by somebody in the aforementioned youtube link) ?

That is the classic vortex shape of a high speed high G maneuver.

Avinandan wrote: 2. What could be the maximum Gs that LCA Tejascould have pulled in this video ?

According to people whom KrishG talked to it is 6.9G. But hush, we are not supposed to go above 6.

Avinandan wrote: 4. Why Wingtip pylons were avoided (instead kept under wing) for LCA Tejas? Any advantages because of it ?
Wingtip missiles seem to the norm for most of the 4G fighters today.

Stop getting worried about which pylon is where. People who only worry about aesthetics, speak that way. There is no requirement for it yet. Tejas carries over 40% of its weight worth of armament. If reqd. the wing tip pylons can be added, but that would need strengthening the wing, which nobody is interested in now.

dipayan · Post by **dipayan** » 14 Feb 2011 02:12

Reporting straight from LCA Tejas cockpit

Link

The aircraft is very stable and that gives it the requisite agility and manoeuvring capability.

Seems contradictory to me. The whole article has a very amateurish feel about it.

adarshp · Post by **adarshp** » 14 Feb 2011 04:14

Rahul/ Kartik - Thank you for the answers. I am a little confused that weight of basic equipment like hydraulic fluids and ejection seats is not part of the empty weight of the aircraft. The more I look at Google and wiki chacha to compare these numbers across aircraft, the deeper the confusion. If there a glossary of aircraft weights and definitions that you can handily refer me to?

Thanks again.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 14 Feb 2011 04:37

dipayan wrote:Reporting straight from LCA Tejas cockpit

Link

The aircraft is very stable and that gives it the requisite agility and manoeuvring capability.
Seems contradictory to me. The whole article has a very amateurish feel about it.

It has taken a Retd Col from the Indian Army years to realize the obvious .......................... Let her have her 15 minutes.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 14 Feb 2011 05:52

Here's another nice, if shaky LCA video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZpEYI9nI-BM

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 14 Feb 2011 07:55

Tejas deadline likely to be postponed

...
...
“For the FOC, the aircraft has to go through a tedious certification process that involves tests for each and every component. While the list is long, some of the suggestions we have approached the HAL with include drop tank, store integration, flutter, specifications of sensors, carriage, equipment integration, and so on. In fact, we also have suggestions regarding envelope expansion — angle of attack and ‘g’. Given the lengthy certification process, the December 2012 deadline would be missed,” said the pilot on condition of anonymity. The pilot added, “The DRDO is projecting the December 2012 deadline just because post that deadline, it would become a 30-year project and it might not be a good tag.”

Giving an example the pilot added, “Store integration is a lengthy process. It involves geometric issues, besides aspects such as centre of gravity, aero dynamics, fusing, weaponry, intra-store effects and so on. The drop tank specifications involve sensor specifications, electronics, loads, so that it does not hit the aircraft and others.”

“It is a good aircraft. By the time we obtain the FOC, it is going to be five to six times better than what it is now,’ said Group Captain George Thomas, Group Director, Flight Test Operations, ADA.
...
...

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 14 Feb 2011 08:17

Those modifications I thought, were for Mk2.

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 14 Feb 2011 08:22

Modifications? They are standard stuff for any FA

rajanb · Post by **rajanb** » 14 Feb 2011 09:16

Delayed again? Beyond 2012!!

Why can't they give a timebound schedule! Are we losing the plot as far as Tejas is concerned?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 14 Feb 2011 09:17

relax - well EF did FOC in 2006 and is still not capable of carrying *all* the weapons in european service probably, so I think by 2012 we will get in the bulk of what IAF uses
- ccip bombs (250, 500, 1000)
- one model of LGB (1000lb)
- drop tanks (one size)
- one bvr aam
- one wvr aam
- all EW/protection systems
- full testing of the radar

that would still leave all the KH-series, durandal, armat, matra BGL etc etc kitchen sink seen on other types..dont think we need bother about it most are getting replaced by better kit.

"popeye" (crystal maze) , Astra1 and Astra2 , Python5/K-74 would be a good future add and a new ARM(hopefully developed from the astra2).

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 14 Feb 2011 09:24

Guys at around 1 minute mark Tejas almost performs a back flip (something only the Ru and other latest gen Euro canards and raptor have been able to show), rolls with a snap and performed vertical loops with ease

that is precisely what i was talking about. the tejas did what the eurocanards all did - flip over on its back multiple times and do a full vertical loop ... rahul's famous wallpaper photo must have caught it at the bottom as it was about to level off and slide away.

I did not see the bandar do it at all in the zhuhai 2010 video posted in paki arms sales thread.

someone should check J-10 videos and see if this is being done.

time to pull a few chaddi's down and apply the stick to backside now that we have proven public show footage of the tejas.

rajanb · Post by **rajanb** » 14 Feb 2011 10:17

Thanks Singhaji.

What worries me is that with 32-33 operational squadrons we seem to be very cool about what I feel are possible threats all along our borders. (Northeast/ Northwest and our coastline)

And the chin-pak axis gloating over it. At times a strong force is itself a deterrent. But we are ambling along taking years to do anything. Not to take away from the lovely LCA that we have and the monumental challenges it faced - some arguably self-imposed!

Mukesh.Kumar · Post by **Mukesh.Kumar** » 14 Feb 2011 10:29

But we are ambling along taking years to do anything.

More bad news.

srai · Post by **srai** » 14 Feb 2011 10:32

shiv wrote:Here's another nice, if shaky LCA video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZpEYI9nI-BM

The person taking this video tried to zoom in too much on the aircraft.

IMO, for flight displays, less zoom is better to capture the full loops/turns in time/space, which gives a much better picture of the maneuver capability of the plane.

srai · Post by **srai** » 14 Feb 2011 11:04

shiv wrote:LCA Tejas in Aero India 2011

Reviewing the video gave me a pleasant surprise. The display was good. 3 loops 2 barrel rolls in the video below

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UkM0ZHMv7Gk

This video is good!

Only suggestion for improvement would be to have the full flight in one continuous clip!

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 14 Feb 2011 11:14

somehow the GE engine on Tejas sounded more noisy and growling than on the gripen or maybe I was tone deaf by then as the gripen came at the end of show just before the red bulls and tejas was the first.

btw gripen wake as the same "scooter helmet" pattern as the tejas - if some are 'worried' by it. here is a photo I took.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/33097132@N00/5437834719/

rajanb · Post by **rajanb** » 14 Feb 2011 13:14

Thanks for the observation Singhaji.

Gurus, please correct me if I am wrong. But an unstable a/c makes for agility and manouvreability? So the trail of the LCA, as seen in the video should not be a problem at all. The flight control software, which a/c like the Holland Gnat (the Sabre Killer) did not have, will ensure the Tejas doesn't whack the pilot. The genesis of such software is interesting. Its origin was the micro-controlled software, used on hard disk drives which were first introduced on mainframe computers! But tht is another topic in itself.

Cheers

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 14 Feb 2011 13:39

my advice to nanhas and weekend mujahids - take it or leave it
aeronautical engineering is a mature discipline with many decades of research behind it - particularly in aeronautics and flight mechanics and considerably so in structural mechanics and control engineering
HAL/DRDO may be short, dark and eat rice - but they have bush shirt and spectacle wearing mathematics doing gentlemen and ladies (in salwar kameez) who have a pretty decent understanding about how to design an aircraft
whilst many comments on this forum are well intentioned, without any inkling of aviation or aviation design, do not assume that our SDRE engineers are shivering in their ignorant dhotis in narrow dark scooter helmets.

rajanb · Post by **rajanb** » 14 Feb 2011 13:54

Agree with you Lalmohan.

Having sold mainframes to ISRO, HAL and NAL, I was struck by one thing. The humility, the eagerness of the people to learn something knew, their intellect and knowledge. Their dedication was so heart warming that I used to love sitting and chatting with them.

In fact, I installed Dr. Hari Kota's first Tektronix terminal in '82 (at HAL Nashik) and his enthusiasm was so fantastic to watch.

We owe them a lot for their sweat and toil!

BTW, who were you shafting?

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 14 Feb 2011 13:57

my only ambition is to do that sort of thing to lalchix

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 14 Feb 2011 15:17

Karan M wrote:I hope this settles the EW suite on the LCA business as nobody seems to have picked it up. My own email in December 2010.

http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 08#p989608

Looks like the flight testbed for the MiG-27 Upgrade (see report below on Bangalore aviation from Devesh Agarwal) with a new EW suite as mentioned in news reports. There seems to be a new fitment just beside the Indian flag on the aircraft stabilizer. In comparison, see this picture of the same aircraft earlier:

http://frontierindia.net/wp-content/upl ... 00x212.jpg

The picture of the new aircraft is from this site:
http://www.bangaloreaviation.com/2010/1 ... force.html

And the news report I am referring to is here:
http://www.dnaindia.com/bangalore/repor ... 27_1471748

Announcing the latest achievement in the country’s defence warfare capabilities, Dr Prahlada, chief controller, R&D (Ae&SI) of DRDO, speaking on the sidelines of the India National Electronic Warfare Workshop (EWWI-2010) in the city, said the technical know-how would bring India on par with the rest of the world.

“We have successfully integrated the present electronic warfare (EW) systems with MiG-27 fighters. It will be operational from 2011. Similarly, we’ll integrate EW systems with MiG-29 fighters and Tejas light combat aircraft (LCA) by 2011. They are likely to be operational by 2012,” said Prahlada.
Now, kind gentlemen, which year is the LCA MK1 FOC to be done by? It is 2012.

When is the LCA MK2 intended to be operational? Per reports, flight in 2014, operational by 2016.

So figure what the above EW suite is for.

Also - MiG-29 Upgrade already mentioned in the above article.

Now, lets go back to 2008.
http://www.india-defence.com/reports-3896

Talking to The Hindu just before his retirement, Director R.P. Ramalingam said that his laboratory could offer a state of the art EW suite for the MiG-29, including a radar warning receiver and a self protection jammer, provided the production agency came up with funding.

“BEL is prepared to put up a portion of the project’s cost, but this will first have to be cleared by their board. BEL also wants an assurance that the production order for the EW will go to them.”

With each EW suite expected to cost Rs. 15 crore, the production order for BEL could be around Rs. 1,000 crore.

Now, lets see the latest image of the FAT MiG-29 upgrade
http://key.aero/central/images/news/2936.jpg

Check the right fin (nearest to the camera) & the fairing there. Clearly an EW system/provision made for one. It is not RWR. That is the small circular antenna on top of fin. Check MiG-27 picture for comparison.

Enough said, I think...??

Karan, not quite correct. EW aperatures are forward facing rather than sideways, because that is the direction most threats are faced from. Fighters try to present their least profiles to AD radars, and the forward profile is the least one. No fighter on earth has sideways facing - and radiating - EW aperatures. Tempest (I incorrectly mentioned Tranquail in earlier posts) is in MiG-27 nose and vertical tailfin leading edge (not side spot).

“We have successfully integrated the present electronic warfare (EW) systems with MiG-27 fighters. It will be operational from 2011. Similarly, we’ll integrate EW systems with MiG-29 fighters and Tejas light combat aircraft (LCA) by 2011. They are likely to be operational by 2012,” said Prahlada.

Now, kind gentlemen, which year is the LCA MK1 FOC to be done by? It is 2012.

We were discussing LSP aircraft determining IOC capabilities in 2010, that never had this system in the first place. No one was assessing 2012 performance with 2012 systems in December 2010. December 2010 IOC was done with what was available. I am simply refuting the then-prevalent PoV that Mk.1 design was perfect/close-to-perfect-theory or new-systems-added-one-ton-weight-theory. Both these theories are grossly incorrect. Not sure why you're defending those theories. FWIW, the Mk.1 specs in the picture posted by Shiv above lists EW suite as an external store.

IAF Mk.2 shows much more area ruling to improve aerodynamics, and IN Mk.2 MLG is being re-designed. Mk.2 simply irons out Mk.1 performance deficiencies. It adds some incremental performance enhancements from Mk.1 as a positive side effect. The intent is to keep the empty weight constant while using a higher engine to compensate.

And in your pods-vs-internal EW discussions, normal fighter internal EW suites offer only X-Band jamming. Pods are must for wideband jamming. Sukhoi has a Su-30MKI/A/M variant that carries 3 pods for wideband jamming, to accompany standard Su-30MKI/A/M. http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/de ... 04eb28a9aa That is why we have EA-6 Prowler and the US Navy jammer equipped Hornets. If internal jammers were so good, they wouldnt be building these planes to carry pods.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 14 Feb 2011 16:39

srai wrote: This video is good!

Only suggestion for improvement would be to have the full flight in one continuous clip!

Thanks. But regarding the whole performance I can only say "been there, done that". The truth is that I go armed only with a video camera - anticipating being on my feet and watching the sky of 5-6 hours. I don't have and have never use a monopod but I believe it is useless for an airshow because one often has to cover nearly 180 degrees horizontally and often more than 90 degrees vertically (eg Suryakirans flying overhead from behind)

Over the years my hand has got steadier and steadier and I have figured out exactly what causes shake. But after correcting everything what remains is fatigue. The only way for me to mitigate fatigue is to make all the relaxing movements that cause jerking when the plane is far away and has just finished a maneuver and is positioning itself for another maneuver. I have the full video in most cases but edit out the bad bits.

Still I will soon upload a Su-30 video made right before I left - when I was dog tired and just wanted to sit. It is certainly jerkier than the LCA video for which I was really charged up.

Gurneesh · Post by **Gurneesh** » 14 Feb 2011 18:03

Tejas to be fitted with Israeli Derby missile

http://idrw.org/?p=2773

The Sea Harrier upgrade with the Derby missile was criticized by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG) last year in a report, saying the navy zeroed in on the Derby without a proper open tender procurement process. During trials, the Derby did not perform at the required range, but was still accepted, the CAG said.

Maybe they chose it because of MMR's 2032 lineage. Or maybe R77 was just too heavy (though it weighs only 50 kg more). Though for commonality sake R77 would have been better (as MKI, Bison and Mig29upg all use it).

Baldev · Post by **Baldev** » 14 Feb 2011 19:36

Gurneesh wrote:Tejas to be fitted with Israeli Derby missile

http://idrw.org/?p=2773

The Sea Harrier upgrade with the Derby missile was criticized by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG) last year in a report, saying the navy zeroed in on the Derby without a proper open tender procurement process. During trials, the Derby did not perform at the required range, but was still accepted, the CAG said.
Maybe they chose it because of MMR's 2032 lineage. Or maybe R77 was just too heavy (though it weighs only 50 kg more). Though for commonality sake R77 would have been better (as MKI, Bison and Mig29upg all use it).

if bison can carry 2 r77 then its pretty obvious lca can carry 4-6 of them without any problem.

r77 already in inventory then there is no need to spend money on derby,but someone wants to spend peoples money.
on the other hand rdy3,mica,asraam,topsight also a better option because these are going to be bought for m2000,jags so for tejas it will have commonality.

having 3 types of missiles r77,mica,derby is menace

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 14 Feb 2011 19:45

The hard points stores may be increased with dual rails where ever possible.

Baldev · Post by **Baldev** » 14 Feb 2011 20:00

radar choosen also depend on how much power aircraft's engine can provide for different electronic systems such as mfd,hud,rwr,pods and as well as to radar

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 14 Feb 2011 20:11

there is also this switch mode power supply, that can be advanced enough to support various components supporting various roles.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 14 Feb 2011 20:27

methinks its just a money saving way (readymade derby vs additional time/cost to integrate r77) and the real designated weapon will be astra mk1 in a few yrs. since we are using a imported agat seeker on astra (per reports) and doing the control system and propellant part (in which we have good experience), there will likely be no major roadblocks delaying astra mk1 from FOC.

Baldev · Post by **Baldev** » 14 Feb 2011 20:52

Singha wrote:methinks its just a money saving way (readymade derby vs additional time/cost to integrate r77) and the real designated weapon will be astra mk1 in a few yrs. since we are using a imported agat seeker on astra (per reports) and doing the control system and propellant part (in which we have good experience), there will likely be no major roadblocks delaying astra mk1 from FOC.

no bvr has even been integrated on tejas.

r77 is integrated with kopyo and derby is integrated with 2032 and mica with rdy,so ADA has to choose one of these radars along with missile.but perhaps they choose Israeli avionics all the way i mean derby,2032,LDP probably dash and python too in future and moreover this integration can cost cheaper compared to others to bring lca operational for air to air fight.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 14 Feb 2011 21:02

yes derby is pre-certified with the regular 2032 (on harrier) and should be minimal work with lrde back end which Elta front end uses...I dont think r77 has been integrated on any non-russian ac yet...rus always plays hardball on such issues and will push its own radar....

Gurneesh · Post by **Gurneesh** » 14 Feb 2011 23:05

LCA already uses r-73, so i guess ruskies would not have too much problem with R-77 either (specially when MMR radar is already fixed and it is either sell BVR missiles to LCA or nothing).

If I am not wrong then, R77 is much better than Derby (even performance wise). Gurus clarify...