LCA News and Discussions

member_20292 · Post by **member_20292** » 09 Jul 2012 00:29

^^

Its flying does not compare with the displays I have seen of other planes----Su 30 (of course), F 16, Mirage 2000 , Rafale, EF.

I want to project. "LCA will fly like this place ultimately, when 9G. "

Right now , that is the M2000.

Raja Bose · Post by **Raja Bose** » 09 Jul 2012 00:59

mahadevbhu wrote:^^^

Right now it flies like a nimble 747 IMO

I think mahadevbhu is just trying to be provocative like a dhoti.

Suraj · Post by **Suraj** » 09 Jul 2012 03:26

mahadevbhu: The term for coming into a thread, asking others to give you feedback on the product the thread is about, and straightaway stirring the pot without anyone's response, or even ignoring them, is called trolling. Your post above has been recorded in your user notes. The next time you do it, you will get a warning.

member_20292 · Post by **member_20292** » 09 Jul 2012 07:33

^^^

I wanted a satisfactory response. Anyways.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 09 Jul 2012 07:50

mahadevbhu wrote:^^^
I wanted a satisfactory response.

I once met Angelina Jolie at an airport and invited her politely for a quickie in the men's toilet. A couple of bouncers hit me and handed me over to the airport police. I was innocent. I was just asking for a satisfactory response. i wanted a response that would satisfy MY need. I didn't give a damn about what Angelina Joile or anyone else might see as "satisfactory". My satisfaction was paramount. Anyways..

I invite you to debate your perfectly innocent need for self satisfaction in the OT thread.

khukri · Post by **khukri** » 09 Jul 2012 08:37

shiv wrote:
mahadevbhu wrote:^^^
I wanted a satisfactory response.
I once met Angelina Jolie at an airport and invited her politely for a quickie in the men's toilet. A couple of bouncers hit me and handed me over to the airport police. I was innocent. I was just asking for a satisfactory response. i wanted a response that would satisfy MY need. I didn't give a damn about what Angelina Joile or anyone else might see as "satisfactory". My satisfaction was paramount. Anyways..

I invite you to debate your perfectly innocent need for self satisfaction in the OT thread.

I understand she hates golfers - she must have noticed that your right hand was tanned darker than your left hand!

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 09 Jul 2012 09:23

mahadevbhu wrote:^^^

Right now it flies like a nimble 747 IMO

Dont watch the vid in slow motion

rajanb · Post by **rajanb** » 09 Jul 2012 09:31

Raja Bose wrote:
mahadevbhu wrote:^^^

Right now it flies like a nimble 747 IMO
I think mahadevbhu is just trying to be provocative like a dhoti.

I know. Mahadevbhu hasn't landed at HongKong's old Kai Tak airport in a 747. Manouvreing between hills, high rises and making sure the wingtips don't capture underwear from the washing hanging out of windows!. Maybe not 9G, but skill and sweat.

rajanb · Post by **rajanb** » 09 Jul 2012 09:35

shiv wrote:
mahadevbhu wrote:^^^
I wanted a satisfactory response.
I once met Angelina Jolie at an airport and invited her politely for a quickie in the men's toilet. A couple of bouncers hit me and handed me over to the airport police. I was innocent. I was just asking for a satisfactory response. i wanted a response that would satisfy MY need. I didn't give a damn about what Angelina Joile or anyone else might see as "satisfactory". My satisfaction was paramount. Anyways..

I invite you to debate your perfectly innocent need for self satisfaction in the OT thread.

Humour helps.

member_20292 · Post by **member_20292** » 09 Jul 2012 10:21

^^

can somebody point me out to earlier and older posts comparing and contrasting the performance of our beloved LCA to F 16 , M2000, Mig 29, etc.

I understand some of it..some of the wing design and all. But not all of it.

thanks.

suryag · Post by **suryag** » 09 Jul 2012 11:48

Meanwhile Flight test update

LCA-Tejas has completed 1931 Test Flights successfully. (07-July-2012).
(TD1-233,TD2-305,PV1-242,PV2-222,PV3-348,LSP1-74,LSP2-234,PV5-36,LSP3-72,LSP4-56,LSP5-101,LSP7-4,NP1-4)

from

LCA-Tejas has completed 1925 Test Flights successfully. (03-July-2012).
(TD1-233,TD2-305,PV1-242,PV2-222,PV3-348,LSP1-74,LSP2-230,PV5-36,LSP3-70,LSP4-56,LSP5-101,LSP7-4,NP1-4)

vic · Post by **vic** » 09 Jul 2012 12:50

I also need a satisfactory response whether Angelina Jolie errrr LCA MK 3 ie stealth version is contemplated seriously? Saraswat interview along with HAL picture raises my errrr expectations. Though HAL picture looked more like semi stealth single engined Rafale?????

alexis · Post by **alexis** » 09 Jul 2012 13:53

shiv wrote:
mahadevbhu wrote:^^^
I wanted a satisfactory response.
I once met Angelina Jolie at an airport and invited her politely for a quickie in the men's toilet. A couple of bouncers hit me and handed me over to the airport police. I was innocent. I was just asking for a satisfactory response. i wanted a response that would satisfy MY need. I didn't give a damn about what Angelina Joile or anyone else might see as "satisfactory". My satisfaction was paramount. Anyways..

I invite you to debate your perfectly innocent need for self satisfaction in the OT thread.

Nice one, shiv!

However the intended target seems not to have grasped the barb.

nikhil_p · Post by **nikhil_p** » 09 Jul 2012 14:05

mahadevbhu wrote:How good is the LCA?

I understand that it has a double anhedral twisted hammered down cranked wing. (mouthful, that)

Which means thats its aerodynamic performance....when fully developed, should match the Mirage 2000s currently (maybe slightly better)

Hence to imagine how cool the LCA will ultimately look in airshows and dogfights, one can watch current Mirage 2000 airshow videos on youtube?

Is that right??

Do you drive a car? If yes what model?

Let me tell you something, whichever car you drive is CRAP and not fit to be driven in. The reasons are as below.
1 - Your car will not be able to pull a 4.5G turn
2 - Your car does not have a body shell made of carbon graphite composite
3 - Your car engine lasts 4000+ kms.
4 - Your car is driven by a ignoramus
5 - Your car is not seen on TV!

An F1 car can do all this! and does so superbly. But it is equally true that an F1 Car when being tested cannot do all this!

Do you know that one of the most effective dogfight aircraft of all time was the spitfire? do you also know that it had a greater turning radius than the Bf109? It however had a beauty of an engine (RR Merlin?). Do you also know that the Hawker Hurricane was a substandard dog fighter but an excellent bomber and ground support aircraft?

Do you realise that the LCA is a product under development. Do you know that the so called 4.5 Gen Gripen had more than 4 crashes during tests and that was even before IOC? Do you know that the Mirage 2000 that you refer to has excellent straight line speed but lacks a sharp turning ability. Please read up some more before you come here and start trolling!

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 09 Jul 2012 16:10

mahadevbhu wrote: I understand some of it..some of the wing design and all. But not all of it.

Really? You must be one heck of a smart guy. I understand nothing of wing design and all. Could you explain what you understand? We depend on occasional pearls from an aerodynamics guru such as yourself, who understands something about wing design to enlighten us. You should be teaching some of the morons who frequent this board. Not the other way round.

member_20292 · Post by **member_20292** » 09 Jul 2012 16:30

^^^

I can't reply to these wonderful comments by both Shiv and Nikhil. So I will simply repeat what I requested earlier and then cease and desist from any more convo on this thread.

qn. How will the LCA compare with the F 16 and the Mirage 2000 when it becomes fully operational? I'm sure, having lurked on this forum for a while, and having read a lot, that I have come across some earlier posts on the same issue . But. I forget.
Will some kind Sir please point me out to some earlier posts or thread that discusses this comparison, indirectly or directly?

Mucho gracias.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 09 Jul 2012 16:47

mahadevbhu wrote: qn. How will the LCA compare with the F 16 and the Mirage 2000 when it becomes fully operational? I'm sure, having lurked on this forum for a while, and having read a lot, that I have come across some earlier posts on the same issue . But. I forget.
Will some kind Sir please point me out to some earlier posts or thread that discusses this comparison, indirectly or directly?

How do you think anyone will know the performance of an aircraft that is not yet operational? My reply may seem combative but your questions are less innocent than you claim. You have stated earlier that the LCA can be seen manoeuvring like a 747 in a video. You already have an opinion about the LCA, so why ask? And please stop pretending that comparisons between the manoevrability of the LCA with F-16 and M2000 have been made in the past on this forum. No sane person can do that before the LCA goes into service and the IAF gets a chance to handle it.

If those posts exist i am sure you can locate them using the forum search function. After all other forum members would have to do it for you. You can do that. After all you are smart enough to know about wing design. If you locate even one post where these aircraft have been compared on BRF you will see an apology from me on BRF

And my question to you stands. What do you know about wing design?

krish.pf · Post by **krish.pf** » 09 Jul 2012 17:04

can somebody point me out to earlier and older posts comparing and contrasting the performance of our beloved LCA to F 16 , M2000, Mig 29, etc.

No Idea about LCA but for Mirage-2000H vs MiG-29B refer here - http://www.angelfire.com/falcon/fighter ... ig-29.html

Do you know that the Mirage 2000 that you refer to has excellent straight line speed but lacks a sharp turning ability.

Mirage-2000 is good for sharp turns aka instantaneous turn rate, but poor sustained turn rate.

Ardeshir · Post by **Ardeshir** » 09 Jul 2012 18:06

mahadevbhu wrote:Mucho gracias.

And while you are at it, "Thank You" is better than gramattically incorrect Spanish. It's Muchas Gracias.

Raman · Post by **Raman** » 10 Jul 2012 01:19

maitya wrote:Kartik, aerodynamically what is the diff between launching a BVR missile and that of a dumb-bomb/external store?

I can understand the rail launch related aerodynamic launch-complexities of a WVR missile but what is it for a R-77/Derby/AMRAAM etc kind of BVR missiles.

There are three ways of launching a munition:
- gravity drop
- rail launch
- ejector launch (using gas-cartridge powered pins)

Many dumb-munitions and bombs are launched using gravity drop, and are generally done from a wings-level, right-side-up attitude in relatively static conditions. E.g., you'll never launch an dumb bomb flying upside down or while rolling.

None of these are the case for A-A missiles: munitions are often ejected to ensure clearance from the aircraft (even if upside down), or rail launched (like R-73), and launches are often done at more extreme attitudes (e.g., pitch down/up) and conditions (e.g., while rolling). Thus, the separation trials have many more test points to consider.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 10 Jul 2012 04:02

vic wrote:I also need a satisfactory response whether Angelina Jolie errrr LCA MK 3 ie stealth version is contemplated seriously? Saraswat interview along with HAL picture raises my errrr expectations. Though HAL picture looked more like semi stealth single engined Rafale?????

which HAL picture?

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 10 Jul 2012 08:23

a 747 look and feel for mr. bhu!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... 7kLjhxvXFg

Enjoy it on 1080p mode if you do have on your monitor.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 10 Jul 2012 08:40

SaiK wrote:a 747 look and feel for mr. bhu!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... 7kLjhxvXFg

Enjoy it on 1080p mode if you do have on your monitor.

Here is a timed comparison
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7V4waXZLxSE

Dileep · Post by **Dileep** » 10 Jul 2012 11:51

Mahadev, why don't you go to the next AI show and see for yourself!!

member_20033 · Post by **member_20033** » 10 Jul 2012 13:17

Dear All,

I am very surprised by aggressive response to Mahadev's post. I think novice readers like me who are very enthusiastic about our own indigenous products would love to know where we stand vis/a/vis other proven platforms.

If this cant be told with certainty than experienced BRFite can simply tell us that this cant be done instead of getting aggressive with our request.

Regards

Yogi_G · Post by **Yogi_G** » 10 Jul 2012 13:37

I hope they dont pull the plug on Aero India 2013, I have been waiting to see the LCA in action for a long time. I hope this time around the LCA pushes the AoA envelope to the maximum it has been tested to provide the "oomph" factor.

Zynda · Post by **Zynda** » 10 Jul 2012 13:40

Dear C,
There is enough open source information (BRF forum, articles etc) about LCA program goals, its design features and the program's impact on local Mil-industry Complex. Newbies are requested to go through the same and are encouraged to lurk a while before posting questions which have been answered numerous times before.

Tejas is an aircraft still in testing phase. Answers to certain questions like maneuvering capabilities wrt F-16 etc., can be answered competently only by end users i.e. IAF. So far the pilots who have had a chance to fly LCA have expressed positive sentiments about its handling capabilities (not personally to me but to media

)

Also some of us who have had a chance to see LCA fly at air shows can report that even with flight envelope not opened entirely, the plane did look impressive.

member_23657 · Post by **member_23657** » 10 Jul 2012 13:49

Kartik wrote:
vic wrote:I also need a satisfactory response whether Angelina Jolie errrr LCA MK 3 ie stealth version is contemplated seriously? Saraswat interview along with HAL picture raises my errrr expectations. Though HAL picture looked more like semi stealth single engined Rafale?????
which HAL picture?

I came across this article which throws some light on a future LCA MKIII.. But I am not very sure about the stealthiness of the LCA(picture inset) in the article..
If fellow BRFites have some more info on this, please share.

Thanks

abhijitm · Post by **abhijitm** » 10 Jul 2012 14:02

mahadevbhu wrote:qn. How will the LCA compare with the F 16 and the Mirage 2000 when it becomes fully operational?

Why this urge to compare LCA with other planes? What are the comparable parameters? LCA is custom built for the IAF need of certain operational capabilities, cost and indigenousness.

member_20292 · Post by **member_20292** » 10 Jul 2012 14:19

^^^

To me, in short; LCA == Mirage 2000.

thanks all.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 10 Jul 2012 16:51

bhu, please define "==" first.

Chanakaya wrote:.. about our own indigenous products would love to know where we stand vis/a/vis other proven platforms.

1. This thread has left a lot of discussion trail, in addition to www and google.
2. There are no born gurus in BR.
3. No novice can expect to given shishya like in elementary school. meaning please do your homework first.
4. bhu, has already concluded what LCA is., and then AK phyrring.. or that is the language he has chosen

And, you have a point to know where we stand.. unless you want specifics you will not know.
1. engine and controls
2. fuselage and wing design
3. static stability, control laws, and aerodynamics
4. avionics and electronics
5. counter measure systems and warning systems
6. radar and irst
7. weapon systems and stores
8. modular design and LRUs
9. V&V - requirements vs. achievements
10. User specific ops needs - SEAD, CAS, etc..

so, how in the world one could shoot at 100K ft, and then get specific answers?

shiv, kartik and other experts are ever willing to answer your genuine questions.

rgsrini · Post by **rgsrini** » 10 Jul 2012 17:23

Saik wrote:a 747 look and feel for mr. bhu!

Saik, I completely understand where Mr.Bhu is coming from. Infact this video is conclusive proof that LCA is a dud, in its own words.
In the video, LCA repeatedly draws a "0" in the air clearly communicating that it is useless. It is also flies upside down several times, indicating that it will quickly go "belly up" in a war. Regarding formation flights, it indicates that it does not have the "guts" to go to war alone and it needs 3 other LCAs by its side to face the enemy.

Bhu... forget it man. It is useless to discuss with these folks. These folks are not experts like us. I am convinced that they have no clue in reading the body language of an aircraft. It is an art like interpreting the movements of an elephant's a.ss.

member_22539 · Post by **member_22539** » 10 Jul 2012 18:05

^

+1

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 10 Jul 2012 19:15

a.peter, not sure about that article, but I think Mk.3 is far fetched now.. of course there is nothing wrong in planning, but it must be more pragmatic given staged capabilities and expertise. It would be ideal to focus on Mk2 now rather Mk3 and AMCA, which is a natural progression.

We have got long way to go in terms of the critical precision engineering sub systems like the core engine Kaveri. Which is a mandatory requirement for any jingo lungi dance from the current shivering dhotis status.
The key progress should be seen from this core engine section, when done, will put India a little ahead than china in this area of expertise. Only USA+UK chela, France, Russia are the established leaders here. If India gets ahead than Chinas ws10, then we could walk with brighter face.. where our dhoti-shiver++ just happened after china's manned space flight. So, the point is Kaveri++ is fundamental need for giving any color to lungi.

Stealth is not a precision-critical problem (in the sense - safety critical as would be the engine class).. but more of RCS. Composites themselves disperse mw radiations is the report. not sure which direction and how. need you to research and post. these information will not be available freely.

of course, you could go about from first principles, and ask questions to our radar gurus in the radar thread. our own LCA MMR is the second in the priority of things that needs to be done..

so, stealth is out of requirement right now for FoC LCA.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 10 Jul 2012 19:22

Yogi_G wrote:I hope they dont pull the plug on Aero India 2013, I have been waiting to see the LCA in action for a long time. I hope this time around the LCA pushes the AoA envelope to the maximum it has been tested to provide the "oomph" factor.

LCA in Aero India 2011 was a 5G performance. Air Marshal Rajkumar had told me that a 7G performance had been planned but was cancelled because of software issues. In fact the Aero India video from which I made the above video disappointed me because 2-3 days previously on the golf course I had seen an LCA doing some really impressive stuff - that did not appear on the show. So I presume it had been preparing for a higher-G show.

member_23657 · Post by **member_23657** » 10 Jul 2012 21:32

SaiK wrote:a.peter, not sure about that article, but I think Mk.3 is far fetched now.. of course there is nothing wrong in planning, but it must be more pragmatic given staged capabilities and expertise. It would be ideal to focus on Mk2 now rather Mk3 and AMCA, which is a natural progression.

We have got long way to go in terms of the critical precision engineering sub systems like the core engine Kaveri. Which is a mandatory requirement for any jingo lungi dance from the current shivering dhotis status.
The key progress should be seen from this core engine section, when done, will put India a little ahead than china in this area of expertise. Only USA+UK chela, France, Russia are the established leaders here. If India gets ahead than Chinas ws10, then we could walk with brighter face.. where our dhoti-shiver++ just happened after china's manned space flight. So, the point is Kaveri++ is fundamental need for giving any color to lungi.

Stealth is not a precision-critical problem (in the sense - safety critical as would be the engine class).. but more of RCS. Composites themselves disperse mw radiations is the report. not sure which direction and how. need you to research and post. these information will not be available freely.

of course, you could go about from first principles, and ask questions to our radar gurus in the radar thread. our own LCA MMR is the second in the priority of things that needs to be done..

so, stealth is out of requirement right now for FoC LCA.

Rightly said SaiK: Mk3 is far fetched now.. We should wait for LCA Mk1, Mk2 to mature enough, and with proper technological and manufacturing advancements in place by the time these platforms mature DRDO can start working on Mk3..

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 10 Jul 2012 22:46

Chanakya and Mahadev ji,

I don't want to preach to the choir here. But aren't you being lazy? You are asking somebody to put in an effort to summarize LCA vis-a-vis other planes. It is easily a 1-2 hours job to put together a coherent reply to that question.

If you are really interested to know, check the competition (Gripen/JF-17/T-50 Golden Eagle/Mirage 2000-5 and to a lesser extent J-10/F-16). Check the vital features: flight envelop, range, armaments, avionics, radar, self protection suite, cockpit design etc. Then, if you have specific question about (say) the radar performance, or AoA or turn rates etc., people here will be happy to answer/discuss. There is a very high chance that your questions would be repeat questions. But there is no harm in asking those questions.

But, a question like "How is LCA with regards to its competitors" and a comment "we have been lurking here for long enough" cannot be simultaneously true. You are only asking hakim and co. to do your hajamat! There are very respected posters who lurked for over 2 years before asking their first question. There are some other posters who have a post count of less than 200 inspite of being here for 10 years. Just check the quality of their posts!

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 10 Jul 2012 23:42

avinashpeter wrote:

I came across this article which throws some light on a future LCA MKIII.. But I am not very sure about the stealthiness of the LCA(picture inset) in the article..
If fellow BRFites have some more info on this, please share.

Thanks

THAT image?! Who on earth said that it was the Tejas Mk3? Its just a picture of the Tejas Mk1 ! If Vic thought that it was an HAL picture of the Tejas Mk3, then really the fault lies with him, not with anyone else.

member_20292 · Post by **member_20292** » 11 Jul 2012 02:29

@kartik

That fellow youtube Terence Fornoff mentioned that the Mig 21 had some sort of Israeli jammer.

I wonder whats the jammer/EW (Tarang? Mayavi?) in the LCA?

What hardware component propagates those jamming waves...the radar itself?

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 11 Jul 2012 03:28

LCA should get mayavi EW suite.

there is a lot of jamming techniques.. it should be classified for what technique they would be using. I doubt you will get to know the details there.