LCA News and Discussions

Sagar G · Post by **Sagar G** » 16 Jul 2013 19:00

NRao wrote:The fact that they have pretty much shut down the AMCA program and moved most, if not everyone, to the LCA MK-I certification effort shows where their newly formed focus is - so that topic should be laid to rest.

What is your source for this "fact" as you say ???

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 16 Jul 2013 19:19

Sagar G wrote:
NRao wrote:The fact that they have pretty much shut down the AMCA program and moved most, if not everyone, to the LCA MK-I certification effort shows where their newly formed focus is - so that topic should be laid to rest.
What is your source for this "fact" as you say ???

Sorry, thought this was common knowledge. No?

April 21, 2013 :: Tejas grounds Medium Combat Aircraft project

Is this considered DDM?

And the Russian source on the previous page.

Sagar G · Post by **Sagar G** » 16 Jul 2013 19:30

The reason for the sudden decision to send the AMCA project—which began in right earnest in 2006 as the Medium Combat Aircraft (MCA) development in 2006—to cold storage is to help ADA to focus all its energies to first work on completing the much-delayed LCA project. “The AMCA has been put on hold for the moment. This decision was taken recently to let the ADA focus on the LCA project,” top Defence Ministry sources told The Sunday Standard. The AMCA project, for which the IAF provided the final Air Staff Qualitative Requirements (ASQR) in April 2010, may be taken up at a later date, sources said. But that will still be far away in the future.

OMG "TAAAAAP Defence Ministry Source", yup it's absolutely legit

You also said that "shut down the AMCA program moved most, if not everyone, to the LCA MK-I certification effort". Which "TAAAAP Defence Ministry Source" confirmed this ???

I apologise for my lack of knowledge regarding this matter since I certainly don't have any "TAAAAP Defence Ministry Source".

Sagar G · Post by **Sagar G** » 16 Jul 2013 19:55

Probing the article further there is....

The much-touted Tejas has taken 30 years already, at an escalated project cost of Rs 5,489 crore. Since the LCA project was sanctioned in 1983 at a cost of Rs 560 crore, the time overrun has resulted in a 10-fold increase in the project cost. The plane is yet to get even its Initial Operational Clearance (IOC) so that the IAF could take the plane for a spin. But sources pointed out that the LCA still lacks certain critical capabilities, including a reliable radar, and is deficient in at least 100 technical parameters. “The plane cannot fly on its own. It needs a lifeline in the form of support and monitoring of its systems from the ground by technicians,” they TAAAAAP Defence Ministry Source of course said.

and

The LCA, in fact, gave creditable flying displays during the AeroIndia show in Yelahanka in Bangalore in February this year, and followed it up with weapons firing to hit both ground and aerial targets during the Iron Fist fire power display by the IAF in the Rajasthan’s Pokhran ranges, again in February this year. “The common man thinks the plane is doing fine, its engine sounds great and the manoeuvres are perfect. But those flying and weapons firing displays are done with ground monitoring and support. The plane is still not ready to flying on its own,” sources stressed. Their guess is the LCA may not meet its schedule of obtaining the IOC before July this year and it could take till December this year or early next year before it is ready. To give an example of LCA’s troubles, the sources noted that LCA was grounded for three months between September and December 2012 following problems with its landing gear. “Normally, a combat plane is ready for its next sortie following a 30-minute attention from ground service personnel soon after it has returned from a mission. In the case of LCA, after a single sortie of about an hour or so, it needs three days of servicing before it can go for its next sortie,” they said.

Deja Vu anyone ??? This crap was printed before and IIRC was discussed here and in AMCA thread where it was shown factually that this allegation was wrong and motivated. But of course who can question "TAAAAAP Defence Ministry Source".

Brando · Post by **Brando** » 16 Jul 2013 20:53

NRao wrote: I think, seriously, that the IAF should accept a rolling IOC/FOC (something they have done when it comes to foreign efforts - MKI in particular). IF the MoD + IAF (and others) are going to insist on a hard date for IOC/FOC, the LCA (and perhaps even the AMCA) are doomed to fail. Sadly something we seem to be witnessing WRT the Arjun. Heck even the likes of Toyota have recalls with years of experience under their belt.

This sounds like an argument for the LCA project to go on for another 3 decades merely to satisfy academic interests instead of fulfilling the practical goals and the reasons why the Indian tax payers have sunk so much time and money into the LCA program - the need for a reliable fighter aircraft to bolster the security of India today.

Any pedantic indulgences should not come at the cost of national security needs. Every day the LCA project is delayed from achieving the FOC is another day an Indian pilot is forced to risk his life with a Mig-21 costing the Indian Taxpayer tremendous money on training new pilots apart from the real cost in lives and livelihoods.

If close to 2200 test flights haven't been enough then they need to be more aggressive with their testing regimen because the LCA project is a real world urgent requirement that the IAF is counting on - there no choices but to set firm deadlines and as the ones bankrolling the LCA program, the GoI has every right to set firm deadlines and metrics for the scientists to meet and force them to do so, otherwise it would be negligent on their part to not demand timely results as the custodians of our national security and our tax money.

Unlike a Toyota, the Indian Air Force pilot when given the call has no choice but to get into his Mig-21 because there is nothing better or safer available. The LCA is urgently needed and it is proper that the Politicians have made this goal a priority as it ought to have been from the very start. No project or enterprise anywhere is allowed to go on indefinitely without delivering results.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 17 Jul 2013 02:23

Well put Brando.It is only in the last few years that the GOI has realised the importance of the LCA project,as the financial implications of acquiring MIG-21 replacements in the hundreds stare at the govt. in the face.With the callous mismanagement of the economy leading to rampant inflation,declining industrial output,corporate India investing abroad-thanks to babudom and corruption,the rupee in free-fall,I seriously wonder whether the GOI actually has the money to actually buy from abroad even where decisions have been made.Petrol prices have been hiked 4 times in a month(!) and the GOI's best brains (ha!ha!) of Dr.Singh,PC and Mntek,are clueless as to how to stem the rot.As a wise old owl tells me repeatedly,the election will be won by the side that "knows its onions".

One supposes that the babus and PSU honchos expect the armed forces to maintain their falling-apart fleets of aircraft and helos with red tape and string,just as they do with their files!

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 17 Jul 2013 05:12

what is hidden is the status of testing... we only know numbers, and way too abstract data to even discuss anything. we can only go by schedule out in public, and perhaps certain features displayed. what is important for all schedule slips, is to RTI the fact, (not tech details), where are they in terms of meeting the schedule. weekly updates from now, with time to delivery and target reachable or not, and how they are slipping.

will some ears clean up now, and pay attention to public cry? team lca - please show progress for aam eyes.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 17 Jul 2013 07:39

+1 to Brando . doing a Phd/MS r&d thesis project is way different from a commercial product. many of us have done both and all realize the much higher level of testing and "last 10%" effort needed to make it robust, well documented, customer centric etc. not too many product cos are successful because its a hard thing to do. HAL via Tejas and Dhruv is making the transition from a licensed assembler and maintainer to a OEM which has to figure out everything itself with no imported manuals or "consultants" to help. obviously its painful but there is no ther way fwd.

the idea of keeping the Mig-21s flying until 2020 is scary. their engines are the same R-25 and nothing has changed in last few yrs to indicate it is any easier to get their spare parts. I dont now how flying hrs are being kept up or whether some risky regimes have been deleted from Mig-21 flying. there is a quiet blackout on how our Mig21 bison fleet is faring, uptimes etc.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 17 Jul 2013 10:39

lesson is that a story is done, only when it is operationalized and user capabilities enhanced.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 17 Jul 2013 10:51

SaiK wrote:lesson is that a story is done, only when it is operationalized and user capabilities enhanced.

Very, very true. Just that for the MK-I it will happen when it happens. I would expect it would be far smaller cycle for the MK-II and even smaller for the AMCA. I just wish the FGFA had gone through a greater design change than it has to date - allowing Indians to actually experience the testing phase from a lot more experienced Russians.

I just do not think one can take any shortcuts for testing and the posts we see of the number of test flights per version, is really of no use. It does not tell us what was tested and were they successful. Just that that number of flights occurred. Establishing a baseline for a rookie nation is going to take a long time. But it is a necessary step.

Anyways ............................

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 18 Jul 2013 09:19

LCA Jamnagar Detachment July 2013

LSP-3

LSP-5

LSP-7

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 18 Jul 2013 09:25

Check out the website guys, they have got extra large pictures , nice for wallpapers

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 18 Jul 2013 10:13

freakin awesome !! these pics made my morning !

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 18 Jul 2013 10:19

Brilliant pics! Even with underwing stores the LCA is going to be a very small bird and difficult to pick up.I wonder what the RCS of the LCA is in this configuration.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 18 Jul 2013 10:58

night shot is great. looks like they are using those yellow tapes as "stress gauge" thing ...?

varunalh · Post by **varunalh** » 18 Jul 2013 11:18

Some chaiwala news on NP1. They are planning to have the next flight of it on the 29th.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 18 Jul 2013 11:42

of July ? if true, then tumhaare mooh mae ghee shakkar !

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 18 Jul 2013 11:44

I think I just heard an LCA fly overhead..

MN Kumar · Post by **MN Kumar** » 18 Jul 2013 11:47

Great pics.
Is there any significance to the black & white square blocks on the launch rail?
Does it indicate the number of times its been used?

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 18 Jul 2013 11:54

the black and white squares are used for camera alignment for filming stores release tests

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 18 Jul 2013 11:57

Check the forth picture...first time seeing those on her

pragnya · Post by **pragnya** » 18 Jul 2013 12:03

Kartik wrote:I think I just heard an LCA fly overhead..

Kartik, can you drop a line at jois(number thirteen)at google mail. needed to write you for a friend in bengaluru.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 18 Jul 2013 12:49

I think we will still see more changes in APU air intake. This intake makes no sense to me. Why smoothen it out and they have a scoop penetrating out. To me it looks the small slit was not providing enough air and they are going ahead with testing with this jugaad scoop.

Click for higher resolution

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 18 Jul 2013 13:05

krishnan wrote:Check the forth picture...first time seeing those on her

I am sure you would have seen it before.

From weapons trials

From 2012 detachment

From 2013 calendar

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 18 Jul 2013 14:24

Indranil,there was some debate about the shape of the aux. scoop a long time ago,as to why it was horizontal and not in a vertical config. as we see on other aircraft.Is it because there is no space left for such an alignment ,the fuselage being packed with eqpt.Has there been any official answer for such ?

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 18 Jul 2013 15:20

pragnya wrote:
Kartik wrote:I think I just heard an LCA fly overhead..
Kartik, can you drop a line at jois(number thirteen)at google mail. needed to write you for a friend in bengaluru.

sorry pragnya whats the email id again?

vina · Post by **vina** » 18 Jul 2013 15:38

Look closely at the differences between the LSP-3/5 and LSP-7. You can see aerodynamic differences. Apart from the inlet on the spine, in the tail, there is an extension so that the wing-tail fairing ends smoothly at the end rather than an abrupt termination at the LSP-3/5. Also, a small pinching of the fuselage on the flanks in the rear in the LSP-7 ? I am not sure .

Probably the nose has change as well, dunno, cant make out.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 18 Jul 2013 15:50

Philip wrote:Indranil,there was some debate about the shape of the aux. scoop a long time ago,as to why it was horizontal and not in a vertical config. as we see on other aircraft.Is it because there is no space left for such an alignment ,the fuselage being packed with eqpt.Has there been any official answer for such ?

Philip sir,

Kartik and I were having that discussion after the article by Prof. Prodyut Das. The vertical and the horizontal arrangements have nothing to do with space. Then they found out that they needed to decrease the drag. In very layman's terms, anything which is blunt creates more drag. So they smoothened APU intake and just had a slit in this smoothened hump. At that time, the slit looked quite small to in comparison to the previous intake size. Actually, I was expecting a NACA airduct(I had made a comment on the same as well and Raghuk had replied that it was just a slit). But I assumed that ADA must have done the calculations well. But, looks like they did not.

vina wrote:Look closely at the differences between the LSP-3/5 and LSP-7. You can see aerodynamic differences. Apart from the inlet on the spine, in the tail, there is an extension so that the wing-tail fairing ends smoothly at the end rather than an abrupt termination at the LSP-3/5. Also, a small pinching of the fuselage on the flanks in the rear in the LSP-7 ? I am not sure .

Probably the nose has change as well, dunno, cant make out.

I don't know about the pinching of the fuselage. I don't see the change. But the other changes were there from the time LSP-7 was rolled out. In fact they have discussing and publishing these changes for some time now. Kartik and I thought that it would be part of Mk2 (as the paper also spoke about the fuselage plug). But we were pleasantly surprised to see the changes in LSP7 itself. I am quite sure you will be seeing redesigned pylons as well sometime soon. I would be jumping, if I see the MLG doors being used at airbrakes (they have done some studies).

varunalh · Post by **varunalh** » 18 Jul 2013 17:02

Kartik wrote:of July ? if true, then tumhaare mooh mae ghee shakkar !

Kartik. Yes it is July unless they find something else which needs a fix.

pragnya · Post by **pragnya** » 18 Jul 2013 17:33

Kartik wrote:sorry pragnya whats the email id again?

[email protected]

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 18 Jul 2013 18:05

where are the lsp-8s? i don't get to see pics and videos at all.

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 18 Jul 2013 18:38

Saik-ji you are missing something, those are such a beautiful pictures,

member_22905 · Post by **member_22905** » 18 Jul 2013 21:21

Regarding aerodynamic changes planned for LCA: http://drdo.gov.in/drdo/pub/dss/2009/main/2-CEMILAC.pdf

In case not posted earlier

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 18 Jul 2013 21:42

why bring in old articles without specifying what you are intending to bring out to topic?

what is the new study on the table?

titash · Post by **titash** » 18 Jul 2013 22:08

SanthoshS wrote:Regarding aerodynamic changes planned for LCA: http://drdo.gov.in/drdo/pub/dss/2009/main/2-CEMILAC.pdf

In case not posted earlier

There's a few useful snippets in here:

3.3 Sustained Turn Rate Improvement using Levcon

Leading Edge Controller (Levcon) is an secondary
control surface located at the leading edge of the wing
and the fuselage. The Levcon is initially planned in LCA
Navy for the low landing speed capability and other cruise
performance. An important requirement of a fighter aircraft
is the Sustained Turn Rate (STR). The fighter variant of
Tejas is not meeting the STR requirement of ASR. The STR
is a strong function of the aerodynamic efficiency. From
the wind tunnel results it was found that the Levcon produce
higher L/D (Fig. 17). A detailed study to implement Levcon
in fighter and identification of other design constraints is
under progress.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 18 Jul 2013 22:20

titash wrote:
SanthoshS wrote:Regarding aerodynamic changes planned for LCA: http://drdo.gov.in/drdo/pub/dss/2009/main/2-CEMILAC.pdf

In case not posted earlier
There's a few useful snippets in here:

That article is from 2009.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 19 Jul 2013 02:13

would not the wing tip design better benefit the sustained turn rate than levcons?

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 19 Jul 2013 17:08

SaiK wrote:would not the wing tip design better benefit the sustained turn rate than levcons?

That does not make sense at all.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 20 Jul 2013 10:13

i was thinking the pointier the tip, better is the turn rate because it would aid the stall in tight turns. i could be wrong or perhaps it might lose speed.

member_22605 · Post by **member_22605** » 20 Jul 2013 10:46

Tip shape for better speed and lower noise is a very helicopter specific area Saik sahaab IMHO. But even there its kind of very minor but significant enough to be worth the effort.
Cheers!