Archer

Nice video here

Its shaping up to be a nice bird.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJk1kmwlQnI

For a download

http://rapidshare.de/files/34590484/...owres.wmv.html

Still a few years away from IOC, and then FOC, but good enthusiasm & gung-ho spirit amongst the developers.

__________________
Karmani Vyapurutham Dhanuhu

My bow is stretched for its task

Archer

Pretty interesting...the IAF is now following the IN way and deputing its Project Management teams to various groups in the LCA program..

Attached Images

LCA.jpg (217.8 KB, 596 views)

kams

Archer,

Very interesting interview. Do you have rest of the interview?

They have removed the weight restriction from MRCA RFP .

Tronic

wow... the Tejas looks damn nice in the low-vis scheme... simply a beauty...

__________________
Nabha Sparasham Deeptam
-Touch The Sky With Glory

AviramDj

wow they built a phantom ! good job . in 20 years they will build a f16 wanna be aircraft.

Tronic

dumbass from what angle does that look like a Phantom to you???

starsiege

have u ever seen a phantom? and do u know what delta wing means?..pls dont humiliate urself any further just some friendly advice

Archer

I looked at it twenty different ways, and it nowhere near appears like a Phantom to me.

Regarding F-16 wannabe, we've moved onto JSF wannabes, with Ivan & co, lol..

starsiege

Archer that movie was very good!

Akshay

ADA now seriously needs to concentrate on MCA. The era of single-engined ac is coming to an end. LCA/JF-17 or even F-16 offer a very limited degree of TVC.

__________________
If at first you don't succeed, call it v1.0!

Archer

Cheers! Apart from the radar & the engine, the dudes have worked out all the other things pretty well. These two also have fallbacks, Ge404 and Elta/ Kopyo to give the development team some more time to fix the issues!

Archer

That statement does not compute. You can add TVC to an aircraft, and once we fix Kaveri, that could be a future project. I also disagree that light weight aircraft are unnecessary- they are much cheaper to operate & use, and for part of our requirements (bash Pakistan around something fierce), tactical single engine fighters are pretty useful.

Akshay

TVC can be added but a single engined aircraft will offer a very limited degree of Thrust vector control. Take the case of Mig-35 which can stay still in the air & rotate 360 deg. I can never imagine a single-engined aircraft to do something like that since the engine is continuously emmitting thrust & you need a counter thrust to balance it something just not possible with a single engined aircraft. I've never seen a F-16 doing a cobra & according to the laws of aerodynamics it is not posible since the thrust from a single engine can never act against the air or wind resistance thereby disbalancing the aircraft. However, with twin engine you can balance the wind force & keep the aircraft balanced during the cobra maneuver. I am speaking from the aerodynamics PoV although, it'll also depend on the engine. But still, I do not believe that a single-engined aircraft can be as maneuverable as a twin-engined AC if both of them belong to the same gen & use same engineering standards.

highsea

TVC is not relevant for WVR maneuvering with HOBS heaters the standard. It is relevant in supersonic maneuvering wrt retention of energy, and in terms of the MCA, in reducing RCS if the vert stabs can be omitted. All delta's have the problem of low sustained turn rates.

As a carrier AC, even with canards, LCA will have higher landing AOA and speed than a conventional tailplane design. This makes the job much more difficult for the pilot, and is always a problem when employing deltas on flight decks.

LIF's will become less useful as simulators improve, and non-stealthy aircraft will be increasingly vulnerable to the next generation long range AAM's, even the Chinese ones. Small fighters with their tiny radar apertures will be at a disadvantage without networked support from other assets.

HAL's production capacity is not such that LCA can be inducted in large numbers quickly- 12 frames a year is the plan, last I heard.

All of which means the LCA will be battling platform obsolescence from day 1 of IOC.

__________________
My baby called me up. She said- Why don't you ever take me out? Pick me up in your brand new car....You shake the short change from the old fruit jar...

Archer

I disagree partly here. Even in WVR, based on conversation with IAF pilots, Aircraft with HOBS heaters and TVC are better than pure HOBs heaters alone. The LCA's STRs have not been DECLAS yet, but the original designers are on record stating that the designs specs were to better the Mirage & MiG-29 which should be sufficient for its role.

True. But, the LCA N's approach speed will be 130 knots, which is fairly comparable to the F/A-18s approach speed of 134 knots, so it should not be a problem. Approach Alpha= 15 degrees, which is quite reasonable.

http://www.danshistory.com/fa18.html

The issue here is of cost effectiveness and situational context. In the Indo-Pak-PRC matchup, a fighter like the LCA is quite useful and will be complemented by substantial numbers of large/ medium fighters, backed up by AWACs and advanced ADGES networks. Advances in AAM technology are a threat, but will also face complementary advances in EW. The LCA is getting a state of the art EW suite in codevelopment with Israel, so it should be a fairly creditable platform. Whilst simulators are going to take up flying hours, I would still wager that actual flight hours are going to be a substantial portion of the average training markup for the IAF/ per aircraft type, and lower operating costs-local spares burn would make the LCA a valid proposition.

True & this is a struggle the LCA will have to overcome but then again, the same can be said of every non stealth platform out there, which range from the EF/ Rafale/ Gripen to the newer Chinese types such as the Gripen and the J-10. Besides HALs plans in the interim can be changed depending on IAF requirements as done previously.

The LCA is basically meant to provide a much more modern replacement for the plethora of MiG types the IAF currently relies upon, and with a good sensors and munitions fit, is quite suitable for the role.

For a case in point, the IAFs preference was for the Mirage 2000-5 Mk2, which would in its view fit its operational roles quite well. The LCA fills many of the same roles and offers similar capabilities, bar others (range/ payload). If we take the Gripen for instance, even that fits squarely into the LCA slot and does not offer any substantial advantages. (Bar of course, that its ready already). AESA radars also offer substantial advantages in optimizing aperture constraints.

The LCA's MMR currently has a 650 mm dia, and provided the weight of a fixed array set can be balanced out, it can squeeze in an AESA with fairly respectable (equal to current medium weight fighters) in there. Selex has already offered its Vixen 500 E, and Elta its 2052. It depends on IAF requirements what they go for.