"beautiful" LCA

page: 4
2
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 9 2004 @ 05:16 AM
link   
So are u working on the lockheed X-45 or the northrup "pegasus"...




posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 06:05 PM
link   
Hi


Originally posted by engineer
LCA is proving to be a little ambitious at this point, the IAF should rethink it's philosophy on indiginous systems and focus on getting the AC through tests and into production. Upgrades and changes can come later when the bugs are sorted out with the engine and avionics packages.


Well, from the start, the LCA was made to be an ambitious program. Not only is it a true 4th+ generation light multirole in design, but the goal of it was not just to operationalize such, but to literally develop the entire gamut of advanced aeronautics technologies and industries in India. The program has launched India's own aeronautical military-industrial complex.



The technologies themselves developed in this program have been significantly applied to literally every aircraft in the IAF inventory, such as development of advanced materials and technologies for MKI, in-house advanced upgrade of Jags and -27s, superfast development of Intermediate Jet Trainer, development of Dhruv (Advanced Light Helicopter), Lancer upgrade for IAF helos, Bison upgrade on the -21s, development on Light Combat Helicopter, etc., etc., etc... In this respect, the Tejas is already a huge success.


Mastering advanced jet engines using single-crystal engine blade technology is no small step, and it will of course meet with its share of problems, as all new technologies do. I mean, you don't want to develop a brand new airframe around a brand new engine unless you have a stomach for disaster. The Rafael flew with the F404-400 for over 4 years before the M-88 engine was ready. The Su-27 initially flew with the AL-21 because the AL-31F was far from ready.

But its significant that India is committed to the long run of mastering this technology from the ground up, gaining skill not in the manufacture, but in the intricacies of engine design. In the interim, the first tranche of Tejas will be equipped with an upgraded version of the GE-F404 engine called F404-IN20, and retooled with the Kaveri when it matures.



Originally posted by COWlan
To say the truth, I think the LCA is a really ugly plane. In the pictures I can see RUST, that shows how good the project is going.


That's not rust, bro. That is fluid of some sort, colored for the purposes of testing, used in the design phase. The aircraft are painted that way so that the fluid shows clearly. The ADA had specifically addressed this point after certain sections of the normally self-flaggelating Indian press went to hysterics about that very point. The method hardly uncommon. If you look at pictures of test flights of the F-35 in its development, you see the same 'rusting.'

As for beauty, I personally think its a very good looking aircraft. Here's an artist rendering of the aircraft painted in the IAF low-viz paint scheme, equipped with an assortment of weapons the Tejas is going to carry:



Another nice pic showing weapon load:






Originally posted by W4rl0rDI'm sorry,but they are "pathetic copies

You say "pathetic copies", I say "pathetic attempt at insult on a subject you obviously know zero about."

The ONLY thing in common with the Mirage is that ADA consulted with Marcel Dassault some 20 years ago when the LCA idea was in idea phase on the infrastructure path that India was to follow for the LCA's development.

Apart from that, there is NOTHING in common, except for the fact that both aircraft's wings are roughly triangular. Unlike the traditional delta in the Mirage, Gripen and even J-10, the Tejas employs a cranked delta wing a bit similar to that of the F-16XL:



Furthermore, the Tejas design includes extensive wing-fuselage blending, shielded air intakes and a host of aerodynamic features in contrast with the Mirage's (& Gripen's, J-10's) design which is far more conventional.

BUT if you want to extend your inane comparison, then, take the canards off of all the 4+ generation aircraft (EF2000, Gripen, J-10), and whoh! they all look like Mirages! Interestingly, with the Tejas, the original design called for canards as a possible configuration, however, once the cranked, compound hybrid delta design was optimized, ADA was extremely happy with the result, and canards were dropped, as they did not even offer any advantage or enhance manoverability the Tejas's design configuration.

And even furthermore, compared to the Mirage, the Tejas is composed of much more advanced materials and more sophisticated indigenous avionics, etc. Even with it being smaller, way lighter, and carrying a smaller fuel load, the Tejas's range exceeds that of the Mirage, and it has a more efficiant and more powerful engine (be they the F404 or the eventual Kaveri, the latter which would make it capable of supercruise, as is planned) giving it a bigger thrust-to-weight ratio, and its wing and structural design, etc. allows it to carry a larger, more diverse and, with the weapons to be inducted with it, a more advanced weapons load.

Even in its technology demonstration phase, IAF test pilots (from the Mirage sqns. no less) flying the Tejas are absolutely gaga over the plane, saying it significantly outperforms the Mirage and Gripen in every single aspect, and, mind you, IAF pilots have flown both the M2K-5 and Gripen. And even purchised the former.



Really, the comparison between the Mirage and Tejas is itself dishonest. Tejas is literally a generation ahead of the Mirage. At one-third the size of the F-22 and half the size of the EFA or Rafale, the LCA will have smallest radar cross section of any non-stealth fighter aircraft in the world (due mainly to materials composition -- 45% composite by weight, the highest of any jet fighter today.)

The Tejas in production will carry more advanced systems and weapons, is longer range, more manoverable, and lighter than Gripen, at half the total project development costs of the latter ($1+billion v. $2.5+billion), and, here's the most significant figure: the Tejas will cost less than half as much as the Gripen whilst being significantly more advanced.

When you factor in the types and numbers of aircraft the Tejas is going to be up against, its definitely an awesome aircraft.



Anyway, development of the aircraft seems to progress exponentially every month. It recently crossed the 300th flight sortie mark, and the fourth prototype vehicle, designed for weapons testing, will be operational by Feb. Its been disclosed that eight more Limited Series Production prototypes, to comprise IAF's evaluation squadron, will be ready by 2007. The aircraft is expected to enter full service by 2009. Over 400 are eventually to be procured.

In conclusion, to paraphrase GWB:

Don't mess with Tejas



-Raj





[edit on 1-12-2004 by rajkhalsa2004]



posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 11:08 PM
link   
Well don't you put the cork in every critics mouth!!!



posted on Dec, 2 2004 @ 12:40 AM
link   
Hmm.. I don't seem to be able to edit my post (?)

A small correction


Originally posted by rajkhalsa2004
Even in its technology demonstration phase, IAF test pilots (from the Mirage sqns. no less) flying the Tejas are absolutely gaga over the plane, saying it significantly outperforms the Mirage and Gripen in every single aspect, and, mind you, IAF pilots have flown both the M2K-5 and Gripen. And even purchised the former.

I meant that IAF pilots have test flown the Mirage and Rafale, not Gripen, and that they feel the Tejas is more manoverable then both.

The Tejas is in the same class as both Gripen and Rafale and needless to say, that the cost of the LCA, in like comparison to the Gripen, is cheaper than the Rafele.

-Raj



posted on Dec, 2 2004 @ 12:56 AM
link   
raj, I'm not being critical of India for being ambitious. But the program has had some major setbacks, and the DRDO does have some operational problems. Note I said operational problems, not problems with capability. But right now you guys are looking at 2010 or possibly later before you get certification.

In the meantime, you guys are still losing pilots and Mig 21's at an alarming rate. If you would go ahead and get the LCA up and running with the GE engine and western avionics, you could sort out the problems later.

The overall benefits from the program will pay off, not the least on the MCA, which will hopefully go a lot smoother. I just hate to see India losing pilots because the DRDO insists on doing everything indiginously. They could cut 2-3 years off the deployment lead time if they would accept a phased in concept of development wrt engines and avionics.



posted on Dec, 2 2004 @ 08:19 AM
link   
Beautiful?It looks orangish,thats how beautiful it is,try not brushing your teeth for 1 week then look in the mirror,thats how it looks


In terms of technology,it is still years behind schedue,it does not look very advanced,probably has avonics and performance similar to the block 50 F-16,but thats just a guess,read,just a GUESS.

However,it is a step forward for India,who is finally building their own planes instead of importing Mirages,this could be the threshold for better and heavier armed 5th generation planes.



posted on Dec, 3 2004 @ 06:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by engineer
raj, I'm not being critical of India for being ambitious. But the program has had some major setbacks, and the DRDO does have some operational problems. Note I said operational problems, not problems with capability. But right now you guys are looking at 2010 or possibly later before you get certification.

In the meantime, you guys are still losing pilots and Mig 21's at an alarming rate. If you would go ahead and get the LCA up and running with the GE engine and western avionics, you could sort out the problems later.

The overall benefits from the program will pay off, not the least on the MCA, which will hopefully go a lot smoother. I just hate to see India losing pilots because the DRDO insists on doing everything indiginously. They could cut 2-3 years off the deployment lead time if they would accept a phased in concept of development wrt engines and avionics.


Hi,

I'm not being critical of your post either, sorry if I sounded that way (I was just getting irritated at the terrible signal:noise ratio of this thread)


I agree, the Kaveri project is incredibly ambitious. But I do think it is necessary, now, because now is the only time a project of this scale is feasible to do so. As of now, the Chinese have a lead on us in engine development, though heaven only knows how far along their indigenous engine projects are (rumour upon rumour upon rumour contradicting itself.) The Chinese project has a decades worth of knowledge and developmental infrastructure to fall back on. India, for the Kaveri project, has to develop this knowledge base and experience from the ground up.

By simply buying off the shelf engines and washing our hands of the matter, we are not developing a viable indigenous defense industry. For a country of our size, it is necessary, because we do not have the advantage of relative strategic insignificance that allows a Sweden or a Taiwan or an Israel to allow their defense industries to be controlled by American ones, and have their defense capabilities held hostage to the American military industrial complex, and American national policy.

Don't get me wrong, America and India are becoming fast friends, but the very nature of India's size simply does not allow India to sacrifice its own strategic independence to another without hurting its own interests. For too long, this was the place India was in, completely dependant on foreign systems from countries that thereby force policy onto India.

But, even then, the closeness of the Indian-American relationship is now such that, until the Kaveri is developed, India is going to use the GE engine to power the Tejas.

And yes, the benefits are being paid off now as well
, as I explained in the previous post, but also in the MCA. As of now, it has been confirmed that DRDO will plan to use the same cranked-delta wing from the LCA project to the MCA project. As Mr. Jones has so nicely pointed out in his posts, the wing/body design of the LCA can easily be adapted to a tail-less design, as the MCA will have, decreasing RCS considerably.


W4rl0rD,

I am not sure I will even bother to address any further posts from you, if the crux of your entire flam excuse me, "argument" boils down to "OMG!! It loosks oreange!!! WTFLOL!!!1!1"

Thankfully, what you 'think' that you 'guess' about what the Tejas 'probably has', boldly flies in the face of what is publicly known.

Any other wild-a$s guesses you'd like to contribute to the discussion? Or can the rest of us otherwise continue?

-Raj




[edit on 3-12-2004 by rajkhalsa2004]



posted on Dec, 3 2004 @ 07:44 AM
link   
Sure,whatever,but the LCA or MCA will never compare to the F-22 Raptor or even the F-15 Eagle for that matter.I rest my case.



posted on Dec, 3 2004 @ 08:19 AM
link   
You'd make a wonderful attorney.

Your Honor! I 'think' the guy did it! But this is just a 'guess', read members of the jury, 'just a GUESS'!

Based on the testimony and the evidence above, your Honor, the prosecution rests!



posted on Dec, 3 2004 @ 08:21 AM
link   
2004, what has that last post to do with the topic? Let's play nice folks.



posted on Dec, 3 2004 @ 09:32 AM
link   
Just trying to show the absurdness of W4rl0rD's exact method of argument he used to draw his baseless conclusions in this thread, quoted straight from from his last two posts... and applying it to another format

But, yeah, I'm being snippy


My bad and my apologies, W4r



posted on Dec, 3 2004 @ 09:19 PM
link   
Come on guys, stop the personal bashing. Lets stop the "beautiful" argument at the paint scheme was bad. LCA should not be widely purchased and India should put all of its resources into the MCA (alive or not, I'm not sure) and the PAK-FA. By the time all the LCA have been constructed and put into service, India would be fighting against 5th Generation fighters. 4th and 5th generation aircrafts just don't match up against each other. Try and keep the peace with your neighbors for a few years and when you have your ADVANCED fighters, act tough.

As for J-10, everything from the ground up were basically designed by the Chinese except for the basic shape, the engine (which are now being produced in China) and minor electronics. We caught up 40 years of lag in fighter technology in a mere 10 years and J-10 is a must for the 5th generation aircrafts that China have on R&D.



posted on Dec, 3 2004 @ 10:48 PM
link   
Thats my point,the J-10 might compare to the F-16 or the F/A-18,its not really a 5th generation fighter,just like the LCA,same thing.



posted on Dec, 4 2004 @ 01:20 AM
link   
And when is the LCA scheduled for service induction COWlan?
Btw the first completely indigenous Su-30MKI rolled out of Ozhar, Nashik a few days ago


Get the pun? "indi"-genous.........

sorry maybe i a little intoxicated!!



posted on Dec, 4 2004 @ 01:46 AM
link   
From the sources i saw,first production model would be in 2006.



posted on Dec, 4 2004 @ 03:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by COWlan
LCA should not be widely purchased and India should put all of its resources into the MCA (alive or not, I'm not sure) and the PAK-FA.


The LCA is insrumental to the MCA project. There is a whole host of commonality in design between the two ac. And I disagree, the LCA should (and will) be purchased. Simply because it is a cheap, very capable, fighter aircraft.

And while the aeronautics world has suddenly become India's oyster (as soon as it was realized LCA is very much realizable!), and India can just as easily go an buy an advanced foreign fighter, for developmental (can cost!) reasons, LCA induction just makes far more sense. You don't go develop from the ground up something just as a tech demonstrator.


By the time all the LCA have been constructed and put into service, India would be fighting against 5th Generation fighters. 4th and 5th generation aircrafts just don't match up against each other.


At 2006 IAF will face 5th generation fighters? Even at 2010, there's no chance of India facing hostile 5th generation aircraft. Even PAK-FA is supposed to be inducted in full service by the 2010-12 timeframe, according to official Russian claims.

Also, you're not takign into account the LCA's role in the IAF. It is directly replacing the role of the MiG-21s and -27s, of a cheap, small, short-range, BVR and nuclear-capable, multirole attack aircraft that can be procured and deployed in large numbers. Larger hostile aircraft will be met with MKIs, and eventually PAK-FA.



Try and keep the peace with your neighbors for a few years and when you have your ADVANCED fighters, act tough.


Pardon? Act tough? Who's acting tough? There's no need to be so defensive. As for keeping pace, the IAF certainly sees and raises versus the ac and capabilities of any potential hostile airforce, i.e. PAF and PLAAF.



As for J-10, everything from the ground up were basically designed by the Chinese except for the basic shape, the engine (which are now being produced in China) and minor electronics. We caught up 40 years of lag in fighter technology in a mere 10 years and J-10 is a must for the 5th generation aircrafts that China have on R&D.


J-10 is not a 5th generation aircraft by any means. It is a 4+ gen project similar to LCA, Gripen, EF2K, Rafele. The J-10 was designed, like the LCA, to be an open-architecture platform that can mach the capabilities of late model M2Ks, etc. that would replace the swaths of aging 1st and 2nd gen aircraft that make up the bulk of both airforces. China's real 5th gen (PAK-FA/MCA-type) project is the J-XX. But nothing is really known about it.

In terms of matching airforce capabilities, it can't, and isn't designed to match IAF MKIs in role or capabilities. It is the Chinese equivalent to the LCA role, and is very similar to the LCA in terms of capabilities, not more advanced, as you suggest. The on-paper capabilities in terms of avionics, electronics and radar suggest the LCA superior in fact. In terms of manoverability, no one can make any claim because, unlike the LCA program, when there are literally daily updates on every aspect of the project on the developers websites in true open-society fashion, there are no official statements or projections on J-10s capabilities. The J-10 project is, however, 2-3+ years ahead of the LCA, and is reportedly undergoing weapons integration testing, which LCA will not do until next year.

With a large number of -21s to be phased out before the LCA will enter full service, and the increase of IAF combat squadrons, as well as to match the increase in PLAAF capabilities by the earlier induction of the J-10 replacing J-Xs, India has put out a tender for 120-odd aircraft + local license production of more. IAF has its eye for the M2K-5 for this, but the Russians are pressing hard for -29SMTs, Americans for F-16blk50+s. Other contenders are Rafele and Gripen, but requests for tenders of these are generally understood to be just for leverage purposes in the negotiations.

Anyway, while there was significant re-engineering of the Lavi, the J-10's design remains fairly true to the original Israeli form. It is not therefore correct to completely equal it to the LCA project in that the Chinese did not develop the specialized airframe from the start. This, the fact that China did have a more advanced aeronautics industry, and for other reasons, a direct comparison between the product schedule of the LCA and J-10 wouldn't be an accurate comparison.


Regards,
Raj

[edit on 4-12-2004 by rajkhalsa2004]



posted on Dec, 4 2004 @ 04:27 AM
link   
The LCA was not meant to be a frontline fighter,it was meant to replace the roles of the -21 and -27.Unlike the J-10,the LCA does not end there,i would like to think of it as a prototype of the MCA,which WILL be a frontline fighter.

Also,by the time the Pak-Fa project finishes in 2012,it will also be around the time the J-12 project finishes off.Chew on that,the J-12 is a copied version of the F-22.Just like the J-12,the Pak-Fa has not really started.



posted on Dec, 4 2004 @ 07:16 AM
link   
Well, the LCA was designed for a specific role, which it will eventually fill.

I read a report where a DRDO scientist described the LCA as '2/3s the way to MCA', so you're right. From what's released, thoguh, the MCA would not be designed for a purely fighter role, but instead as a stealthy ground attack aircraft with secondary air-2-air ability. The Pak-FA is supposed to be an air superiority fighter first with multirole capability. The MCA is still a ways away to being inducted though.

So, IAF roles would be akin to something in the USAF like.. f-22 = pak-fa/mki, f-35 = mca, f-16/18 = mki/lca/m2kor-29smt


You really don't believe that J-12 would have the capabilities of the F-22, and that development within 8 yr timeframe... I doubt even with Russians experience first batch of PAK-FA will be comparable. Though, work on it has already started, as news reports about the formal signing of the agreement stated that they both had 'formally agreed upon the design of it.' or something to that account

I'd be interesting to see whether the Chinese can be able to singularly design true a 5th generation fighter and attack aircraft types fast enough to counter Russian, Indian, and, most importantly, American 5th gen a/c (supplied also to Japan, Korea(?))

-Raj



posted on Dec, 4 2004 @ 11:47 AM
link   
No. F-22 will not be supplied to any other country.

J-10 is 6 years ahead of LCA because it is already operational and able to launch weapons and serve and 50 are already operational and being mass produced right now. The first 50 are stationed at Yunnan which is at the Indian border. LCA is a long way from being mass produced. Also J-10 follow up versions are on R&D right now. J-10C or B (some say its C some say its B) are stealth front line fighters with much improved avionics and radar. Its a competitor to the J-12 and J-13.

J-12 and J-13 are two planes designed to do the same roles but have different characteristics and they compete each other for the 5th generation fighter role in China as China currently will build its own 5th generation fighter than purchase them off Russia or other ways.



posted on Dec, 4 2004 @ 11:11 PM
link   
F-22=MKI? wow,i don't believe it....F-22 is at least 3 times as good as the Su-37 (IMHO),so what makes you think the russians are gonna give the best (Pak-Fa) to the Indians when they didn't give the Su-37/MFI to them?





top topics
 
2
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join


Haters, Bigots, Partisan Trolls, Propaganda Hacks, Racists, and LOL-tards: Time To Move On.
read more: Community Announcement re: Decorum