Dismiss Notice
Welcome to IDF- Indian Defence Forum , register for free to join this friendly community of defence enthusiastic from around the world. Make your opinion heard and appreciated.

LCA Tejas Multirole Aircraft

Discussion in 'Indian Air Force' started by Dark_Prince, Apr 14, 2010.

  1. Foxtrot

    Foxtrot Captain SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2011
    Messages:
    1,453
    Likes Received:
    420
    LCA Tejas - what a mess !!!
     
  2. VIP

    VIP FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2013
    Messages:
    26
    Likes Received:
    31
    Parrikar was not fired, he had to go back to goa because of political reasons, and there's no reason to believe that Sitharaman won't support LCA.

    But I agree, it's upto Uttam and Kaveri 2.0 if LCA needs to survive.
     
    zebra7 and Blackjay like this.
  3. Sancho

    Sancho Lt. Colonel IDF NewBie

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    5,687
    Likes Received:
    3,461
    It's the other way around. The longer we wait for Uttam or Kaveri, the more delayed LCA MK1A gets. We need to focus on getting ready and available parts now, to get LCA MK1A into production. Uttam and Kaveri can be added in later upgrade stages.
     
    proud_indian, zebra7 and Blackjay like this.
  4. vstol jockey

    vstol jockey Colonel MILITARY STRATEGIST

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2011
    Messages:
    13,790
    Likes Received:
    15,448
    Country Flag:
    India
    Just to give you a small example and to amplify my statement,
    upload_2017-11-4_18-35-45.png upload_2017-11-4_18-36-10.png
     
  5. vstol jockey

    vstol jockey Colonel MILITARY STRATEGIST

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2011
    Messages:
    13,790
    Likes Received:
    15,448
    Country Flag:
    India
    Now coming to the question of Gripen NG and LCA MK1A,
    upload_2017-11-4_18-40-29.png

    LCAMK1A will be less than 6tons in weight. So we remove two tons from the GripenNG empty weight and that gives us 6tons. Remove another one ton for extra fuel of one ton which Gripen NG carries. That makes it a 13.5ton MTOW aircraft with equal amount of weapon load. Now valculate the TWR of Gripen NG at combat weight with 4xBVRAAMs+2xWVRAAMs and also that of LCA MK1A. use 90Kn max thrust for MK1A and tell me which aircraft comes out on top?
    The TWR for Gripen NG will be 0.875 based on 8+1.7+1.5=11.2tons combat weight
    The TWR for LCAMK1A will be 1.034 based on 6+1.2+1.5=8.7tons of combat weight.
    NOW which aircraft is superior?
     
    Last edited: Nov 4, 2017
  6. vstol jockey

    vstol jockey Colonel MILITARY STRATEGIST

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2011
    Messages:
    13,790
    Likes Received:
    15,448
    Country Flag:
    India
    @Sancho, lesson learnt is that you can't use the dictums of a woman while designing aircraft-Big is beautiful.
    In aircraft design reverse of it is true. In every major war or conflict, the maximum damage has always been done by small fighters and strike aircraft. starting from P-51 to A-4sky Hawk to Gnat to Now what LCA will do.
     
  7. VIP

    VIP FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2013
    Messages:
    26
    Likes Received:
    31
    Let me rephrase, only early completion of these projects can save LCA series.
     
    zebra7, dadeechi and Blackjay like this.
  8. randomradio

    randomradio Colonel REGISTERED

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2013
    Messages:
    11,206
    Likes Received:
    6,312
    The problem is LCA can't carry 4 BVR and 2 WVR with drop tanks. If the LCA can carry 6 missiles with 2 drop tanks, that's the only way it can rival SE MII. That's the only way SE will become irrelevant.
     
  9. Picdelamirand-oil

    Picdelamirand-oil Lt. Colonel MILITARY STRATEGIST

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2012
    Messages:
    8,328
    Likes Received:
    6,264
    Country Flag:
    France
    Gripen NG specifications are very closed of Mirage 2000, just put the Rafale weapon system in the Mirage 2000 and relace the M53-P2 by a Kaveri and you have a better airplane. :BVICTORY:
     
    HariPrasad and Angel Eyes like this.
  10. vstol jockey

    vstol jockey Colonel MILITARY STRATEGIST

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2011
    Messages:
    13,790
    Likes Received:
    15,448
    Country Flag:
    India
    You are wrong. The centerline pylon is being modified to carry multiple loads like that of Gripen NG and even with two 1200 ltr D/Ts on inner pylons, LCA will be able to carry four BVRAAMs and two WVRAAMs easily. One point which I forgot to mention in the comparison of LCAMK1A with Gripen NG is that Gripen NG will have a fuel fraction of 0.298 while LCAMK1A with 2.45tons will have a fuel fraction of 0.2899. LCA and Gripen both use engine with same SFC today and LCA being lighter, will outrange Gripen NG anyday. Anyone who says that LCAMK1A is inferior to Gripen NG is either a fool who needs to be sent to a mental asylum or a sold out stooge fit to be called a deshdrohi. The overall drag profile of LCA is lower than that of GripenNG. Same payload, same fuel fraction, same SFC of the engine, one being lighter than the other by over three tons is being called inferior. Someone needs to get his head examined. And if we get SAFRANised kaveri with thrust of even 60/95Kn, LCAMK1A will beat any SE aircraft hollow in potential and combat.
     
  11. vstol jockey

    vstol jockey Colonel MILITARY STRATEGIST

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2011
    Messages:
    13,790
    Likes Received:
    15,448
    Country Flag:
    India
    I wud like to correct you here. M2K is superior even today. M2K has 3.3 tons of internal fuel with an empty weight of 7.5 tons. and lifts 7 tons of payload. Gripen NG with higher thrust engines, 100kgs more fuel lift just 5.1 ton of payload. The maths is simple. Its arthmatics and not even algebra or calculus or integration or analytical maths.
    16.5 - (8+3.4)=5.1.
    How is GripenNG compareable to M2K?
     
  12. zebra7

    zebra7 Captain FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2016
    Messages:
    1,229
    Likes Received:
    1,250
    Country Flag:
    India
    Tailless delta was choosen for lift at high altitude and less number of control surface, since for the first time india was developing FBW and digital FCS. Every design has plus and minus and for an interceptor delta design is the choice most prefered. Thats my view, your views?
     
    Angel Eyes and Shekhar Singh like this.
  13. vstol jockey

    vstol jockey Colonel MILITARY STRATEGIST

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2011
    Messages:
    13,790
    Likes Received:
    15,448
    Country Flag:
    India
    Go thru the comparison which I posted between F-1 and M2K. F-1 had higher ceiling than M2K with lower powered engines.
     
    Shekhar Singh likes this.
  14. randomradio

    randomradio Colonel REGISTERED

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2013
    Messages:
    11,206
    Likes Received:
    6,312
    The center hardpoint is too small. That's why it's stuck carrying only a 800L tank there. The landing gear is in the way.

    In that space there you can't fit anything beyond 1 R-77 class missile.
    [​IMG]

    I think I've told you this before also. Without the ability to carry 4 missiles, 2 bombs and 2 drop tanks, the LCA will never be able to compete with the F-16 or Gripen E.

    If LCA has to compete with this:

    [​IMG]

    ...it must add two more missiles to this:
    [​IMG]

    Gripen E can do it because of a new landing gear design.
    [​IMG]

    The Tejas of today can't even use that funny looking twin arm because of the compound delta design.

    The F-16 has no problem either.
    [​IMG]

    This is probably the biggest drawback that the LCA has. Of course, if the IAF is willing to accept this flaw, then they can compensate with more Rafales for swing role capability instead, and no SE MII. But it appears they will be getting all three jets through MII one way or the other.
     
    Sancho and zebra7 like this.
  15. Ved Mishra

    Ved Mishra Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2011
    Messages:
    955
    Likes Received:
    251
    Country Flag:
    India
    You made my night:chilli:
     
    Shekhar Singh and vstol jockey like this.

Share This Page