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. vstol jockey

    vstol jockey Colonel MILITARY STRATEGIST

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2011
    Messages:
    13,804
    Likes Received:
    15,567
    Country Flag:
    India
    Bhai, do you ever read anything carefully? What did i write? I said the present 750ltr tank has more length than the Meteors also. How will two side by side Meteors hit ground with 3.7m length when a 5m long D/T does not? And do you have any Idea as to how these figures about ground clearance for stores calculated? Are they calculated purely on stationary aircraft or on rotation of aircraft when you will actually hit the ground? What will be the ground clearance when oleos are partially compressed? will it be same as that of an aircraft on ground fully loaded with stores?
     
    Shekhar Singh likes this.
  2. Sancho

    Sancho Lt. Colonel Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    5,572
    Likes Received:
    3,386
    Yes and I even specifically quoted the part I was answering to and didn't bothered to reply to the 2 Meteor claim, because that's fantasy too.

    So unless you have something real to talk about MK1A, let's leave it at that.
     
  3. vstol jockey

    vstol jockey Colonel MILITARY STRATEGIST

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2011
    Messages:
    13,804
    Likes Received:
    15,567
    Country Flag:
    India
    I agree to what you had stated as problems and also offered to you what can be done. I never stated that LCA design can carry three Meteor on centerline. Max two are easily possible. Lightening pod carried on station-8 is about 200 kgs and with pylon weight it handles a load of nearly 250kgs. You change the gun position and the other 9th pylon will also share the same load figures.
    BVR launches are normally certified for 4-5 G load conditions and normally fired at just about 1.5G load conditions. WVRAAMs are fired at 9G loads.
     
    HariPrasad likes this.
  4. HariPrasad

    HariPrasad Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2016
    Messages:
    672
    Likes Received:
    615
    Country Flag:
    India
    Ya that was exactly done sir. As per your formula, dry thrust was multiplied by 2.5.
     
  5. X_Killer

    X_Killer Captain FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2017
    Messages:
    1,005
    Likes Received:
    1,201
    Country Flag:
    India
    Yup, for sure..
     
    GuardianRED likes this.
  6. dadeechi

    dadeechi Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2016
    Messages:
    519
    Likes Received:
    678
    Country Flag:
    India
  7. dadeechi

    dadeechi Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2016
    Messages:
    519
    Likes Received:
    678
    Country Flag:
    India


    The current cycle time quoted for LCA is 11-13 months to assemble a unit excluding the testing and handover time to the end users.

    upload_2017-11-11_16-15-9.png

    upload_2017-11-11_16-16-6.png

    upload_2017-11-11_16-16-45.png

    upload_2017-11-11_16-18-41.png

    upload_2017-11-11_16-21-14.png

    upload_2017-11-11_16-21-46.png


    upload_2017-11-11_16-25-52.png

    upload_2017-11-11_16-26-32.png

    upload_2017-11-11_16-27-8.png
     
    Sancho and BON PLAN like this.
  8. randomradio

    randomradio Colonel Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2013
    Messages:
    11,181
    Likes Received:
    6,295
    Darshan gohel likes this.
  9. dadeechi

    dadeechi Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2016
    Messages:
    519
    Likes Received:
    678
    Country Flag:
    India
    These figures are from the videos that I posted above - CNBC-TV18's Rituparna Bhuyan in conversation with T Suvarna Raju, CMD of HAL Published on Sep 30, 2017
     
    Last edited: Nov 12, 2017
    Sancho likes this.
  10. randomradio

    randomradio Colonel Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2013
    Messages:
    11,181
    Likes Received:
    6,295
    If we get 2 AAMs under the fuselage apart from 2 WVR AAMs, 2 bombs and 2 drop tanks on Mk1A, we won't need SE MII. We will have a proper swing role aircraft with enough range.

    We don't need FSO, just fusing the WVR AAM's IRST with the LCA's other sensors is good enough. We don't need expensive GaN radars either. It's better to stick to GaAs with properly optimised software. We don't need Meteor either, the iDerby-ER, Python and Astra are more than enough. All that extra stuff will simply add to the cost of the aircraft, which we don't need.

    But to do all this, we will need more engine power and empty weight has to reduce by 800+Kg.
     
  11. dadeechi

    dadeechi Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2016
    Messages:
    519
    Likes Received:
    678
    Country Flag:
    India
    HAL outsouring to the Tier 1 & 2 suppliers is for adding additional capacity in addition to HAL's own capacity.

    Current LCA production is for the approved 20 IOC configuration only and followed by 20 FOC configuration as and when it attains the FOC.

    The production for 83 LCA MK1A has not yet started and won't at least until 2018-2019.
     
  12. dadeechi

    dadeechi Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2016
    Messages:
    519
    Likes Received:
    678
    Country Flag:
    India
    What would be the AESA for MK1As since Israeli EL/M-2052 seems to have gone out of favor due to the escalation of the cost by 2-3 times?
     
  13. randomradio

    randomradio Colonel Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2013
    Messages:
    11,181
    Likes Received:
    6,295
    I know. But that video is quite old compared to the news I am talking about. It's from this month, ie, 9 months to assembly.

    But I stand corrected, it is assembly, not full production. So there's still a whole lot more before that. I think I got some wrong information. Which means assembly was 19 months before that, not full production.

    My bad, @BON PLAN.
     
    dadeechi likes this.
  14. randomradio

    randomradio Colonel Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2013
    Messages:
    11,181
    Likes Received:
    6,295
    The first preference will continue to be 2052. But Israel will now have to give competitive rates via tender instead of just throwing whatever number they thought of at that moment at our face.

    The alternatives will be the RBE-2AA derivative and Uttam. Saab has a new radar as well, but we don't know how far behind in development they really are, probably at the same level as Uttam, but with the added advantage of having developed AESA radars for decades.

    I really think Uttam has a shot. They want to get it flying on LSP-2 by the end of the year. So in about 6 months, ADA and IAF will be in a position to make a decision. If we go by tender route, the Mk1A will get delayed a lot. So if Uttam succeeds, we may very well get our own homemade radar. LRDE has some very good experience with AESA radars as well, enough to compete with Saab.
     
    VIP, Shekhar Singh and dadeechi like this.
  15. dadeechi

    dadeechi Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2016
    Messages:
    519
    Likes Received:
    678
    Country Flag:
    India
    The key questions are

    1) What would be the time frame for Thales or SAAB to re-engineer to make their product compatible for Tejas once selected (i.e this is additional time on top of the time required for selection of the vendor through the tender)

    2) What would be cost of this re-engineering and who would be paying for it (I would assume it would be India as this product would be considered for Tejas only)?

    This is probably the reason why Elta has jacked up the price. The best option is to go with Uttam but what would it take to get it ready for Tejas?
     
    Sancho likes this.

Share This Page