HAL Tejas | Updates, News & Discussions

[shaktiman2010]

And you might want to count how many prototypes of LCA exists now for the air force version, just to have a comparison and to see that 6 for N-LCA isn't that much. The final N-LCA will get the higher thrust engine and will be available only around 2015 and still will be just a modest platform as the IN pilot said.

Do you work in DRDO? If not, provide link for this claim. And if not, then you should add "I guess" or "mujhey lagta hai ki" when saying that.

 

[shaktiman2010]

Hoo yeah.. you dont need to point the mirrors to say that is my assumption... because i very well accept that it is my assumption which you can understand if you read the line properly....

Hoo ho.. ab aisa fir mat karna acha...

 

[kingdurgaking]

Hoo ho.. ab aisa fir mat karna acha...

Are you from school or kinder garden??... just see your last 10 post.. any value added??

 

[shaktiman2010]

Are you from school or kinder garden??... just see your last 10 post.. any value added??

How much value that bold question adds to this thread?

 

[sancho]

Do you work in DRDO? If not, provide link for this claim. And if not, then you should add "I guess" or "mujhey lagta hai ki" when saying that.

Like this?

Chindits: LCA Navy Mk-2 To Fly In 2015

 

[kingdurgaking]

self deleted...

 

[shaktiman2010]

Like this?

Chindits: LCA Navy Mk-2 To Fly In 2015

From above article,
The Mk-1 version of LCA which has GE-F404 engine, will make its first flight this year. The Navy has ordered 19 LCA Mk-1.

There goes his claim that Mk-1 won't make a flight.

 

[kingdurgaking]

From above article,
The Mk-1 version of LCA which has GE-F404 engine, will make its first flight this year. The Navy has ordered 19 LCA Mk-1.

There goes his claim that Mk-1 won't make a flight.

its a printing mistake and you can understand from next line itself...

because

Navy places Rs 900-cr order for 6 Tejas LCA

... because Navy only ordered 6 for MK-1

 

[shaktiman2010]

its a printing mistake and you can understand from next line itself...

because ... because Navy only ordered 6 for MK-1

First you said, Mk-1 can't fly. Now you saying opposite. Changing sides?

printing mistake huh? ..good 1.. acchi koshish thi

 

[kingdurgaking]

First you said, Mk-1 can't fly. Now you saying opposite. Changing sides?

Arguing just like that without any base... if you have doubts or if you forgot what we are talking on.. read from 5164 post ...

 

[shaktiman2010]

Arguing just like that without any base... if you have doubts or if you forgot what we are talking on.. read from 5164 post ...

How to go back? ..krupaya post page number..

 

[sancho]

From above article,
The Mk-1 version of LCA which has GE-F404 engine, will make its first flight this year. The Navy has ordered 19 LCA Mk-1.

There goes his claim that Mk-1 won't make a flight.

And again twisting words aren't we? Poor try to hide your lack of arguments!

 

[Bratva]

If war breakout b/w india pak, everyone knows that our army and navy are much superior in technology and number than pakistan . Check wikipedia if anyone doubts.



LCA can pull 9G's JF-17 can pull 8.5
LCA max take of weight is 13,300kg JF-17 MTOW is 12,700kg
LCA radar cross section is 1.5 square meter JF-17 is over 5 square meters
LCA has 8 hardpoints and 3 air to air BVR weapons JF-17 has 7 hardpoints and 1 BVR weapon
LCA has more advanced radar(AESA) than JF-17
LCA's avionics are more technologically advanced than those of the JF-17 which most are imported
LCA uses the Israeli lightening targeting pod which is more advanced than the FLIR used on the JF-17
LCA uses a indigenous EW suite known as Mayavi "illusionist" includes a radar warning receiver (RWR), self-protection jammer, laser warning system, missile approach warning system, and chaff/flare dispenser and is far better than the Chinese designed EW system of the JF-17
LCA internal fuel capacity is 2458kg JF-17 internal fuel capacity is 2300kg
LCA's weapons are better than JF-17's







Comaprison of JF-17 and LCA.


Let compare them fairly.
JF-17
Engine:
The engine used in JF-17 is RD93, a modification of RD33, the same engine used in older Mig29. The engine though powerful enough is known to be lazy and not good at acceleration. Also the engine is very old and newer Migs use a newer variant RD33MK of the engine.

The thrust provided by the engine is around 49.4KN without the use of afterburners. With the afterburners, the thrust is 84.4KN. Also its worth mentioning here that this old Russian engine like its counterparts is known to have problems sustaining its afterburner for longer duration of time, which suggests that most of the time the aircraft would be flying without its afterburners on. So the important thrust specification here is the49.4KN, which by today's standards and the weight of the aircraft is quite low.

The thrust to weight ration comes out to be 0.78 for an empty aircraft and 0.55 for a loaded aircraft which is a SERIOUS drawback. Its the biggest problem with the current batch of JF-17 aircraft. Even with the afterburners on the aircraft fails to exceed a ratio of 0.94 for a loaded aircraft, which is poor to say the least.

Airframe:
The airframe of the aircraft seems to be good enough. The stabilizers are good enough and shaped perfectly. The nose is also carved nicely to direct air to enter the engines. The intakes are also nicely shaped to hide engine blades from radar waves. The airframe is good enough and nothing seems wrong with it.

The only problem with the airframe is the material. The airframe is made completely from metal and a little use of some alloys. There has beenno use of composites at all. This increases the weight as well as the rcs of the plane.

Avionics:
This is another field JF-17 is lacking in. The chinese avionics are just not enough. Although PAF is negotiating with France and now even Italy for an avionics upgrade, nothing is surfacing as of yet. The radar in use now is KLJ-7 which is a scaled down version of the KLJ-10 radar used in the J-10 of Chinese Air Force.

The range of the radar is 75 kms in look-up mode and 35 km for look-down mode for a target of rcs 3 square meters. Also the radar can monitor upto 10 targets in TWS(Track While Scan) mode and engage two in BVR mode.

The radar is obsolete by today's standards and it would need serious backing by AWACS in order to put up a fight. Also the missile that the plane will use for its BVR engagements would be SD-10 which is a chinese missile with a range of 65 kms. And the radar is limited to 75 km for 3 square meter rcs target, so for smaller targets, the extra range of the missile won't come in handy.

The newer aircraft coming up have rcs of 1 square meter or below. The KLJ-7 would not be able to detect these targets at ranges beyond 30-40 km. In combat with these aircraft, the JF-17 would be shot down even before it can detect what hit it.

It is only after an avionics upgrade that we can analyze the true capabilities of the aircraft.

Weapons:
The only BVR missile compatible with JF-17 for now is the SD-10 missile. As of now, not much information is available about the missile. Even the range is speculative at best. Wouldn't want to comment on it.

LCA - Tejas

Engine:
The engine in use for the first batch of aircraft will be GE F404IN, which is a modified F404 engine, being used on F18. The engine has a max thrust of 85KN with afterburners on and 50-55 KN without afterburners. The engine is not powerful enough to allow Tejas to carry out combat maneuvers with its full load. This is the reason a new engine is being evaluated for Tejas. The new engine will have a thrust of 100KN with afterburner and 60KN without afterburner.

That would make it powerful enough and would increase the thrust to weight ratio from 0.95 with afterburner at full load to 1.07 with afterburner atfull load and 0.64 at full load without afterburners.

Add to that an unstable delta wing configuration and that makes Tejas a really good maneuverable machine. The fly by wire does a great job at making it agile at high speeds. Speaking of speeds, the new engine might also enable supercruise for LCA. Also TVC can be seen if EJ200 is selected.

Airframe:
The LCA has a delta wing configuration without horizontal stabilizers which makes its configuration unstable. This means that it would require powerful computers and fly by wire controls to make it stable in its flight. Without these computers, it would be impossible to control the plane.
The airframe is inspired from Mirage 2000 and is a proven one. The huge wing span will add to the maneuverability. The Y-shaped intakes guarantee reduced rcs and there is nothing spectacularly contributing to the rcs of the plane.

The LCA uses a lot of composites to reduce the weight and radar detection of the plane. The size of the plane is another factor that contributes to its low rcs. This leads me to believe the rcs of LCA would be a lot less than that of JF-17.

Avionics:
The radar in use for the first batch will be a PESA multi mode radar ELTA EL/2032 radar. The air to air mode of 2032 radar has a range of upto150 km for 5 square meter rcs and in air to sea mode has a range of 300 kms.
The missiles that this radar support are currently R77 and R73. The R77 has a range of upto 90 kms and it believed to be extremely maneuverable.

Also Astra Missile can be supported with the ELTA radar. DRDO believes its indigenous radar would be ready in a couple of years and its supposed to be better than 2032 radar.


So all in all, its Tejas which is more advanced and capable, but its not ready yet. In future, if JF-17 wants to match up to Tejas, an avionics upgrade is desperately required.

Then read it and come with something he missed... No one is interested in your laugh..

You should update yourself a little bit by going to JF-17 threads regularly. WTF RCS of JF-17 5m2? what is your source?

the DSI bumps and LERX have considerably added to the maneuverability JF-17, and This year Block 2 will be introduced which will bring the rcs down as the use of composites has increased upto 40 percent. and Adding some special Features( stealthy features as they call) which will make it's rcs more small. So the 5m2 rcs is no more than rubbish.

The FLIR? JF-17 Block2 is going to use IRST, the AESA radar with moving dish, THE DRFM, Upgraded Avionics, IFR, The SD-10B, upgrded version of SD-10, which is specifically tailored for PAF requirements


One hardpoint will be added more in block 2, as the rumor suggest, RD-93 upgraded version will be used.

Why I put so much emphasis on Block-2? because The block-2 will be the final configuration of JF-17, And Block-1 which is now inducted will be later phased out and will be used for training purposes.

And tell me, what made you think The EW designed by you guys are better than chinese one? The Functionalities that your EW performs, and the EW functionalities on JF-17 are same. And talking about quality, since you have become biased here, let me tell you A nation who can design a Stealth aircraft, then how come his EW suit is inferior than yours? How funny.


and now talking about Radars, you have pulled the Data that is 3-4 years old. The Latest Radar Ranges are over 100Km and for 5m2 target, it is well over 130Km. since they have upgraded the radar.

And the thing about JF-17 can not fire latest missiles because of it's obsolete radar. Let me tell you. MAR-1 anti radiation is integrated with JF-17 and this year or perhaps next, we are going to place order for A-darters. and in current configuration it can fire AIM-9L too.


And about the TWR. the current block1 TWR is 1.01. and will be improved in Block 2 this year.

The G's are always mentioned 8.5+, not exactly 8.5 in JF-17

And the source for this info are, JF-17 Pakistani pilot who shared tidbits with a enthusiastic during Faranboug and Zhuhai airshows. Now i don''t care you believe or not, since it's source is JF-17 Pilot who is more knowledgeable than you ofcourse.

 

[luckyyy]

That's exactly what kingdurgaking said from the start and he is completely right about it. N-LCA with the GE 404 engine will only be used for testing and training at the shorebased testing facility at INS Hansa. And you might want to count how many prototypes of LCA exists now for the air force version, just to have a comparison and to see that 6 for N-LCA isn't that much. The final N-LCA will get the higher thrust engine and will be available only around 2015 and still will be just a modest platform as the IN pilot said.

and you like to say that ADA hasn't learn anything from those prototype for IAF and like to do it all oiver again on N-LCA by building another 6 prototype..

 

[sancho]

and you like to say that ADA hasn't learn anything from those prototype for IAF and like to do it all oiver again on N-LCA by building another 6 prototype..

No, they don't have learned anything about the airframe changes to operate it on carriers, because that is not needed for the air force version, just like they never tested the hook, the LEVCONS and some reports still say the final version will have an angled cockpit to ease carrier landings. This is the first real fighter project for ADA, HAL and co, so of course they need several prototypes and a naval version requires major redesigns as well, which we have no idea of, or experience with, so again it is just logical that they need several prototypes and time to test the changes and all this will be done by N - LCA prototypes with GE 404IN 20 engines and at INS Hansa.