HAL Tejas | Updates, News & Discussions

[SU 30 MKI]

A decent AC is better than no AC, especially when the possibility of phased upgrades is there.

This is especially true given the reports of severe fighter shortage in the IAF, pilots being grounded due to lack of AC, and the proposal being floated that the IAF should acquire used Mirage 2000's or Sukhois.

The first 50 Thunders will also end up being eventually upgraded to most of the systems in the subsequent blocks.

well you are right IAF is shortage of plane but you didnt read the fine line ...... what many plane of 80's do that can be done by just one Advance Plane.

So what 100 SU 30 Can do can only be done by 400 + MIGS Got it.

 

[SU 30 MKI]

The Chinese radar came up to Pakistan's expectations for the short term, and Pakistan is still looking for the best deal - the grifo 7 is being licensed produced in Pakistan I believe, so the issue is not with any of these companies selling to us, but the fact that the requirements of the PAF for the radar they want have changed.

The Chinese may still get the second block order - depends on what they come up with. Till then the PAF is best served by continuing to shop around, till the second block production begins, rather than committing to a purchase and finding out a better value was available later.

The "fact" is that Pakistan will have fifty fighters in the air with weapons and other systems integration and pilots getting familiarized with the equipment.

The scientists can test all they want - they can even produce a hundred LCA's and test them every day - it is getting the AC into the hands of the AF and the pilots that is the real achievement.

Well the thing is that PAF dont have any plan for JF 17, what they want and what is road map regarding to JF 17. The Chinese Radar well cant say what is it specifications they have.

What is the Status of WS engine is? dont know.... yet

Well what is the dead line of getting these 50 planes??

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Well the thing is that PAF dont have any plan for JF 17, what they want and what is road map regarding to JF 17. The Chinese Radar well cant say what is it specifications they have.

The roadmap is there - parts of it have been released to the public and mentioned several times on this thread and elsewhere. You are either not paying attention or refuse to accept the points made.

Better radar, composites, more hard points, Air refueling, new engine etc.

What is the Status of WS engine is? dont know.... yet

The WS-13 does not matter as much - the RD-93 has been cleared for export, and the JF-17 can function with that until the WS-13 comes on line.

Well what is the dead line of getting these 50 planes??

That will depend upon how much damage the production lines in China have suffered. We will find out by the end of this year whether the manufacturing process was impacted in any substantial way.

I can't remember off hand if we were supposed to get 15 AC this year or 25..

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

well you are right IAF is shortage of plane but you didnt read the fine line ...... what many plane of 80's do that can be done by just one Advance Plane.

So what 100 SU 30 Can do can only be done by 400 + MIGS Got it.

Thats a very bad oversimplification - it isn't merely a case of "1 MKI is equivalent to 4 JF-17's". You have to look at the situation from a much broader view.

The JF-17's linked with AEW&C, with F-16 block 52's and BVRAAM's will be a very potent force (not even including the J-10's).

Also, the Thunder is pretty comparable to everything but the MKI's in the IAF, and better than the AC it is meant to replace in the PAF, and its only going to get better with future upgrades.

 

[nitesh]

Thats a very bad oversimplification - it isn't merely a case of "1 MKI is equivalent to 4 JF-17's". You have to look at the situation from a much broader view.

The JF-17's linked with AEW&C, with F-16 block 52's and BVRAAM's will be a very potent force (not even including the J-10's).

Also, the Thunder is pretty comparable to everything but the MKI's in the IAF, and better than the AC it is meant to replace in the PAF, and its only going to get better with future upgrades.

He has not said 1 Su30 is equal to 4JF-17 he said 1 Su30 equal to 4 Mig21. So dont twist the words here. What Indian planes will be without AEW&C support.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

He has not said 1 Su30 is equal to 4JF-17 he said 1 Su30 equal to 4 Mig21. So dont twist the words here. What Indian planes will be without AEW&C support.

His point is the same, if you look at the context in which he replied, so I am not "twisting words" here. I can only interpret what he posts, if he mean to say something else, I would welcome a clarification and retract my post.

The JF-17 and LCA are in a completely different class than the MKI - so even attempting a comparison is ridiculous.

Even if you provide comparable supporting assets to each side, the dynamics are not reduced to a simplistic "4 JF-17's to 1 MKI" calculus.

And regardless, the Thunder will be up with the falcons, which is the comparable AC to the MKI on the PAF side (systems capability-wise, if not class) - and so SU30's comparison of Thunders to MKI's becomes even more pointless.

Anyway, the larger point here is that the JF-17, even in its current config., is better than the AC it is replacing in the PAF, and comparable to the most of the IAF fighters. With the upgrades planed for block 2 and onwards (some of which I mentioned above) it is perhaps going to become comparable to the Block52's, and the argument of "inferior aircraft" becomes ridiculous.

So it is by no means a question of "settling for an inferior AC", as SU30 wants to paint it.

EDIT: Add to the list of planned upgrades, a possible two seater version, news of which has been posted by Fatman17 in the JF-17 Thread.

 

[p2prada]

Thats a very bad oversimplification - it isn't merely a case of "1 MKI is equivalent to 4 JF-17's". You have to look at the situation from a much broader view.

the poster dint say it head to head. he meant it by capabilities wise. the MKI can drop 8tons of payload an stay up in air for more than 10 hours(with air to air refuel). wouldnt that beat even 4 Mig21s from strategic point of view.

The JF-17's linked with AEW&C, with F-16 block 52's and BVRAAM's will be a very potent force (not even including the J-10's).

Similarly, MKIs and LCA will have better AWACs support and GCI. Dont forget one modified greenpine radar or the LRTR is already operational. It is a completely different topic of discussion.

Also, the Thunder is pretty comparable to everything but the MKI's in the IAF, and better than the AC it is meant to replace in the PAF, and its only going to get better with future upgrades.

The mirage2000s and Mig-29 are being upgraded. U mean to say the JF-17 are better than the Mig-29SMT. The upgraded migs will compare to the F-16s and not the JF-17s.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

the poster dint say it head to head. he meant it by capabilities wise. the MKI can drop 8tons of payload an stay up in air for more than 10 hours(with air to air refuel). wouldnt that beat even 4 Mig21s from strategic point of view.

Similarly, MKIs and LCA will have better AWACs support and GCI. Dont forget one modified greenpine radar or the LRTR is already operational. It is a completely different topic of discussion.

The mirage2000s and Mig-29 are being upgraded. U mean to say the JF-17 are better than the Mig-29SMT. The upgraded migs will compare to the F-16s and not the JF-17s.

You and nitesh are both ignoring the context of the posters remarks. He quite clearly stated that the PAF was settling for an inferior AC, and that perhaps the PAF ASR was lower than that of the IAF. He then proceeded to make the comment regarding 400 migs vs 100 MKI - there is nothing else that can be interpreted from his series of comments than what I did.

Now if he wants to admit that was what he wanted to say, he can clarify.

Now regarding the AWACS and whatnot, my reason for mentioning them is not that the IAF will not have them (which is the only thing you guys keep focusing, despite the fact that I never said anything about the IAF not having them) - but because of various supporting assets and net centric capabilities, a simple platform to platform comparison, and then a declaration of "inferiority" is a flawed analysis.

The individual capabilities of the Thunder and the LCA are similarly lower than those of the MKI - so going by yours and SU30's analysis, one has to wonder why India is bothering to develop a fighter that would be "inferior" to the MKI.

There is a place for such platforms in the IAF and PAF, in support of other platforms and just because they cannot carry as much ordinance a the MKI, or fly as far, does not mean they are inferior.

Any way, this thread is turning into a JF-17 thread.

Back to the discussions regarding LCA.

 

[nitesh]

You and nitesh are both ignoring the context of the posters remarks. He quite clearly stated that the PAF was settling for an inferior AC, and that perhaps the PAF ASR was lower than that of the IAF. He then proceeded to make the comment regarding 400 migs vs 100 MKI - there is nothing else that can be interpreted from his series of comments than what I did.

Now if he wants to admit that was what he wanted to say, he can clarify.

Now regarding the AWACS and whatnot, my reason for mentioning them is not that the IAF will not have them (which is the only thing you guys keep focusing, despite the fact that I never said anything about the IAF not having them) - but because of various supporting assets and net centric capabilities, a simple platform to platform comparison, and then a declaration of "inferiority" is a flawed analysis.

The individual capabilities of the Thunder and the LCA are similarly lower than those of the MKI - so going by yours and SU30's analysis, one has to wonder why India is bothering to develop a fighter that would be "inferior" to the MKI.

There is a place for such platforms in the IAF and PAF, in support of other platforms and just because they cannot carry as much ordinance a the MKI, or fly as far, does not mean they are inferior.

Any way, this thread is turning into a JF-17 thread.

Back to the discussions regarding LCA.

Well LCA is supposed to replace the MiG21 so comparing with MKI is not the right way. Yes your point is correct, this thread is getting off topic. let us get back to the point

Radar-fitted Tejas this year-Nagpur-Cities-The Times of India
When LSP3 is supposed to be flying, as LSP2 is already in the air?

Based on the updates on ADA site, check this

(24-June-08)Tejas-LCA
LCA-Tejas has completed 897 Test Flights successfully. (24-June-08).

* LCA has completed 897 Test Flights successfully
(TD1-233, TD2-275,PV1-169,PV2-102,PV3-88,LSP1-27,LSP2-3).
* 03rd flight of Tejas LSP2 occurred on 23rd June 08.

 

[nitesh]

little bit off topic, but I thought no point in opening a new thread.

http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal...nal-displays-for-su-30-fighters_10066238.html

Samtel, DARE develop multi-functional displays for Su-30 fighters

June 30th, 2008 - 7:59 pm ICT by IANS


New Delhi, June 30 (IANS) Samtel Display Systems has become the first Indian company to indigenise multi-functional displays (MFDs) for the Sukhoi Su-30 combat jets of the Indian Air Force (IAF) and has received clearance for their flight testing, it was announced here Monday. The MFDs have been jointly developed and manufactured with the Defence Avionics Research Establishment (DARE), an arm of the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO).

They will now be flight-tested by the Regional Centre for Military Airworthiness (RCMA) at Nashik in Maharashtra, following which the IAF will put them through flight trials.

RCMA looks after the military airworthiness aspects of all products supplied to IAF. It is an arm of state-owned Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) that is manufacturing the Su-30 under licence.

The MFD is a device that puts all aircraft systems, monitoring and flight planning functions at the pilot’s fingertips. It paints a composite view of the aircraft’s environment, providing the pilot with all necessary information to make safe decisions during every phase of flight.

Engine performance and situational data such as location, terrain, traffic, weather and airport information are all digitally depicted and can be quickly interpreted at a glance on a large-format display.

Initially, the Samtel-DARE MFDs were subject to extensive ground tests on a Su-30 integration rig. The tests were conducted during both daylight hours and in the night to evaluate the display characteristics of the MFD under varying light conditions.

Four test sorties were undertaken at an altitude of approximately 40,000 ft with the indigenous MFD for its evaluation, “and no failure was observed”, a company statement said, adding: “Samtel will implement minor improvements suggested by the flight crew.”

Commenting on the landmark achievement, Samtel group chairman and managing director Satish Kaura said, “The flight testing of the indigenous MFDs underscores Samtel’s commitment to produce high quality, high performance avionics equipment and systems for our customers both in the Indian and international arena.

“It reinforces our endeavours to develop and provide indigenous technology developed to meet Export market and defence offset requirements by overseas clients,” Kaura added.

Samtel Display Systems has a joint venture with HAL to produce indigenous next-generation MFDs, HUDs (head up displays) and HMD (helmet mounted displays) for HAL star programmes like the Su-30, the Tejas light combat aircraft (LCA) and the intermediate jet trainer (IJT).

Along with this, Samtel has also entered a JV with French electronics major Thales to work towards the indigenous development, production, sale and maintenance of helmet mounted sight & displays (HMSDs) and other avionics for the Indian market.

Samtel Display Systems (SDS) is a key player in manufacturing high-technology equipment for avionics, military and professional applications in the international arena.

SDS is a part of the Samtel group, India’s largest integrated manufacturer of a wide range of displays for television, avionics, industrial, medical and professional applications, TV glass, components for displays, machinery and engineering services.

The group employs 6,000 people in nine world-class factories and has an annual turnover of Rs.12 billion ($300 million).

DARE initially started as a project laboratory for DRDO’s Advanced Systems Integration and Evaluation Organisation (ASIEO) that was established in 1986 to enhance the operational capabilities of the IAF through modern technologies.

Over the last decade, DARE has made rapid progress in the areas of airborne electronic warfare, airborne processors and testing and evaluation of electronic warfare systems.

It has implemented concepts in concurrent engineering in partnership with Indian industry to achieve shorter design-to-induction time frames and seamless transfer of technology.

DARE has two major wings - the electronic warfare (EW) wing and the mission avionics wing (MAW).

 

[Munir]

The main problem is that LCA is outdated delta design and being lightweight yet overweighted and still not in radar and weapon integration we can skip this as a potent utility. The problem with posters is that one the one side they use non canards as being superb yet on the other side MKI is superb thanks to its canrds. The posters have no aeronautical knowledge. Surely yhe delta can turn fast but do look at the size of the parts to make it move and do look at the fact that it is all out of energy and a sitting duck after that move...

We have to see haw well JF17 performs but it will be inducted and sofar the tests look promising. The Thunder II is still a deisgners nightmare to be optimized but it will eventually be good enough. Looking at Indian products and their performances sofar I doubt that LCA wil ever get that far. Nothing personal but purely logic.

 

[nitesh]

The main problem is that LCA is outdated delta design and being lightweight yet overweighted and still not in radar and weapon integration we can skip this as a potent utility. The problem with posters is that one the one side they use non canards as being superb yet on the other side MKI is superb thanks to its canrds. The posters have no aeronautical knowledge. Surely yhe delta can turn fast but do look at the size of the parts to make it move and do look at the fact that it is all out of energy and a sitting duck after that move...

We have to see haw well JF17 performs but it will be inducted and sofar the tests look promising. The Thunder II is still a deisgners nightmare to be optimized but it will eventually be good enough. Looking at Indian products and their performances sofar I doubt that LCA wil ever get that far. Nothing personal but purely logic.

Regards being canards or no canards

it's a bit difficult to say that before the testing is completed.

what we can say is that adding canards to LCA won't give it a significant performance advantage over it's current capabilities, which is why the designers discarded the canards in the first place.
initial LCA models had canards.

what you have to understand is that there can be different ways of approaching a particular problem, each with it's own set of pros and cons. that means while performance can be compared, you can't compare a/c on design features alone. the LCA's cranked delta configuration is a very novel approach to the maneuverability problem.
canards certainly aren't the most advanced idea that has happened to a/c, if you are thinking on those lines. e.g the latest avatar of the flanker, the su-35 doesn't carry canards.

And btw please dont again turn it to LCA vs JF-17 thread.

 

[nitesh]

Broadsword: The latest on the LSP-3: from my visit to HAL

Some news on LSP3

 

[JEFF]

The main problem is that LCA is outdated delta design and being lightweight yet overweighted and still not in radar and weapon integration we can skip this as a potent utility.

Offcourse you can skip this as a potent utility, often it becomes biggest irony that sometimes some people simply choose to overlook all other elements that are very critical for fighter jet development. Regarding your aspect of overweight, to tackle it new GE engine with higher output thrust has already been fitted and tested on it and hence you can skip this shortfall. Regarding its outdated delta design, if I ever follow your line of thinking then I will have to assume that various other fighter jets in the world having similar feature especially of Mirage type are also absolute designs.

The problem with posters is that one the one side they use non canards as being superb yet on the other side MKI is superb thanks to its canrds. The posters have no aeronautical knowledge.

Which is definitely the case as far as your this posting posting and commenting is concerned. Because you don’t even know what Tejas Delta design is made of. LCA has a cranked, compound hybrid delta design and hence canards were dropped as they didn’t offer any advantage or enhance its maneuverability in Tejas design configuration.

Surely yhe delta can turn fast but do look at the size of the parts to make it move and do look at the fact that it is all out of energy and a sitting duck after that move...

Sitting duck, hmmm…. Don’t worry this delta design is also fitted with FBW to deal with its instability. And let me remind you, Have you ever heard about BVR? Before that deficiency beginning to take toll over the aircraft with delta wing, by then that delta design fitted with BVR already done its magic of shooting down its opponents leaving very little space for crying over its lack of energy.

We have to see haw well JF17 performs but it will be inducted and sofar the tests look promising. The Thunder II is still a deisgners nightmare to be optimized but it will eventually be good enough.

So you also manage to forcast the performance of Thunder II even without its first test flights, so optimistic, I guess optimism has no place in the knowledge of aeronautics.

Looking at Indian products and their performances sofar I doubt that LCA wil ever get that far.

Oh really, how convenient for you to discount the performance of LCA upon the induction of JF-17, by the way our MCA has already been on its way, I am just reminding you if you are so oblivion to it.

Nothing personal but purely logic.

Huh? Was it really a logic? I think there has been a sufficient data being available all over the place about the deficiencies of Delta design upon which you have drawn your so called logic, but also take some precautions while analyzing the measures that has been adopted to avert those deficiencies. I hope you should refrain from drawing such a horrible kind of a logics.

 

[nitesh]

Posting news about dhruv also:
http://www.outlookindia.com/full.asp?fodname=20080714&fname=Helicopter+%28F)&sid=1&pn=1