HAL Tejas | Updates, News & Discussions

[Indicom]

Hi All,here is a Tejas walkaround link,the build quality(paint,fitting,caliberation,finish)is truly world class,HAL"s build quality of Jaguar Darin II are also excellent!

HAL Tejas PV-3 Walkaround [KH2005] [www.bharat-rakshak.com]

 

[LCA]

May be many people no agree.

but it is a fair enough comparison.

 

[Indicom]

dude

the jf-17 has a very old airframe design compared to the lca, its based on a j-8 upgrade.

the lca is made of over 50% composite, the jf-17 is mostly metal,

also, the engine on the jf-17 isn't so great compared to the GE-404 and future lca engines (GE-414, or EJ-2000) according to one of the moderators "russian engines are inferior to western engines of the 100 mki's only 10 are flying due to the crappy russian engines" if thats true, than it'll be even worst for jf-17 since rd-33 isn't a modern engine

and has the jf-17 been ordered by china?

you all claim the jf-17 is a miracle plane and dream of 1 jf-17 defeating 4 mki's and bla bla bla


truth is lca is way more advanced than jf-17 if you dont believe me look at the comparisons:

lca:
-50 % composite, lower maintenence, lower rcs, less weight, more performance
-better avionics (pakistan cant get its hands on Israeli avionics)
-will soon have a better engine
-elta 2052 aesa by 2012 (the good thing about delay)
-really good ew suite (Israel has some of the best)
-not rushed


jf-17:
-barely any composites
-avionics are french but haven't been integrated yet
-rd-33 (which i believe is a good engine) but u guys claim otherwise
-grifo radar? comparable to mig-21's radar
-chinese or french ew suite?
-started after lca program and finished before so "rushed"
-china isn't ordering any

truth is lca is better than jf-17, considering both will be made inhouse and the labor costs are similar.

why is lca more expensive than jf-17? 22 million vs 15 million?

lca has better technology, that is the answer

and by 2012 induction will start

Firstly to tell u is,the Russian engines are not at all bad,let the 10 MKIs flying remain a story,there are thousands of AC flying around the world with Russian engines or cheap Chinese knockoffs.RD 93 is a development of RD-33 and is a powerful and reliable engine.

Secondly,composites require more intensive maintenance than metal,so LCA does not score in that area.

Thirdly,yes it is technologicaly superior to the JF-17,quadruplex FBW ,Israeli ECM,RADAR etc and hence costlier,but with serial production slated by 2012,the price is supposed to come down.

 

[LCA]

Firstly to tell u is,the Russian engines are not at all bad,let the 10 MKIs flying remain a story,there are thousands of AC flying around the world with Russian engines or cheap Chinese knockoffs.RD 93 is a development of RD-33 and is a powerful and reliable engine.

Secondly,composites require more intensive maintenance than metal,so LCA does not score in that area.

Thirdly,yes it is technologicaly superior to the JF-17,quadruplex FBW ,Israeli ECM,RADAR etc and hence costlier,but with serial production slated by 2012,the price is supposed to come down.

Please explain your II point , it would be good for all of us to know how composite require more maintenance than metal or provide some link about this topic.

 

[Chanakyaa]

Firstly to tell u is,the Russian engines are not at all bad,let the 10 MKIs flying remain a story,there are thousands of AC flying around the world with Russian engines or cheap Chinese knockoffs.RD 93 is a development of RD-33 and is a powerful and reliable engine.

Secondly,composites require more intensive maintenance than metal,so LCA does not score in that area.

Thirdly,yes it is technologicaly superior to the JF-17,quadruplex FBW ,Israeli ECM,RADAR etc and hence costlier,but with serial production slated by 2012,the price is supposed to come down.

Come on . LCA is one of the Most unique Aircraft in this Area.

Airframe

The LCA is constructed of aluminium-lithium alloys, carbon-fibre composites (C-FC), and titanium-alloy steels. The Tejas employs C-FC materials for up to 45% of its airframe by weight, including in the fuselage (doors and skins), wings (skin, spars and ribs), elevons, tailfin, rudder, air brakes and landing gear doors.

Composites are used to make an aircraft both lighter and stronger at the same time compared to an all-metal design, and the LCA's percentage employment of C-FCs is one of the highest among contemporary aircraft of its class.[28]

Apart from making the plane much lighter, there are also fewer joints or rivets, which increases the aircraft's reliability and lowers its susceptibility to structural fatigue cracks.

Read More

 

[Amanpuneet Singh]

Firstly to tell u is,the Russian engines are not at all bad,let the 10 MKIs flying remain a story,there are thousands of AC flying around the world with Russian engines or cheap Chinese knockoffs.RD 93 is a development of RD-33 and is a powerful and reliable engine.

Secondly,composites require more intensive maintenance than metal,so LCA does not score in that area.

Thirdly,yes it is technologicaly superior to the JF-17,quadruplex FBW ,Israeli ECM,RADAR etc and hence costlier,but with serial production slated by 2012,the price is supposed to come down.

Yes,you have point .There is problem in maintenance of LCA .The greatest value of composite materials is that they can be both lightweight and strong. The heavier an aircraft weighs, the more fuel it burns, so reducing weight is important to aeronautical engineers.

Despite their strength and low weight, composites have not been a miracle solution for aircraft structures. Composites are hard to inspect for flaws. Some of them absorb moisture. Most importantly, they can be expensive, primarily because they are labor intensive and often require complex and expensive fabrication machines. Aluminum, by contrast, is easy to manufacture and repair. Anyone who has ever gotten into a minor car accident has learned that dented metal can be hammered back into shape, but a crunched fiberglass bumper has to be completely replaced. The same is true for many composite materials used in aviation.

 

[nitesh]

You guys really think that you are brilliant then the designers and engineers who are working on LCA?

What makes you think that they have not thought about this?

Don't compare a car with a plane.

 

[Amanpuneet Singh]

You guys really think that you are brilliant then the designers and engineers who are working on LCA?

What makes you think that they have not thought about this?

Don't compare a car with a plane.

Nitesh i am not comparing car with LCA and i m not saying its flawed all im saying is composite harder mentain than metal bit it gives more than it take as compared to metal.

 

[nitesh]

Nitesh i am not comparing car with LCA and i m not saying its flawed all im saying is composite harder mentain than metal bit it gives more than it take as compared to metal.

When you design a plane you take care a lot of parameters like weight, maintainability, RCS of that the particular material etc. Once all the parameters are taken care then you see what is best suited. You can't just harp around with one parameter and keep giving judgments. Any way a link has been posted some post above about maintainability check that.

 

[Myth_buster_1]

dude

the jf-17 has a very old airframe design compared to the lca, its based on a j-8 upgrade.

the lca is made of over 50% composite, the jf-17 is mostly metal,

also, the engine on the jf-17 isn't so great compared to the GE-404 and future lca engines (GE-414, or EJ-2000) according to one of the moderators "russian engines are inferior to western engines of the 100 mki's only 10 are flying due to the crappy russian engines" if thats true, than it'll be even worst for jf-17 since rd-33 isn't a modern engine

and has the jf-17 been ordered by china?

you all claim the jf-17 is a miracle plane and dream of 1 jf-17 defeating 4 mki's and bla bla bla


truth is lca is way more advanced than jf-17 if you dont believe me look at the comparisons:

lca:
-50 % composite, lower maintenence, lower rcs, less weight, more performance
-better avionics (pakistan cant get its hands on Israeli avionics)
-will soon have a better engine
-elta 2052 aesa by 2012 (the good thing about delay)
-really good ew suite (Israel has some of the best)
-not rushed


jf-17:
-barely any composites
-avionics are french but haven't been integrated yet
-rd-33 (which i believe is a good engine) but u guys claim otherwise
-grifo radar? comparable to mig-21's radar
-chinese or french ew suite?
-started after lca program and finished before so "rushed"
-china isn't ordering any

truth is lca is better than jf-17, considering both will be made inhouse and the labor costs are similar.

why is lca more expensive than jf-17? 22 million vs 15 million?

lca has better technology, that is the answer

and by 2012 induction will start

what a piece of pile jack $hit you have created! who told you that? you losers scroll down wikipeedia and think you know every thing now!

here is a better comparision between the two.
btw LCA with AESA and Kavir engine wont be ready before 2025!

 

[Myth_buster_1]

What was that? guy's have you heard of anything like that before? I haven't.

By the way we should stop comparing as this will lead to nowhere. Indians, lets do these silently. Time will tell where we are in the aircraft industry and thats what we are trying to build. by the way LCA is our aircraft and next one will be better. PAK will still be building and collaborating . Lets hope Kaveri ignites by 2009.

Has that tiny single cell brain of yours just had a seizure from a comparative youtube video? wait before i provide some more ("non wikipeedia" indian wet-dream) and see how you cope with that this time along with your delusional indian mates.

Aliph Ahmed from *********** came up with very factual information about LCA.

-First 40 will not meet the ASR.
-LCA at present is only pulling 6gs. ASR has been decreased to 8gs from 9g (For the benefit of LCA?)
-No way to meet the ASR unless a different engine other then the IN20 is bought.
-Empty weight of LCA is 6.5 tons now.
-To take it from AoA of 20 upwards, India needs help from outside in consultation or it will require double the flights to do it on her own,thus more delay.
-The new engine will be installed after the first 40 LCAs.


The New Indian Express - Best of South India News, Entertainment, Cricket, Business, Lifestyle

Link to the report that LCA is unable to pull greater then 17 degrees of AoA dated June 06, 2008: Also mentioned in 25th issue of Janes Defence Weekly but one need subscription for it.

Also the same link that states that first 40 will be incapable of combat.

LCA needs new engine to be worthy of combat

Link to the report that 20 LCA will be produced by 2011 and the other 20 by 2016. Therefore 40 by 2016. The article is dated June 16, 2008:

http://news.webindia123.com/news/Art...16/975849.html

This link is an interview of Programme Director (CA) and Director, Aeronautical Development Agency, P.S. Subramanyam dated 12th of July 2008 where he clearly acknowledges the previous links I have posted such as first 40 will not meet the ASR, the aircraft gone heavier, LCA has around 500 flight hours to date, only way to meet the ASR is to go for a new engine and etc etc.

http://www.forceindia.net/interview4.asp


This is coming from Programme Director (CA) and Director, Aeronautical Development Agency, P.S. Subramanyam. Sounds enough of an expert on LCA to me.

This is what he had to say about Kaveri:

Kaveri engine was fine for the LCA programme when it started. But as we have shifted the goal-post, which is the LCA weight, the Kaveri engine does not meet the ASR requirement. In the meantime, I am also requesting GTRE that technologies are available in the world to make the Kaveri engine fulfil the ASR requirements.

This is what he had to say about both the engines:

We used GE 404 F2J3 engine for the test. However, the latest test of LSP 2 was done with GE 404 IN20 engine, which is slightly more powerful than the earlier one. The IAF, in what are called the Air Staff Requirements (ASR), is asking for certain parameters to be met. Both the engines now fitted on the LCA do not meet the ASR completely.

http://www.forceindia.net/interview4.asp

 

[Chanakyaa]

Has that tiny single cell brain of yours just had a seizure from a comparative youtube video? wait before i provide some more ("non wikipeedia" indian wet-dream) and see how you cope with that this time along with your delusional indian mates.

Aliph Ahmed from *********** came up with very factual information about LCA.

You are Missing one Basic fact.
LCA is NOT going to be India's Prime Defence while JF-17 will be Your Main Fighter Jet.
Where will JF17 Stand when Its Knocked down by Mig-29 BVR ( Leave aside the Mighty SU- 30 MKI infront of it ) ?

LCA will replace the MiG 21s.. Its Mainly for Number and to Boost the MCA Project.

 

[shchinese]

how about considering to import some of these L-15 aircrafts? they can be easily converted to light fighters, actually all gears are already there from day one.

YouTube - chinese L-15 Advanced Jet Trainer CHINA AIR SHOW 2008

YouTube - china fight l15 ? ? A

 

[shchinese]

one thing to consider - you don't need to wait another 5 years to get this, much cheaper than LCA, and the performance is even better.

 

[ju87]

Has that tiny single cell brain of yours just had a seizure from a comparative youtube video? wait before i provide some more ("non wikipeedia" indian wet-dream) and see how you cope with that this time along with your delusional indian mates.

Aliph Ahmed from *********** came up with very factual information about LCA.

I know where Aliph Ahmed trolls around. If you check the same site, you'll find his stupid diatribes rebutted easily. I won't say anymore, due to this forum's policy.