What's new

i-Derby-ER new BVR missile for Tejas Mk-1A

Do not understand the confusion here. Both LCA and JF-17 have thrust to weight ratio less than 1.

How then can they be 4 gen. Here is proof/validation

Thrust to Weight Ratios of all Fighters
Is thrust to weight the only criteria to judge the standard/generation of a fighter jet?

I thing you Mismanaged the Facts
Let me tell you the Figure you Quoted is For Total Radius of Action With IFR(In-Flight Refueling)ability
The 500 Km Combat Radius With Mission Load of 3500 Kg is For IOC-2 Configuration LCA.the Range will be Increased Double when IFR Probe will be Added to It.

As For JF-17 ,the Figures are Dubious Even F-16 Have Combat Radius of 550 Km


Also Combat Radius Can be Increased or Decreased According to External PayLoad
The jets i mentioned have said combat radius on internal fuel not with mid air refuelling ...

F16 is the only exception with less range but it can compensate with cft or air refuelling and still be carrying a good deal of weapons (it has more than double the payload of tejas)

I was not talking about IFR though
 
F16 is the only exception with less range but it can compensate with cft or air refuelling and still be carrying a good deal of weapons (it has more than double the payload of tejas)

Combat radius is 550 km (340 mi) on a hi-lo-hi mission with six 450 kg (1,000 lb) bombs.
he jets i mentioned have said combat radius on internal fuel not with mid air refuelling
Combat radius is the distance which the aircraft can fly the farthest with maximum payload and without refueling

The Point I Was Making is for JF-17

Tejas: 27.0%(Empty weight: 6,500 kg,Internal fuel: 2,458 kg)

JF-17: 26.3%(Empty weight: 6,586 kg,Internal fuel: 2,350 kg)

JAS-39C: 25.0%(Empty weight: 6,800 kg,Internal fuel: 2,268 kg)

Clearly Mentioned that Internal Fuel Capacity of LCA is more than JF-17
the Combat Radius of Jf-17 is Exaggerated

500 Km Radius of Action is For IOC-2 Configuration It will be Increased By FOC.
 
Last edited:
Is thrust to weight the only criteria to judge the standard/generation of a fighter jet?

It is a critical factor. An aircraft with T/W less than one would constantly loose energy in sustained combat.

It is hence no match for 4 gen fighter
 
Last edited:
Do not understand the confusion here. Both LCA and JF-17 have thrust to weight ratio less than 1.

How then can they be 4 gen. Here is proof/validation

Thrust to Weight Ratios of all Fighters


What happens to F-35C ?? Which is 1: 01, does this mean f-35 is not a 5th generation fighter.

Thrust to Weight does not validate "a generation" of a particular jet. It just means either the Jet is over-weight or the Engine is under-powered. Cheers
 
It is a critical factor. An aircraft with T/W less than one would constantly loose energy in sustained combat.

It is hence no match for 4 gen fighter
Thrust to weight ratio of Miraage 2000,Rafale,Gripen and F 18 E/F are also less then 1 so what do you think that these are also third Gen Fighters...
 
Do not understand the confusion here. Both LCA and JF-17 have thrust to weight ratio less than 1.

How then can they be 4 gen. Here is proof/validation

Thrust to Weight Ratios of all Fighters
Ttwr ratio of lca is 1.07 and will increase for lca mk1p also f35 has lower ttwr so that makes it 3.5 gen jet qith 4.5++gen avionics and 5 gen stealth.
 
Dont let only one feature lead you to classifying an aircraft as one generation to another. First of all, there is no clearly defined line between successive generations. However, the “generation” term is very popular because of its simplicity. Each category represents certain class of technology used in the planes: avionics, constructions, engines, etc. Higher generation means a more technologically advanced “bird”. In broad terms, aircraft classification, this old article takes the cake for simplicity and clarity

Posted from the article
The Aviationist » Fighter generations comparison chart

Generations are a common way to classify jet fighters. Often, generations have been “assigned” to fighters in accordance with the timeframes encompassing the peak period of service entry for such aircraft.

The best definition I’ve found so far of fighter generations is the one contained in an article published in 2009 by Air Force Magazine, that proposes a generations break down based on capabilities:

Generation 1: Jet propulsion

Generation 2: Swept wings; range-only radar; infrared missiles

Generation 3: Supersonic speed; pulse radar; able to shoot at targets beyond visual range.

Generation 4: Pulse-doppler radar; high maneuverability; look-down, shoot-down missiles.

Generation 4+: High agility; sensor fusion; reduced signatures.

Generation 4++: Active electronically scanned arrays; continued reduced signatures or some “active” (waveform canceling) stealth; some supercruise.

Generation 5: All-aspect stealth with internal weapons, extreme agility, full-sensor fusion, integrated avionics, some or full supercruise.

Potential Generation 6: extreme stealth; efficient in all flight regimes (subsonic to multi-Mach); possible “morphing” capability; smart skins; highly networked; extremely sensitive sensors; optionally manned; directed energy weapons.

In order to give the readers an idea of the type of aircraft belonging to each generation I’ve prepared the following table with the help of Tom Cooper / ACIG.org and Ugo Crisponi / Aviatiographic.com, who provided the profiles.

Evolution-The-Aviationist.jpg



In another article from Fighter Jet generations – The classification of military aircraft. » MiGFlug.com Blog for more reading purposes
The third generation was a continuation in researches of advance avionics, aerodynamics performance and air guide missiles. Dogfights forced improvements in maneuverability, air-to-air missiles and radar systems. However, poor accuracy of weapons and electronic countermeasure (device designed to trick detection system) did not make it easy to win an air fight. Aircraft construction was also improved. Canards, powered slats and thrust vectoring (ability to manipulate the direction of the thrust) gave the opportunity to design the Harrier Jump Jet, first vertical/short takeoff and landing (V/STOL) fighter. Rising costs and research difficulties resulted in new doctrine for air forces. Multirole aircrafts developed into primary weapon e.g. the McDonnell F-4 Phantom became the only fighter in the history used by every branch of the United States Armed Forces.

Fourth generation fighter jets are mostly multirole aircrafts. Sophisticated avionics, especially fly-by-wire system improved maneuverability at the expense of aerodynamic instability. It sounds crazy, but the digital flight control systems stabilized the aircraft without the pilot’s knowledge and helped him controlling the jet. Therefore, impossible aerobatic maneuvers like Pugachev’s Cobra could be made. Electronics became the most essential part of equipment. Head-up and multifunction displays, long range radars and more attest led to sky domination. Engineers revolutionized the construction by using composite materials and the stealth technology (only in bombers aircrafts).

The end of the Cold War brought some serious problems for the Air Force inventories. Lower budget and political environment slowed down many researches or even canceled them. That is the reason why we currently have 4.5th generation of jet fighters. Almost every new aircraft is in some way based on existing airframes or similar to previous ones. MiG-35 is a further development of the MiG-29, the same like Sukhoi Su-30 and Su-27, a new version of the Boeing F/A-18, F-15 and many more. Present fighter jets have advanced digital avionic based on microchip technology and highly integrated systems. They are adapted to operate in high-tech warfare where not only avionic but also super maneuverability are the key to success.

A few development projects of fifth generation fighter jets have been initiated. The Russian Sukhoi T-50 PAK FA, the Lockheed Martin F-35 and the Chinese J-20 and J-31 are in advanced stadium of development. Currently only the Lockheed Martin/Boeing F-22 Raptor is in the active service with the US Air Force. All of them are designed to operate in the high-tech and complex combat environment. The aerospace materials used and the new technology gives them the biggest advantages, being invisible for radars and granting super maneuverability. Avionics is also much more sophisticated, along with new ways of communication, navigation, glass cockpits, high speed network and many more. The question is if these incredibly expensive fighters play an important role in asymmetric conflicts. It could be that most tasks will be taken over by drones (UAV) very soon.

Hope this helps.. As using just one sub classification like TWR will not help in arriving in a proper peer group to compare and understand the generation.
Fascinating how from World War 2 we the human beings in a short time had advanced so much..
 
This is great development, almost ground breaking........never before in air force history have we ever seen an air to air missile capable of being fired from a non flying plane

So is india planning to arm these jejas and place them on strategic locations............can indian scientist suspend these tejas from aerostats and arm them with new missiles, this way they can be places on strategic locations across Pakistan border





Does that helps the truck Tejas piggy backs?

Ttwr ratio of lca is 1.07 and will increase for lca mk1p also f35 has lower ttwr so that makes it 3.5 gen jet qith 4.5++gen avionics and 5 gen stealth.
 
This is great development, almost ground breaking........never before in air force history have we ever seen an air to air missile capable of being fired from a non flying plane

So is india planning to arm these jejas and place them on strategic locations............can indian scientist suspend these tejas from aerostats and arm them with new missiles, this way they can be places on strategic locations across Pakistan border

Does that helps the truck Tejas piggy backs?


:lol::lol:

I don't think so, but it will surely put the 17s on back of a truck in seventeen pieces.
 
Last edited:
What happens to F-35C ?? Which is 1: 01, does this mean f-35 is not a 5th generation fighter.

Thrust to Weight does not validate "a generation" of a particular jet. It just means either the Jet is over-weight or the Engine is under-powered. Cheers

Seems like over patriotism from many Indians. Comparing F-35C with LCA. Next someone may be claiming that LCA is 5th gen because of T/W similar to F-35C.
 
Seems like over patriotism from many Indians. Comparing F-35C with LCA. Next someone may be claiming that LCA is 5th gen because of T/W similar to F-35C.

actually,what they claimed is right..

T/W ratio is not a criteria for "Aircraft Generations".

As others pointed out and posted,These generations definition depends on other criterias and not T/W Ratio.

The fact is Tejas' T/W is 1.07,which is better than Mirage,Rafale,Gripen and F-18,all of these are 4th Gen or 4++ Gen.
 
actually,what they claimed is right..

T/W ratio is not a criteria for "Aircraft Generations".

As others pointed out and posted,These generations definition depends on other criterias and not T/W Ratio.

The fact is Tejas' T/W is 1.07,which is better than Mirage,Rafale,Gripen and F-18,all of these are 4th Gen or 4++ Gen.

Let us approach this is an other way. What Air superiority roles do you envisage the LCA to be deployed in once this missile is integrated?
 
Let us approach this is an other way. What Air superiority roles do you envisage the LCA to be deployed in once this missile is integrated?
LCA MK1A with EL-2052 AESA and Python5 , Derby & I Derby ER is more leathel than even a upgraded Mig29 and PAF is already worried as I Derby ER has a doul pulse motor and a new version of active radar seker than AIM-120C you have with almost the same range but much better seeker ... rest you speculate yourself

but LCA will never be a frontline fighter it will always fight in shadows of big boys of IAF (mig29,M2K & MKI)
 
LCA MK1A with EL-2052 AESA and Python5 , Derby & I Derby ER is more leathel than even a upgraded Mig29 and PAF is already worried as I Derby ER has a doul pulse motor and a new version of active radar seker than AIM-120C you have with almost the same range but much better seeker ... rest you speculate yourself

but LCA will never be a frontline fighter it will always fight in shadows of big boys of IAF (mig29,M2K & MKI)

Exactly my point. Let us assume LCA is 4 gen. I see it being used primarily for point defence, in counter air and close support + maybe battle field interdiction in counter land- agree with you not as frontline fighter. Using a fourth generation fighter for these roles does not make sense. Negation proves that LCA is 3rd gen.
 
Back
Top Bottom