What's new

IAF all Geared up to work on LCA MK-2 aircraft, with HAL and DRDO : Chief

If I assume, that 148 KMs figure would be for 5 m^2. Give or take 10-20 KM less than KLJ 7.

And the goal of Tejaa's FCS is same, to achieve 26 AoA. I presume due to it's Delta config, it needed a more complex FCS to achieve a 26 Degree AoA, or my presumption is incorrect?
If I assume, that 148 KMs figure would be for 5 m^2. Give or take 10-20 KM less than KLJ 7.

And the goal of Tejaa's FCS is same, to achieve 26 AoA. I presume due to it's Delta config, it needed a more complex FCS to achieve a 26 Degree AoA, or my presumption is incorrect?

Tested up to 24 degrees,not that it cant do more.
 
If I assume, that 148 KMs figure would be for 5 m^2. Give or take 10-20 KM less than KLJ 7.

And the goal of Tejaa's FCS is same, to achieve 26 AoA. I presume due to it's Delta config, it needed a more complex FCS to achieve a 26 Degree AoA, or my presumption is incorrect?

Well the source I provided is from the official site directly but I still dont know what will be the real ranges of different aircrafts as the ground clutter and the terrain also plays a very important role in deciding the RCS of the aircraft including the altitude.

Well according to me the LEVCONS might solve most of the AoA problems but the IAF dont want to add more control surfaces as it is difficult during maintainance and gives added weight to the aircraft. The FCLAW is being tweaked so as to accommodate the IAF's 26 degree AoA without adding LEVCONs.

The Physics of LEVCONs seems sound but as we dont know much about the difficulties faced by the designers we cannot comment on it.

Tested up to 24 degrees,not that it cant do more.
Attaining high AoA was not the criteria but sustaining it without bleeding energy is.
 
Well the source I provided is from the official site directly but I still dont know what will be the real ranges of different aircrafts as the ground clutter and the terrain also plays a very important role in deciding the RCS of the aircraft including the altitude.

Well according to me the LEVCONS might solve most of the AoA problems but the IAF dont want to add more control surfaces as it is difficult during maintainance and gives added weight to the aircraft. The FCLAW is being tweaked so as to accommodate the IAF's 26 degree AoA without adding LEVCONs.

The Physics of LEVCONs seems sound but as we dont know much about the difficulties faced by the designers we cannot comment on it.


Attaining high AoA was not the criteria but sustaining it without bleeding energy is.

Correct me, Delta config bleed more energy as compared to F-16 config?
 
Correct me, Delta config bleed more energy as compared to F-16 config?
Pure delta do because of larger wing surface area. That is why the extra control surfaces like Levcons and Canards and tailplanes to prevent the aircraft from stalling and give a better controlability. LCA tried solving this problem by using a compund delta wing but that added more drag to the airframe.
 
Pure delta do because of larger wing surface area. That is why the extra control surfaces like Levcons and Canards and tailplanes to prevent the aircraft from stalling and give a better controlability. LCA tried solving this problem by using a compund delta wing but that added more drag to the airframe.

That's what I was trying to understand. JF-17 doesn't need complex FCS, It's Hybrid FCS coupled with LERX is more than enough to pull off AoA maneuvers and a glimpse of this were shown in last month demonstration in Air Dubai.
 
Yet you have the time to upload a picture just to unsuccesfully prove that you don't care?

View attachment 11780

Lmao.. yeah we dont care if some indian fanboy compare a "under development" jet with JF-17 ..(First block delivered n Block II soon to be inducted) in his retarded jingoistic posts..

I guess you meant all aluminium Junk fighter that would 'light up' Indian radars..hence corrected for you.....Has that 3.5 gen fighter got all axis FBW yet?



Why,coz you are unable to develop them??

And this is the same guy who claimed 'no one cares about Agni V'....No,one cares about a MIRVable ICBM having single digit accuracy......:lol::lol:

Son do u have a MIRV? as for ur so called ICBM shit aint even a threat... when ur country is covered by our missiles already.. as for ur all alliminium junk etc? son 50+ are in service... block II going to be inducted soon... is foriegn made indian assembled Low crap aircraft even flying yet? :omghaha::omghaha:
 
Correct me, Delta config bleed more energy as compared to F-16 config?
Lmao.. yeah we dont care if some indian fanboy compare a "under development" jet with JF-17 ..(First block delivered n Block II soon to be inducted) in his retarded jingoistic posts..

isn't the current JF-17 is found not suitable thats why its production stopped and current Block-II JF-17 specifications is equals to LCA MK-1?
 
That's what I was trying to understand. JF-17 doesn't need complex FCS, It's Hybrid FCS coupled with LERX is more than enough to pull off AoA maneuvers and a glimpse of this were shown in last month demonstration in Air Dubai.

Yes I usually refute people only when they claim that JF 17 has FBW in all 3 axes. They usually dont understand between quadruplex FBW and FBW in all three axes. That is when the problem starts.

When I say that the JF 17 is a stable platform compared to LCA it gets even worse. An aircraft is designed as being unstable in all platforms ground up so there is nothing wrong with an aircraft being stable in a single axis. The F 15 is a stable design but I am yet to see a F 16 shoot down one in combat.
 
Lmao.. yeah we dont care if some indian fanboy compare a "under development" jet with JF-17 ..(First block delivered n Block II soon to be inducted) in his retarded jingoistic posts..



Son do u have a MIRV? as for ur so called ICBM shit aint even a threat... when ur country is covered by our missiles already.. as for ur all alliminium junk etc? son 50+ are in service... block II going to be inducted soon... is foriegn made indian assembled Low crap aircraft even flying yet? :omghaha::omghaha:
Well call back when you have inducted it.
Last I heard it was supposed to be this year.LOL
 
isn't the current JF-17 is found not suitable thats why its production stopped and current Block-II JF-17 specifications is equals to LCA MK-1?

Now that statement requires a full on facepalm. Each Block of JF-17 is being produced in batch consisting 50 aircrafts. JF-17 production slowed down in 2011-2012 due to extreme funding problems and it concluded it's production run in November 2013. All 50 produced and Block 2 in production.

Nope. Block-1 and onwards are equal to LCA sans composites material. All things are similar.

Yes I usually refute people only when they claim that JF 17 has FBW in all 3 axes. They usually dont understand between quadruplex FBW and FBW in all three axes. That is when the problem starts.

When I say that the JF 17 is a stable platform compared to LCA it gets even worse. An aircraft is designed as being unstable in all platforms ground up so there is nothing wrong with an aircraft being stable in a single axis. The F 15 is a stable design but I am yet to see a F 16 shoot down one in combat.

Well info about JF 17 having hybrid FBW wasn't disclosed until 2011. That's why people always assumed JF-17 has FBW in all axis.
 
I guess you meant all aluminium Junk fighter that would 'light up' Indian radars..hence corrected for you.....Has that 3.5 gen fighter got all axis FBW yet?



Why,coz you are unable to develop them??

And this is the same guy who claimed 'no one cares about Agni V'....No,one cares about a MIRVable ICBM having single digit accuracy......:lol::lol:

I already discussed this in detail, but in a DACT b/w F-16 and JF-17, that Junk aluminum RCS was observed b/w 2-3 m^2. A DSI hiding it's engine blades. A full axis FBW is compensated with having an LERX. That's why it achieved 26 degree. Next time have some dignity in discussing thing with full facts instead of half arsed knowledge.
 
That's what I was trying to understand. JF-17 doesn't need complex FCS, It's Hybrid FCS coupled with LERX is more than enough to pull off AoA maneuvers and a glimpse of this were shown in last month demonstration in Air Dubai.

JF 17 and LCA design are different due to their purpose, while JF17 is a conventional strike platform, the LCA is designed as an interceptor and air defense fighter and in that role it will have some of its strike abilities get compromised. But like you know delta is a great design for interceptors.

Its a bit of odd when people compare LCA with JF17 as I dont find any resemblance in doing so.

But yes I agree, it will need more sophisticated FCS than JF17 and rightly so, They did that with NLCA by adding LERX.

Cool story... old induction timeline thingy:



Crawl n die .. :rofl:

Itna bhi hason maat bhai, bachake rakho, kyun ki yeh bahut jald band hone wali hei, aur hamara start hoga...:lol:.:cheers:
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom