IAF may not get to fly LCA before 2010

[ajaybhutani]

They're meant to counter eachother no?

LCA is built as a point defence fighter which will be deployed near borders..
thunder will be used by PAkistan against all indian planes.(i wouldnt state it has been designed for facing all indian planes..as a lot of compromises have been made to keep it cheap ).
again i'll wait for these planes to come out before i start speculating about who can win in which circumstances. All i can state is that LCA is a much bigger effort because its a much different airframe.. its cant run without a FBW( JF17 can.. as its staticallystable and in turn much lessser agile).. that changes the whole development effort level altogether.. Paksitan made a compromise to have a proven 3rd gen (statically stable ) airframe as it leads to lower development costs and lower prices.. but this leads to lower performances too. how lower that we need to wait till a war happens or these two fighters face each other.

 

[Best of the Best]

i dont have any objection on that.

Thanks for that

that depends on how good the plane turns out to be. Please remember its not a JF17. its a statically unstable frame built with mostly composites(reducing its rcs) and running on the more reliable and more long lasting american engines.( as of now.. and kaveri has to exceed the params of GE404 to replace it in LCA) . About avionics india surely has a lot of supply from many sources and will place the foreign avionics components for whatever avionic components it finds below standards.( you can even look at the same from the LCA development till now where foreign parts are getting replaced by indian parts gradually).
the product is not even out and you have compared it to a 2nd hand F16/mig29.. if you really believe that the 2nd hand option is better please give out reasons as so why LCA is worse than these options.

Well lets see now JF-17 has an airframe which is if not all is influnced by the F-16 which is an unstable design it self, according to my sources thunder has better turn rates then F-16 at subsonic speed besides that my entire family is in PAF and i take there word for it when they say that the JF-17 has 30% composites on it which in turn has been done to increase its speed from the current Mach 1.8 to Mach 2....now as far as JF-17 not being an unstable design plz show me some proof becoz that has been proved wrong several times..


Well if LCA is so good then why did ur IAF chief support introducing old mig's to counter the F-16 deal rather then introducing the LCA which accourding to u surpasses the MIg and F-16 series..?????

thats exactly what led to the spark..
the LCA hasnt been ruled out by IAF/ADA/GOI/HAL.. ( all who are involved in this project ) then who are you to rule it out?? and then you expectme to take your argument as a neutral stance.

Sorry to disappoint u but IAF never saw ur saw called spark to me it was a short curcit that IAF totally lost confidence in this jet cause of the long time it took and every time it came out with a new issue...

shows your ignorance about the project.. and in fact that you have formed a view about the plane without doing any research.. theres an engine called GE404 which is right now used in LCA and special versions of it ( GE-404 IN20) is already funded by India to suit its needs. first batch of this engine has already been ordered.. .. the first few squadrons will fly with GE engines. as again .. " please read before you post"

Plz i dont want u to tell me abot GE404 engine's since this engine is also used on some F-16's varients and i am fully aware about the engine and i would advice u too plz stop thinking about me or others to be so ignorent whats next u comming and telling me that M-88-3 would be used on Rafale and would make it able to supercruise....

the avionics and radars are already in the plane.. Whats taking time is the fact that its a statically unstable plane and testing a FBW for such a plane takes time.

Thats the entire argument my fellow member how much time ur not making a raptor its an LCA which has been in development for the last 20 years the raptor is in service now like wise how much time do u guys need to get this jet battle ready in other words ur proving my point...

its not a competition to thunder .They are totally different planes in level of airframes itself. oh i forgot(for you a generation of difference in airframe doesnt do any good to the plane).

Weird how with time things change i remember at one time indian's claming that LCa would fly circuls around thunder now LCA is not in a competition (trust me now i grantee u thunder would run circuls around LCA).

 

[Bull]

Well if LCA is so good then why did ur IAF chief support introducing old mig's to counter the F-16 deal rather then introducing the LCA which accourding to u surpasses the MIg and F-16 series..?????

Which old Mig did India introduce to counter F16s??
We cant introduce the ZLCa bcoz it isnt ready?

 

[Samudra]

Thats the entire argument my fellow member how much time ur not making a raptor its an LCA which has been in development for the last 20 years

Do you have any clue about when the first tranche of money was sanctioned for the LCA development?

And please use punctuations and proper spellings.Helps others comprehend your post.

 

[Owais]

i'll surely like to see the source..
actually i'll give you hint of how to calculate it urself. Look at gripen's empty weight and loaded weight( i.e. empty wt + fuel) and same for LCA. now both of these have same engines(same engine efficiency) and are deltas ( so similar drag) . do your math on what will be range for LCA wrt range for Gripen. ( you can even try with Mirage) .. figures should give you a good idea about what LCA's range will be.

may be these links will help you...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_Combat_Aircraft
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/aircraft/fighter/lca/
http://www.fighter-planes.com/info/lca.htm
http://www.india-defence.com/specifications/fighters/1
http://www.reference.com/browse/wiki/Hindustan_Tejas

 

[Averroes]

Do you have any clue about when the first tranche of money was sanctioned for the LCA development?

When was it? Thanks.

 

[Best of the Best]

Which old Mig did India introduce to counter F16s??
We cant introduce the ZLCa bcoz it isnt ready?

I was talking about your IAF's chief's statment about introducting 2nd hand Mig-29's to counter the new F-16 threat. Well when will it be ready after 15 more years thats the argument When exactly will it be put into service.

 

[Best of the Best]

Do you have any clue about when the first tranche of money was sanctioned for the LCA development?

Well Fellow member i dont but i do know this the plane has been in development for more then 20 years now, that speaks for its self.

And please use punctuations and proper spellings.Helps others comprehend your post.

What does any of that gotta do with this topic?. Then again if ur trying to prove your the only educated person around here point taken lol.

 

[Munir]

I don't like the way some people ask questions. Behave Samudra.

About your onesided remark...

>>>The LCA is India's second attempt to develop its own combat aircraft. In the 1950s a limited number of Indian developed HF-24 Marut ground attack fighters were built by Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL), but the design proved to be insuccessful. In 1983 the LCA was conceived by the Indian Air Force to replace its MiG-21 fleet in the front line tactical role.

Marut was produced thanks to foreign input. There is enough to Google before you start typing that it is Indian. About LCA. 1983-2006. 23 years. Lots of foreign input (engine/composites/avionics etc etc). I don't see that as a success...

 

[Samudra]

About LCA. 1983-2006.

Project definition (PD) of LCA commenced in October 1987 and was completed in September I988 not 1983.And Phase I costing Rs.2188 crores was sanctioned only in 1990.

That means the actually money for the project was given only in 1990.Before that it was only talk of the project.Just because people thought about building a airplane locally in 1983 does not mean they started full scale engineering development in 1983.

The LCA programme is only 16 years old.

I don't see that as a success...

Most unfortunately, your opinion on the aircraft is irrelevant to the Indian Air Force.

 

[Munir]

If it wasn't relevant then they would not skip LCA and buy 125 MRCA. We know those excuses that it is not related to LCA but I am not into that anymore. Sometimes a dead cow is not worth to cherish. I wish you would understand that. LCA is imho just a failed simplistic Mirage2000H version. Just like the fact that Fc1 was planned to be a simple block15 F16... Fc1 matured thanks to USA. LCA is almost dead thanks to many factors. If we have to argue about that then I this is the wrong place.

 

[Samudra]

See, Munir, what you think is irrelevant to the IAF.

Whether IAF will induct the aircraft or not is for the Indian Air Force to decide, not for people who arrive on conclusions based on half baked opinions and articles written on the internet.You dont even know the program was initated.

The LCA Tejas is by all means a suitable replacement for the MiG-21.

We know those excuses that it is not related to LCA but I am not into that anymore.

While I'm most certainly awed by your rather vivid imagination I will be in a position to appreciate the same if it can be somewhere near the truth and based on facts rather than ones own wishes and fantasies.

 

[Munir]

See, Munir, what you think is irrelevant to the IAF.

Whether IAF will induct the aircraft or not is for the Indian Air Force to decide, not for people who arrive on conclusions based on half baked opinions and articles written on the internet.You dont even know the program was initated.

The LCA Tejas is by all means a suitable replacement for the MiG-21.



While I'm most certainly awed by your rather vivid imagination I will be in a position to appreciate the same if it can be somewhere near the truth and based on facts rather than ones own wishes and fantasies.

Thanks for personal bashing and goodbye!

 

[master_fx]

i think there are still tons of problems with the LCA.....

 

[ajaybhutani]

may be these links will help you...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_Combat_Aircraft
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/aircraft/fighter/lca/
http://www.fighter-planes.com/info/lca.htm
http://www.india-defence.com/specifications/fighters/1
http://www.reference.com/browse/wiki/Hindustan_Tejas

Please be specific of what range are we trying to compare.
for instance a ferry range can be upto 2.5 times greater than a combat range..
about the planes .. range values without explicit information about measurment parameters are useless for comparison..unless we are sure we can comparing both planes in similar conditions..
i'll give you a simple comparison data for gripen and LCA.
gripen
# Empty weight: 6,620 kg (14,600 lb)
# Loaded weight: 8,720 kg (19,200 lb)

LCA
# Empty weight: 5,500 kg (12,100 lb)
# Loaded weight: 8,500 kg (18,700 lb)

difference tells you the amount of fuel ( + i dunno wether it includes avinonics or not.. but again that would be the case with both planes and weight of avionics can be safely assumed to be similar. )

they run on similar versions on GE404 engines.. carry similar fuel quantities..(actually in case of LCA since the weight is much lower the fuel fraction will be considerably higher.. and giving it more range..