Round One JF17 - Poor Display By Tejas Took 10 more sec Than JF17 To Go Up

[KIND]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">With 4 Astra Mk-Is, 2 K-74s and one SPJ on point &#39;L&#39; + Uttam AESA + IFR we are looking at a very potent &#39;Defender of the Skies&#39;.</p>&mdash; Saurav Jha (@SJha1618) <a href="

https://twitter.com/x/status/690417456742014976

">January 22, 2016</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[SpArK]

isnt it funny that LCA took just 12 seconds to be completely in air and JF17 takes well over 20 seconds 0:34 to 0:54 (at 34 the plane was already moving) to even get in air in paris. Tejas completed the run way to start show and should have been a rule from the organisers. Very bad observation.

Good Reply.

This guy's threads are really entertaining.

Pakistanis are really low..

F 16 sale in trouble
Sree Lanka ditched
Not going to baharain to face off LCA

No wonder he hasn't heard of low level pass ...

 

[MilSpec]

waste of time buddy, this would have been the outcome here anyways.

35 years? The LCA project team was only formed in 1992/3, first flight was in 2001 and it will be in service from 2016-

The Typhoon, Rafale, F-22, F-35 etc have all had longer periods of devlopment and this is coming from India who had no real industrial base prior to the LCA in this arena.


Why are you comparing the LCA with the F-35? Absurd to say the least.


What actual BS is this?


+ a SQN a month?? 240 fighters a year?? Cool story genius.


Welcome to the globalised world

Point to me the Pakistani content/sanction proof parts of the Thunder please.


No one is going to embargo India.

Just lol at this failure of a thread

First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win



@PARIKRAMA @Levina @Parul @MilSpec @SRP @AMCA @XiNiX @nair @kbd-raaf @Vauban @anant_s @AUSTERLITZ @Taygibay @ranjeet @Roybot @Star Wars @ayesha.a @knight11 @mkb95

 

[nik22]

Shhh, Our Teja has got secret Powerplant Technology from ISRO. There you know why it files like a rocket.

 

[SQ8]

Rather disappointing but we must look at it from the perspective of an incomplete product and the first airshow. The platform has a lot more to offer within it and if that purported software change to 28 degrees only produced this it is then being overcautious or lacklustre pilot confidence in the jet.

The turning demonstration was pretty good when it came to the instantaneous and one can see the leading edge react on cue to get the nose turning to the high alpha limit much like the M2K in turns even as the aircraft lost a lot of speed and energy in them, but those are pure delta woes common to the M2K and Tejas. The aircraft seemed to lack energy at many points and the manoeuvres shown seemed to underline a hint of pilot focus on energy conservation. Perhaps holding off since the aircraft is still in a test program to verify its flight parameters with the new AoA limit?

Clearly this aircraft is very analogous to the M2k and essentially shows similar performance that the M-2000 C1 did during its first appearance at the 78 Paris airshow( You tubers look up the show).

But as stated earlier, neither are we looking at a complete product since the Mk2 is the definitive version to look out for and this particular aircraft is essentially a technology and capability demonstrator we should not expect too much nor jeer at it. There is a lot more to the idea of bringing a Jet from the ground up and when coupled with the disastrous program management that has mired the Tejas, it is still pretty good.

 

[Omega007]

yea yea generation 4.5+++++++ my foot.

you guys trolled us to death for not showing up on the show of the shows of the centuries. now take it like a man not a mouse.

MK can teach you aviation for all day long.

Kyaa hua Sir jee,kuch naraj lagte ho aaj aap humlogo se??!!Kuch galti ho gai to maaf karna.

 

[manojb]

Compare the stellar first performance of jf17 at farnsborogh in 2010 and lca's first performance@ international air show. .

 

[Abingdonboy]

M2K in turns even as the aircraft lost a lot of speed and energy in them, but those are pure delta woes common to the M2K and Tejas.

This is only true of low speed, low level flight profiles ie not representative of how any aircraft is going to perform in a dogfight. At higher speeds and higher altitudes where fighters will generally operate, the Deltas' performance is superior.

 

[SQ8]

This is only true of low speed, low level flight profiles ie not representative of how any aircraft is going to perform in a dogfight. At higher speeds and higher altitudes where fighters will generally operate, the Deltas' performance is superior.

No it isnt, please find me the aerodynamics to prove it. Delta's offer a lower profile that assists transonic and supersonic acceleration but they lose a LOT more energy in turns at high speeds when compared to conventional designs. Their planform when mated with an unstable movement allows for rapid nose pointing ability but that also creates massive drag. The M2K has excellent instaneous turn rate but when it comes to sustaining a turn, it cant hold its own against a conventional mechanical F-15. The Tejas is at the end a pocket M2K.
Deltas perform very well at low speeds and high alphas but anywhere else they are in trouble against a conventional design.

 

[Danish saleem]

isnt it funny that LCA took just 12 seconds to be completely in air and JF17 takes well over 20 seconds 0:34 to 0:54 (at 34 the plane was already moving) to even get in air in paris. Tejas completed the run way to start show and should have been a rule from the organisers. Very bad observation.

brother .

for vertical take off plane have to get in more speed on ground which usually required for take off! check its vertical
take off, not normal take off.

 

[Blue Marlin]

No it isnt, please find me the aerodynamics to prove it. Delta's offer a lower profile that assists transonic and supersonic acceleration but they lose a LOT more energy in turns at high speeds when compared to conventional designs. Their planform when mated with an unstable movement allows for rapid nose pointing ability but that also creates massive drag. The M2K has excellent instaneous turn rate but when it comes to sustaining a turn, it cant hold its own against a conventional mechanical F-15. The Tejas is at the end a pocket M2K.
Deltas perform very well at low speeds and high alphas but anywhere else they are in trouble against a conventional design.

ask @Khafee even he backs up your point

 

[JamD]

No it isnt, please find me the aerodynamics to prove it. Delta's offer a lower profile that assists transonic and supersonic acceleration but they lose a LOT more energy in turns at high speeds when compared to conventional designs. Their planform when mated with an unstable movement allows for rapid nose pointing ability but that also creates massive drag. The M2K has excellent instaneous turn rate but when it comes to sustaining a turn, it cant hold its own against a conventional mechanical F-15. The Tejas is at the end a pocket M2K.
Deltas perform very well at low speeds and high alphas but anywhere else they are in trouble against a conventional design.

To add to your point this will be instructive to some of the folks here:

 

[Chanakyaa]

No it isnt, please find me the aerodynamics to prove it. Delta's offer a lower profile that assists transonic and supersonic acceleration but they lose a LOT more energy in turns at high speeds when compared to conventional designs. Their planform when mated with an unstable movement allows for rapid nose pointing ability but that also creates massive drag. The M2K has excellent instaneous turn rate but when it comes to sustaining a turn, it cant hold its own against a conventional mechanical F-15. The Tejas is at the end a pocket M2K.
Deltas perform very well at low speeds and high alphas but anywhere else they are in trouble against a conventional design.

For Your Kind Refernace :

Compund Delta Wing - Technology | Tejas - India's Light Combat Aircraft

Extensive wind tunnel testing on scale models and complex computational fluid dynamics analyses have optimised the aerodynamic configuration of the LCA, giving it minimum supersonic drag, a low wing-loading, and high rates of roll and pitch.

Plus,

During that summer, at the Farnborough Airshow, this machine ( Mirage ) displayed not only excellent handling capabilities, but also a full control at 204 km/h and 26 degree angle of attack. This was totally unexpected in a delta-wing fighter, and proved how computer controlled dynamic (CCD) controls were capable of overcoming the delta wing shortcomings related to poor low-speed control, while retaining the advantages, such as low-drag, low radar cross section, ideal high speed aerodynamics, and large internal volume, as well as simplicity, provided by the absence of horizontal tail surfaces

 

[Irfan Baloch]

waste of time buddy, this would have been the outcome here anyways.

the highlight is sustained 10 second vertical climb, the vertical dive aint bad either .. rest is kind of meh.

 

[Nilgiri]

Delta's offer a lower profile that assists transonic and supersonic acceleration but they lose a LOT more energy in turns at high speeds when compared to conventional designs. Their planform when mated with an unstable movement allows for rapid nose pointing ability but that also creates massive drag. The M2K has excellent instaneous turn rate but when it comes to sustaining a turn, it cant hold its own against a conventional mechanical F-15. The Tejas is at the end a pocket M2K.

Your points are pertinent for a traditional "naked" delta with no canards or compound geometry (which is effectively a canard attached to a delta for tejas) due to the excessive drag caused by flow separation in high alpha (and hence also high STR) regimes. So quite true for the mirage series and Mig 21.

However with the addition of canards and compound geometries like in the Eurofighter, Gripen and Tejas etc.., this issue has been mitigated quite considerably through flow direct re-energisation and/or higher spanwise flow from the greater incidence angle. The exact specs given their maximum STR is therefore something we cannot automatically to be inferior to regular conventional layouts...while they keep their superior ITR parameters because of their relatively lower wing loading (ceterus paribus). The exact trade-offs and balances are of course quite hush hush, high quality turn performance data is only really released for aircraft that have already been retired or are currently/close to ending their service lives.

Maybe in my free time I will attempt to do some CFD modelling using the geometries of canards and compound deltas as opposed to regular simple deltas so we can all have some layman data as to what the possible improvements might entail in rough % terms.....since gaining access to this online is quite difficult from what I have seen.