Tejas(LCA)- Setting the record straight

[gogbot]

The LCA program Declared a failure, with cost overruns, decades of delays.
But how much of these claims is actually true ?
For the nest few posts i intend to explore what makes the Tejas a failure and what makes it a success.

First a brief overview.

The Indian Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) is the world's smallest, light weight, multi-role combat aircraft. The LCA is designed to meet the requirements of Indian Air Force as its frontline multi-mission single-seat tactical aircraft to replace the MiG-21 series of aircraft.

The LCA program was launched in 1985. The development effort for the LCA is spearheaded by the Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA) under the Department of Defence Research & Development. ADA’s responsibilities include project design, project monitoring and promoting the development of advanced aeronautic technologies of relevance to the LCA.

The Indian government's "self-reliance" goals for the LCA include indigenous development of the three most sophisticated — and hence most challenging — systems: the fly-by-wire (FBW) flight control system (FCS), multi-mode pulse-doppler radar, and afterburning turbofan engine

I want to address the First Issue of its supposed failure.
Chapter 1:The Delays

Many people have made exuberant claims that the program was 10 years delayed to 30 years delayed.
This is simply not the case, if one examines the facts.

The LCA design was finalised in 1990 as a small delta-winged machine with "relaxed static stability" (RSS) to enhance maneuverability performance.

It took 5 years to just design the Aircraft. No small feat considering India's financial status as well as its Lack of experience in making the plane since the second generation fighter (HF-24 Marut) in the late 50's.

One important aspect to note is that only after the Aircraft was designed did any sort of time table for induction even be drafted..
so technically this is when the program started.

Phase 1 would focus on "proof of concept" and would comprise the design, development and testing (DDT) of two technology demonstrator aircraft (TD-1 and TD-2)

Phase 1 commenced in 1990 and HAL started work on the technology demonstrators in mid-1991; however, a financial crunch resulted in full-scale funding not being authorized until April 1993, with significant work on FSED Phase 1 commencing in June. The first technology demonstrator, TD-1, was rolled out on 17 November 1995

Much of the Initial problems with the LCA were financial, leading to its first few delays.

So five years in The first prototype rolled out. Program still very much operating in a reasonable time frame.

The Ministry had stated, in December 1994, that the LCA was expected to enter into squadron services with Initial Operational Clearance by 2002 and with Final Operational Clearance by 2005 provided Government approved Phase-II of FSED in 1995 and accorded clearance for production in 1997. Since proposal for approval of Phase-II of FSED was yet to be submitted to the Government, the chances of meeting the induction schedule of LCA by 2002/2005 were remote.

The first prototype of LCA rolled out on 17 November 1995. Two aircraft technology demonstrators were powered by single GE F404/F2J3 augmented turbofan engines. Regular flights with the state-of-the-art "Kaveri" engine, being developed by the Gas Turbine Research Establishment (GTRE) in Bangalore, were planned for 2002, although by mid-1999 the Kaveri engine had yet to achieve the required thrust-to-weight ratio.

This schedule puts the LCA program with a 15 year development time frame.
The average time frame for Development of any such aircraft.

Following India's nuclear weapons tests in early 1998, the United States placed an embargo on the sale of General Electric 404 jet engines which are to power the LCA. The US also denied the fly-by-wire system for the aircraft sold by the US firm Lockheed-Martin. As of June 1998 the first flight of the LCA had been delayed due to systems integration tests. The first flight awaits completion of the Digital Flight Control Systems, being developed by the Aeronautical Development Establishment (ADE).

The Ministry explained, in February 1999, that delay in conducting first flight of first technology demonstrator was the main reason for not seeking sanction for Phase-II of FSED. However, clearance for an interim Phase-II from the Government was underway and Phase-II would be concurrently undertaken with the last two years of Phase-I. With this arrangement, Initial Operational Clearance in 2003 and Final Operational Clearance in 2005 would be realised.

On 04 January 2001, India's Light Combat Aircraft LCA flew for the first time. The LCA completed its first batch of tests in 12 flights instead of 15 - ahead of schedule - on June 2, 2001. There has been some delay in Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) Project which is mainly due to lack of development experience, non-availability of ready infrastructure, foreign exchange crunch of 1992, sanctions imposed by USA in 1998 and technological complexities. The first technology demonstrator has flown on January 04, 2001 and successfully demonstrated to international experts during Aero India 2001. Further development was in progress for its timely induction in Indian Air Force.

Not only the international Embargo there were problems with The Radar.

Due to delay in development of MMR, government have come out with the collaboration with IAI for development of Radar the sensor for the new radar is supposed to be EL/M-2052 AESA from Elta and the remaining item and software will be combination of MMR and IAI developed products. Varadarajan, (Director — LRDE) has said that LRDE has initiated development of active electronically scanning array radar

The MMR was eventually replaced In favor of the more advanced EL/M-2052 AESA RADAR

There were also problems with the engine.
In mid-2004, the Kaveri failed its high-altitude tests in Russia, ending the last hopes of introducing it with the first production Tejas aircraft.

This eventually led to the Kaveri program to be de-linked from the Tejas program. And developed Independent. whilst the Tejas MK-1 would fly using the The Same GE engine used int the prototypes.

The Hindu : Karnataka News : Kaveri engine programme delinked from the Tejas

The Tejas continued its development to this end and now after a delay of a little over 5 years. The Tejas is finally stated to see An IOC in 2010.

So what have we established in this chapter.
The Tejas was not delayed by over a decade but really only 5 years.
People need to actually take a look at the Tejas time line to realize, That the development cycle of 17 years. while slightly to much is not a giant mess up as some would have u believe


Lets examine the development of a similar plane. The Dassault Rafale

The development of the Rafael and is in fact a similar ambition to that of the LCA.

Both planes were an attempt to improve upon the Successful Mirage aircraft.

Both were supposed to be operated on carriers as well, as in the air force

Both were built with the Intent of having a completely indigenous program

Both had a single seater as well as twin seater version

The difference are clearly the level of technology available to be employed in each aircrafts design.

# 1983, France awarded Dassault a contract for two Avion de Combat eXpérimental (ACX) demonstrators.

# 1985 France formally withdraws from Eurofighter programme, committing to Rafale project.

# 1986 July 4: First flight of Rafale A; December: Development of SNECMA M88 engines commences

# 1988 April: First order signed (for Rafale C prototype).

# 1990 February: Flight tests of M88 begin

# 1991 May 19: First flight of Armée de l'Air single seat prototype (Rafale C); December 12: First flight of Aéronavale prototype (Rafale M)

# 1992 Rafale M carrier trials programme begins

# 1993 March: First contract for production aircraft signed. April: Start of carrier compatibility trials with Foch. April 30: First flight of Armée de l'Air twin seat prototype (Rafale B)

# 1995 June: First MICA fired from Rafale in self guided mode. July: OSF system and helmet-mounted sight/display installed and tested. September: Rafale M tested on board carrier (4th series). November: First non-stop long-range flight by Rafale B01 (3,020 nm in under 6 hours 30 minutes). October: Final land-based carrier test series of Rafale M in the USA. December: First production model fuselage assembly.

# 1996 March: M88 engine "flightworthiness" qualified. April: Production suspended, restarted in January 1997 following cost reductions. May: Low level tests with digital terrain database. July: Spectra electronic warfare system integration tests in anechoic chamber. November: Spectra flight tested. December: First deliveries of production standard engines.

# 1997 February: Rafale B01 flight tested in heavyweight configuration (2 Apache ASMs, three 2,000l drop tanks, two Magic and two MICA AAMs). May: First inertially-guided MICA firing. June: Flight testing of Spectra countermeasures system. October: First production RBE2 radar flown for the first time. November: Inertially-guided firing of missiles against two targets, with aircraft-to-missile link, with countermeasures.

# 1998 June: Qualification of MICA fire control system. Proposed initial operational capability evaluated by Navy and Air Force pilots flying Rafale B01 and M02 development aircraft. November 24: First flight of production Rafale (a Rafale B)

# 1999 May: First test launch of SCALP EG cruise missile. July 6: First deck landing of Charles de Gaulle afgan. July 7: First flight of production Rafale M

# 2000 July 20: First Rafale M delivered to Flotille 12F

# 2002 Rafale M entered service with 12F (Aeronavale, evaluation)

# 2004 Full service entry with 12F (Navy); September 9: First Meteor GHTM (General Handling Training Missiles) carriage trials by Rafale M from CEV Istres; Juneecember: Three Rafale Bs delivered to CEAM, Mont de Marsan

# 2005 September 11: First Meteor GHTM carriage trials by Rafale M from the carrier Charles de Gaulle.

# 2006 Summer: Formation of EC 1/7 with 8–10 aircraft

# 2007 Full service entry (Air Force) expected with EC7; First landing of Rafale M on US Navy carrier USS Enterprise

# 2008 Rafale qualified to full F3 standard

This is Dassault a veteran aircraft manufacturer with more money more, more technology and more experience. Yet their development is well over 15 years. HAL has performed admirably given the the huge list of challenges it has to overcome to bring the Tejas to where it is now.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

AS we move on to the next chapter i would like to mention that The total programme cost for the Rafale, as of 2008, is around €39.6 billion.

This compared to the LCA programme cost of just US$1.2 billion.
Which was supposed to accomplish the same as the Rafael \

India rules out foreign help for Tejas LCA

Antony says 48 billion rupees ($1.2 billion) has so far been spent on the LCA project. However, this has now been pushed back to 2010 because of several technological setbacks and bureaucratic red tape.

***

Chapter 2:Cost over runs ? (also posted on page 3, with extra Pics http://www.defence.pk/forums/india-defence/38132-tejas-lca-setting-record-straight-3.html#post539335)

Earmarked my many as The LCA programs second sing of Failure. Is the 500 % increase in the costs of the project.

The original project cost, incidentally, was estimated to be only Rs 560 crore. The government so far has sanctioned Rs 5,489.78 crore for the development of LCA technology

Rs 5,489.78 crore which translates to about 1.2 billion dollars(depending on the exchange tare)

Often said to be India's white whale, criticized for its gross inefficiency.
But what do these numbers actually mean.

Rs.560 crore is roughly $118,921,214 . Or about the cost of a single Euro fighter typhoon.

Now don't get me wrong i have faith in our scientist. And these figures have not been inflation adjusted.
But the amount of money committed to the LCA project to begin with was peanuts compared to all other development programs arround the world.

Most people would consider, it a miracle that we got anything out of this program at all, considering the gross underestimation of the funding required.

But forget all that, the costs as they stand today amount to Rs 5,489.78 crore which translates to about 1.2 billion dollars. Critics rally to this figure. "A billion dollars clearly money has been misspent here. ?"

Lets examine some other development costs of more advanced and experienced agencies from around the world.

Dassault Rafale



The total programme cost, as of 2008, is around €39.6 billion, which translates to a unit programme cost of approximately €138.5 million. The unit flyaway price as of 2008 is €64 million for C version (Air Force), and €70 million for the Navy version.

A plane i have mentioned in the previous chapter , which was built with the same ambitions as the LCA.

Eurofighter Typhoon




1988 the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Armed Forces told the UK House of Commons that the European Fighter Aircraft would "be a major project, costing £3.3 billion development costs

Mind you this does not include the development costs of the EJ2000 engine otherwise the Costs would have been well in excess of
$15 billion

This next development cost high lights the disparity in the amount of money spent on the LCA programe

UAE funded the entire $3 billion Block 60 development costs, and in exchange will receive royalties if any of the Block 60 aircraft are sold to other nations.



Dubai 2007: UAE shows off its most advanced Falcons

This not a new plane. it was the cost of developing the upgrades for one of the most staple planes in the west. Mind you a new engine was selected attributing to the high costs.

But on that note, it is important to understand that the engine is often the most expensive development cost of the plane.

Development of the Kaveri engine was projected in 1989 to cost Rs. 382.81 crores (nearly US$82 million). In Dec. 2004, it was revealed that the GTRE had spent over Rs. 1,300 crores (around US$295 million) on developing the Kaveri. Furthermore, the Cabinet Committee on Security judged that the Kaveri would not be installed on the LCA before 2012, and revised its estimate for the projected total development cost to Rs. 2,839 crores (more than US$640 million)

That is about half of the money spent of the LCA project. And although it was branded a failure as well. This is in fact not the case.

Scientific Advisor to Defence Minister M Natarajan said nearly 90 to 93 per cent of the expected performance had been realised and the government had recently floated an expression of interest to seek partners to move the programme further

The only reason the engine is not being used right now in its leaky state. which by the way still produces more trust than the enigne used in the Dassault Rafale. Is because The LCA and Kaveri ending up being 200 kg overweight each. Which combined ended up jeopardizing the Amount of Weapons that could be could carry.
Eighter an Increase in trust or a decrease in weight can get the Engine back on track.

But back to costs.
At the end of the day, with all the claims of cost escalation.
The Fact remains.

In December 1996, A. P. J. Abdul Kalam, the then Scientific Adviser, calculated unit costs of US$21 million. At the end of 2001, Dr. Kota Harinarayana, director of the ADA and of the LCA programme, estimated the unit cost for the LCA (for an expected order of 220 aircraft) to be between US$17–20 million, and once production ramped up, that could drop to US$15 million.

However, by 2001 others were indicating that the LCA would cost US$24 million (in excess of Rs. 100 crores [Rs. 1,000,000,000] per aircraft). Considering cost escalations, some aviation experts feel that when the aircraft comes out, it could cost upwards of US$35 million apiece. A Rs. 2,000 crores (over US$450 million) order for 20 Tejas aircraft would represent a unit procurement cost of US$22.6 million for each, which would be consistent with Abdul Kalam's estimates. At a price tag of around US$ 20 to 32 million(Rs. 100-150 crores), the Tejas will be much cheaper than other 4.5 generation fighter planes. (By comparison, the Times of India quoted the costs French Rafale as Rs. 270 crores -US$61 million).

Indian navy has okayed the placement of an order for six Naval LCAs. At an approximate cost of US$31.09 million(Rs 150 crore) per aircraft.

In actually the development costs often help determine the cost of the Plane by the basis of orders.

Whiles the LCA is available for a little over 20 Million dollars.

Most jets around the world excluding the Russians and Chines.
Don't sell a plane for less that 60 million dollars(read back to Dassault Rafale) and some times go upwards to 100 million(typhoon).
Which raises the question how much did the companies really spend of their development to justify such high costs.

Cost over runs ?. What cost over runs?
It is a matter of point of View.

Chapter 3:"Kaveri"

Coming soon...

 

[bigmoneymaker]

you indians impress me deeply with your incredible perseverance over incredible long time, then the incredible result will certainly be seen i guess, as no country including malaysia can keep embracing a non-effective project, so keep it up !

 

[deckingraj]

you indians impress me deeply with your incredible perseverance over incredible long time, then the incredible result will certainly be seen i guess, as no country including malaysia can keep embracing a <b>non-effective</b> project, so keep it up !

What do you mean by non-effective. Please care to elaborate more on this.

Tejas has improved our aero industry in leaps and bounds..Now its matter of succesful IOC of LCA and this will boost the self -confidence of our aero industry. Delay or no Delay LCA programme is a must for self-suffiency that is a dream of every indian...and till then we have all the potential coutries in the world(US, EU, Russia ,Israel) to offer us latest technology. Secondly tejas even in current configuration is going to stay in IAF for atleast 2 decades as its final version can be considered as 4.5 generation fighter aircraft. Now what you mean by non-effective here?


Also the intend of this thread is not discuss the importance of Tejas but to discuss if Tejas is actually a delayed project as being portrayed..It is very obvious how important Tejas is for india and we don't need a thread for that...

 

[MZUBAIR]

The LCA program Declared a failure, with cost overruns, decades of delays.
But how much of these claims is actually true ?
For the nest few posts i intend to explore what makes the Tejas a failure and what makes it a success.

LCA is a failed project. The project is over 2 decades.
Still no proper engine or radar.
What went wrong with LCA, Arjun Tank, Akash missile (Exposed by Indian Express)

Poor planning, over-optimistic timelines and a lack of coordination with the Armed Forces led to cost and time overruns of major defence projects taken up by the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO), says the first external review of the research body.

The P Rama Rao committee, which was formed to revamp the organisation, has said that the major cause for delays and failures of indigenous defence products is DRDO&#8217;s tendency to over-estimate its capabilities. The inability of the research body to involve the Armed Forces in developmental projects

from the start has been identified as a major area of concern.

In all of the major projects reviewed by the committee &#8212; the Light Combat Aircraft, the Arjun Tank, Kaveri engine and the Akash Surface to Air Missile &#8212; it cracked down on the DRDO for the same problems of &#8220;over-optimism&#8221; and poor planning.

 

[PeaceForAll]

commendable job by the thread starter, hats off for taking time and efforts to come up with such an explanation. Unfortunately, there will always be some people who just do not want to open their eyes. But please do not worry about them. PLease continue the good work. Waiting to read and absorb the rest of the information.

 

[deckingraj]

its a humble request to all the members here... Please let's not derail the thread by comparing PAF and IAF etc etc.. For years i have listening that Tejas is a failed project...its a delayed project...with cost overruns...DRDO is crap and what not...Now someone is trying to give us valid information so please derailing the thread will not help at all...Please stick to the thread while discussing and wait more information which sounds music to me....

Anyone has counter points to what Mr Gogbot projected about Tejas not being a delayed project???

 

[gogbot]

Chapter 2:Cost over runs ?

Earmarked by many as The LCA programs second sign of Failure. Is the 500 &#37; increase in the costs of the project.

The original project cost, incidentally, was estimated to be only Rs 560 crore. The government so far has sanctioned Rs 5,489.78 crore for the development of LCA technology

Rs 5,489.78 crore which translates to about 1.2 billion dollars(depending on the exchange tare)

Often said to be India's white whale, criticized for its gross inefficiency.
But what do these numbers actually mean.

Rs.560 crore is roughly $118,921,214 . Or about the cost of a single Euro fighter typhoon.

Now don't get me wrong i have faith in our scientist. And these figures have not been inflation adjusted.
But the amount of money committed to the LCA project to begin with was peanuts compared to all other development programs arround the world.

Most people would consider, it a miracle that we got anything out of this program at all, considering the gross underestimation of the funding required.

But forget all that, the costs as they stand today amount to Rs 5,489.78 crore which translates to about 1.2 billion dollars. Critics rally to this figure. "A billion dollars clearly money has been misspent here. ?"

Lets examine some other development costs of more advanced and experienced agencies from around the world.

Dassault Rafale



The total programme cost, as of 2008, is around &#8364;39.6 billion, which translates to a unit programme cost of approximately &#8364;138.5 million. The unit flyaway price as of 2008 is &#8364;64 million for C version (Air Force), and &#8364;70 million for the Navy version.

A plane i have mentioned in the previous chapter , which was built with the same ambitions as the LCA.

Eurofighter Typhoon

1988 the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Armed Forces told the UK House of Commons that the European Fighter Aircraft would "be a major project, costing &#163;3.3 billion development costs

Mind you this does not include the development costs of the EJ2000 engine otherwise the Costs would have been well in excess of
$15 billion

This next development cost high lights the disparity in the amount of money spent on the LCA programe

UAE funded the entire $3 billion Block 60 development costs, and in exchange will receive royalties if any of the Block 60 aircraft are sold to other nations.



Dubai 2007: UAE shows off its most advanced Falcons

This not a new plane. it was the cost of developing the upgrades for one of the most staple planes in the west. Mind you a new engine was selected attributing to the high costs.

But on that note, it is important to understand that the engine is often the most expensive development cost of the plane.

Development of the Kaveri engine was projected in 1989 to cost Rs. 382.81 crores (nearly US$82 million). In Dec. 2004, it was revealed that the GTRE had spent over Rs. 1,300 crores (around US$295 million) on developing the Kaveri. Furthermore, the Cabinet Committee on Security judged that the Kaveri would not be installed on the LCA before 2012, and revised its estimate for the projected total development cost to Rs. 2,839 crores (more than US$640 million)

That is about half of the money spent of the LCA project. And although it was branded a failure as well. This is in fact not the case.

Scientific Advisor to Defence Minister M Natarajan said nearly 90 to 93 per cent of the expected performance had been realised and the government had recently floated an expression of interest to seek partners to move the programme further

The only reason the engine is not being used right now in its leaky state. which by the way still produces more trust than the enigne used in the Dassault Rafale. Is because The LCA and Kaveri ending up being 200 kg overweight each. Which combined ended up jeopardizing the Amount of Weapons that could be could carry.
Eighter an Increase in trust or a decrease in weight can get the Engine back on track.

But back to costs.
At the end of the day, with all the claims of cost escalation.
The Fact remains.

In December 1996, A. P. J. Abdul Kalam, the then Scientific Adviser, calculated unit costs of US$21 million. At the end of 2001, Dr. Kota Harinarayana, director of the ADA and of the LCA programme, estimated the unit cost for the LCA (for an expected order of 220 aircraft) to be between US$17&#8211;20 million, and once production ramped up, that could drop to US$15 million.

However, by 2001 others were indicating that the LCA would cost US$24 million (in excess of Rs. 100 crores [Rs. 1,000,000,000] per aircraft). Considering cost escalations, some aviation experts feel that when the aircraft comes out, it could cost upwards of US$35 million apiece. A Rs. 2,000 crores (over US$450 million) order for 20 Tejas aircraft would represent a unit procurement cost of US$22.6 million for each, which would be consistent with Abdul Kalam's estimates. At a price tag of around US$ 20 to 32 million(Rs. 100-150 crores), the Tejas will be much cheaper than other 4.5 generation fighter planes. (By comparison, the Times of India quoted the costs French Rafale as Rs. 270 crores -US$61 million).

Indian navy has okayed the placement of an order for six Naval LCAs. At an approximate cost of US$31.09 million(Rs 150 crore) per aircraft.

In actually the development costs often help determine the cost of the Plane by the basis of orders.

Whiles the LCA is available for a little over 20 Million dollars.

Most jets around the world excluding the Russians and Chines.
Don't sell a plane for less that 60 million dollars(read back to Dassault Rafale) and some times go upwards to 100 million(typhoon).
Which raises the question how much did the companies really spend of their development to justify such high costs.

Cost over runs ?. What cost over runs?
It is a matter of point of View.

Chapter 3:"Kaveri"

Coming soon...

 

[Novice09]

Great post gogbot

People keeps crying about cost over runs, I want them to name a 4+ gen fighter jet which haven't faced this issue. Tejas is a FJ program which will help India to strengthen their aviation industry.

On top of that who think that it is a failure... keep in mind that we are going to replace MIG-21s . We are not going to make Tejas our front line or air dominance fighter, we have MKI for that and MRCA will join the list.

We should really appreciate IAF for the high level of professionalism that they are not inducting this jet in a hurry without proper testing (as done in case of JF 17)

 

[DaRk WaVe]

If you say JF17 is inducted. it stands no chance as of today in front of an 1980 build Mig 21 will kill this bird"

You guys dont have not even a single proof of a missile test fire; gun test firing and yet it is claimed its inducted...

Do you know how many test it takes to perfect these things ..may be PAF can not wait for that thats why they have inducted JF17 without any weapons and still under testing risking the lifes of pilots.

IAF doesnt have to do that.

Actually we don't beat Drums like u people, Hota kuch ha ni aur Dunya sar par

Now u are going to Compare JF-17 With MiG-21

& LCA with Rafale & EF

BTW the people who got killed in MiG-21 Crashes were not Pilots Isn't it, IAF does that

If JF was that not that much of a Problem i wonder why Indians cried so much over RD-93

Once JF-17 is a Copy of F-16, Then a Souped up MiG-21, Then comes in the Theory of MiG-33
Come on Boys atleast Decide

Whiles the LCA is available for a little over 20 Million dollars.

Are the Capabilities of LCA comparable to EF & Rafale
Just That Planes are Built with same 'ambitions' Doesn't means that jets are Comparable

On top of that who think that it is a failure... keep in mind that we are going to replace MIG-21s

Yeah when all of MiG-21s will crash

We should really appreciate IAF for the high level of professionalism that they are not inducting this jet in a hurry without proper testing (as done in case of JF 17)

Hehheeee Good, so late Induction is professionalism , Cool

 

[Kompromat]

We should really appreciate IAF for the high level of professionalism that they are not inducting this jet in a hurry without proper testing (as done in case of JF 17) :tongue:[/QUOTE]



Thats a good one

 

[grey boy 2]

Are the capabilties of LCA compare to any planes,

My answer=not until LCA was in full commision form.

Saying its something like a 4 plus gen. now, will be like telling people

LCA can shoot down anything that fly in the sky.

 

[grey boy 2]

To all Indian friends, If one day, India turn out to a global power,

Your never give up attitude will play a very big part in your sucess.

 

[gogbot]

Are the capabilties of LCA compare to any planes,

My answer=not until LCA was in full commision form.

Saying its something like a 4 plus gen. now, will be like telling people

LCA can shoot down anything that fly in the sky.

If i may , i would like to take some liberty by quoting Wikipedia.
On the generations of Planes. I only intend to present my side of the argument, Your free to make your own choice.

First generation jet fighters

The early aircraft of this group entered production during the closing years of World War II with planform similar to their piston counterparts. Later transonic aircraft, such as the MiG-15, are sometimes referred to as a "second generation" and the end of this generation is very loose.

Second generation jet fighters

The beginning of this generation is blurry, but aircraft that were designed for missile armament and supersonic speed are generally considered to be at least second generation.

India's unsatisfactory "HAL HF-24 Marut" falls into this category.

Third generation jet fighters

Third generation aircraft were based on the wrong assumption that air to air missiles would replace dogfighting, and many were initially built without internal gun armament.

Fourth generation jet fighters

Fourth generation fighters had a renewed focus on maneuverability and many were again designed with an internal gun armament.

Now i hope we can agree that the Tejas is in this category or above.

4.5th generation jet fighters

This "half generation" is a term defined by the United States Government as fourth generation aircraft that have vastly improved avionics (digital fly-by-wire), sensors (Active Electronically Scanned Array radars), high speed data links and the ability to carry the latest weapons. Some sources refer to some members of this group as fourth or 4++ generation aircraft instead.

Now being a 4++ aircraft to put it simply, largely depends on the gadgets within the plane.

So the US classifies a plane 4.5 gen if it has:

(1): Digital fly-by-wire

Since the Tejas is a "relaxed static stability" design, it is equipped with a quadruplex digital fly-by-wire flight control system to ease handling by the pilot.

(2):Electronically Scanned Array radars

Due to delay in development of MMR, government have come out with the collaboration with IAI for development of Radar the sensor for the new radar is supposed to be EL/M-2052 AESA from Elta and the remaining item and software will be combination of MMR and IAI developed products. Varadarajan, (Director &#8212; LRDE) has said that LRDE has initiated development of active electronically scanning array radar for airborne applications. And that these radars will be integrated with Tejas light combat aircraft-Mark II by 2012-13.

(3):High speed data links

India's Light Combat Aircraft tests its teeth

Each aircraft, from the time it started up, was being monitored in detail, the data transmitting live from the aircraft over a high-speed data link

Now i know for a fact that the IAF would reject any plane that did not have this feature. But just to make sure, i can back it up. I went and found an article that made specific reference to high speed data links.

(4):The ability to carry the latest weapons

Originally intended to serve as an air superiority aircraft with a secondary "dumb bomb" ground-attack role, the flexibility of this design approach has permitted a variety of guided air-to-surface and anti-shipping weapons to be integrated for more well-rounded multirole and multimission capabilities.

All weapons are carried on one or more of seven hardpoints with total capacity of greater than 4,000 kg: three stations under each wing and one on the under-fuselage centreline. There is also an eighth, offset station beneath the port-side intake trunk which can carry a variety of pods (FLIR, IRST, laser rangefinder/designator, or reconnaissance), as can the centreline under-fuselage station and inboard pairs of wing stations.

(Additional 4++ features)

(5):Trust vectoring and super cruise

In September 2008, it was announced that the Kaveri would not be ready in time for the Tejas, and that an in-production powerplant would have to be selected The ADA plans to issue a request for proposal (RFP) for a more powerful engine in the 95 to 100 kilonewton (kN) (21,000&#8211;23,000 lbf) range. The contenders are likely to be the Eurojet EJ200 and the General Electric F414. The Eurojet EJ200 propulsion offer has thrust-vectoring.

This would be the case if the Euro-fighter is chosen for the MMRCA contract.

If However the Dassault Rafale is chosen

ADA awarded a contract to SNECMA for technical assistance in working out the Kaveri's problems.

Dassault has also offered to fit the Kaveri engine into the Rafale, which, if chosen, which would greatly improve commonality with the Tejas aircraft that will enter service into the IAF by 2010. India and France have recently agreed to "go beyond a buyer-seller relationship".[

If Dassault and SCHEMA can work with GTRE to help finish the Kaveri

Scientific Advisor to Defence Minister M Natarajan said nearly 90 to 93 per cent of the expected performance had been realised and the government had recently floated an expression of interest to seek partners to move the programme further(that partner would be SCHEMA)

Then the Project goals of the KAveri can finally be achieved.

The Kaveri is a low-bypass-ratio (BPR) afterburning turbofan engine featuring a six-stage core high-pressure (HP) compressor with variable inlet guide vanes (IGVs), a three-stage low-pressure (LP) compressor with transonic blading, an annular combustion chamber, and cooled single-stage HP and LP turbines. The development model is fitted with an advanced convergent-divergent ("con-di") variable nozzle, but the GTRE wants to fit production Tejas aircraft with an axisymmetric, multi-axis thrust-vectoring nozzle to further enhance the LCA's agility

The general arrangement of the Kaveri is very similar to other contemporary combat engines, such as the Eurojet EJ200, General Electric F414, and Snecma M88. At present, the peak turbine inlet temperature is designed to be a little lower than its peers, but this is to enable the engine to be flat-rated to very high ambient temperatures. Consequently, the bypass ratio that can presently be supported, even with a modest fan pressure ratio, is only about 0.16:1, which means the engine is a "'leaky' turbojet" like the F404.

The Kaveri engine has been specifically designed for the demanding Indian operating environment, which ranges from hot desert to the highest mountain range in the world. The GTRE's design envisions achieving a fan pressure ratio of 4:1 and an overall pressure ratio of 27:1, which will permit the Tejas to "supercruise" (cruise supersonically without the use of the afterburner). The Kaveri is a variable-cycle, flat-rated engine and has 13&#37; higher thrust than the General Electric F404-GE-F2J3 engines equipping the LCA prototypes.

These features are just the cherry on late but good cake.
To all those critics of the Kaveri, India can just choose the typhoon and get the EJ2000, Which will give the Tejas both super cruise and trust vectoring, with out a shadow of a doubt.

 

[SinoIndusFriendship]

If i may , i would like to take some liberty by quoting Wikipedia.
On the generations of Planes. I only intend to present my side of the argument, Your free to make your own choice.





India's unsatisfactory "HAL HF-24 Marut" falls into this category.





Now i hope we can agree that the Tejas is in this category or above.



Now being a 4++ aircraft to put it simply, largely depends on the gadgets within the plane.

So the US classifies a plane 4.5 gen if it has:

(1)igital fly-by-wire



(2):Electronically Scanned Array radars



(3):High speed data links



Now i know for a fact that the IAF would reject any plane that did not have this feature. But just to make sure, i can back it up. I went and found an article that made specific reference to high speed data links.

(4):The ability to carry the latest weapons



(Additional 4++ features)

(5):Trust vectoring and super cruise



This would be the case if the Euro-fighter is chosen for the MMRCA contract.

If However the Dassault Rafale is chosen



If Dassault can work with SCHEMA to help finish the Kaveri



Then the Project goals of the KAveri can finally be achieved.



These features are just the cherry on late but good cake.
To all those critics of the Kaveri, India can just choose the typhoon and get the EJ2000, Which will give the Tejas both super cruise and trust vectoring, with out a shadow of a doubt.

Well done post. Easy readability!

 

[Novice09]

Yeah when all of MiG-21s will crash

No, before a radar is finalized for JF 17

Hehheeee Good, so late Induction is professionalism , Cool

Yes, It's better to be late then inducting a jet without testing whether it could fire accurately or not