What's new

Where Tejas falls behind

Free Soul

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Feb 14, 2012
Messages
247
Reaction score
0
Country
Pakistan
Location
United Kingdom
Where Tejas falls behind

The purpose of this article is to evaluate the wing structure of IAF Tejas LCA, compare it with current 4th generation and beyond aircrafts.
With what information we have in regards with Tejas LCA’s airframe diagrams, dimensions of the wings, aerodynamics.
We would keep the subject matter to manoeuvrability as this is one of the most important aspects of any fighter aircraft.
The purpose is not to ridicule but try to understand the reasons behind design decisions taken and to explore the short comings noticed/assumed.

We would compare the wing structure of Tejas with proven top of the line aircrafts.

Please note We are not discussing BVR detection/missiles BrahMos, Atomic bombs etc. so please refrain from off topic posts.

AoA and its importance.
Angle of Attack (AoA α) is the angle between the Vector representing the motion of the body and the aerofoil - represented by Alpha α. In aerodynamics the AoA would be the angle between the chord line of the wing of a fixed-wing aircraft and the vector representing the relative motion between the aircraft and the air/atmosphere. Simply put AoA is an angle at which a wing meets air flow.


Angle_of_attack.svg


Turn:
Turn of an aircraft dictates how manoeuvrable an aircraft is. Turn is achieved by a combination of roll and lift. The faster the roll and better the lift the better turn/turn rate an aircraft achieves.
Generating lift force wing plays the primary role; there are specific ways of creating Lift Force. Air Foil Sections (the shape of a wing or blade) + increase of AoA.. Airfoil section and increased angle of attack. α determines the turn of an aircraft
The prominent feature of all top of the line proven combat – Air superiority and Light Combat Aircrafts is a Leading Edge Extension / Wing Root Glove.
Prominent in F-16, F-15, F-18 Hornet, SU-27, MiG-29, MiG-35, SU-27, SU-30 ..... etc. etc. etc.

Leading Edge Root Extension, Root Glove Extensions

In regards with SU-27 development, the wing root extension in SU-27 and all above mentioned aircrafts played a large part in achieving additional lift, airfoil sections were used in additional parts of the aircraft. A ‘Wing Root Glove’ / ‘Leading Edge Extension’ played a large part in creating lift force.

229087_196579540472465_1909158841_n.jpg


During SU-27 development the designers initially could not see the advantages of the wing root extension and such technical innovation.
The idea with the wing root extensions was to increase aircraft stability at supersonic speeds.
After a number of wind tunnel tests, the true potential of Root Leading edge extension / Wing Root Glove was realized.
Below quoting Georgiy Byushgens - one of the giants of Russian aeronautical engineering.

Georgiy Byushgens
Deputy Director of the Central Hydro-Aerodynamic Institute 1961-1991
Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences
Hero of Socialist Labour
Lenin Prize Laureate
Laureate of the USSR State Prize.

’If The Wing Root Glove is made pointed – which means if the tip is sharp – a very powerful vortex was induced with this sharp tip. This effect made it possible to increase lift force by at least 50%.’

Pointed Leading edge extension in the root of the wing merging with the fuselage transforms the airflow into a powerful air vortex, this vortex creates a stable vacuum zone above the wing – resulting in deferential pleasure increase and casing additional lift.

405535_196579530472466_736932004_n.jpg


With AoA increase the intensity of the vortex above the wings grows – this allows the aircraft to fly at high Angle of Attack without losing stability of stalling into a spin. Thus Directly proportional to High Manoeuvrability. A combat turn can be performed more vigorously and aggressively – The intensity of the vortex is so great that the vortices can be seen with a naked eye.

mig29m2.jpg


551__320x240_f16c.jpg


On a modern fighter aircraft root glove extension provides important airflow over the wing at high angles of attack, this greatly delays the stall and improves lift. At high angles of attack, as often encountered in a dog fight, the vortex generated by Leading edge root extension/ root glove extension becomes a must for any competent manoeuvrable Dogfighter


IAF Tejas LCA.

So lets have a look at the wing structure of Tejas.

lca20tejas20topgunchenar4-726756.jpg


Note that on Tejas the line of the wing from the edge to the root of the wing at fuselage is not straight.
There is no leading edge root extension, rather to compensate the low angle of the overall leading edge of the wing with the fuselage it cuts short and joins the fuselage at a steeper angle.
In modern day design Pure Delta wing is not considered a great design for manoeuvrability.
Looking at modern day Delta wings (cropped deltas) such as the JAS Gripen, the Eurofighter Typhoon and the Dassault Rafale use a combination of canards and a delta wing to counter this specific phenomenon.
So Canards help generate vortex lift over the main wings.
Pure delta-wings fell out of favour somewhat due to their undesirable characteristics, notably flow separation at high angles of attack (swept wings have similar problems), and high drag at low altitudes. This limited them primarily to high-speed, high-altitude interceptor roles.

This fact is further strengthened by the fact that Pure Delta Wing Fighter aircrafts were primarily used as high speed interceptors not light combat manoeuvrable aircrafts. Example being Mirage III Family lightweight, all-weather interceptor capable of climbing fast.

ICAS 2004 study in delta wing and LEX configuration to achieve better AoA.
DELTA WING WITH LEADING EDGE EXTENSION AND PROPELLER PROPULSION FOR FIXED WING MAV
High α on Delta wing with leading edge extension. Better Alpha results.

418794_196584517138634_881151721_n.jpg


First Contact:

A very import aspect of aerodynamic design in the wing and leading edge design is construction of first contact surface.
Further up the wing – modifications to the leading edge of the wing would have relatively lesser impact on the lift.

In a canard design the air flow will pass through forward canards first, in case of leading edge root extension the air flow would pass the root extensions of wing first.
Not having a sharper/pointed first contact surface at the leading edge of the wing root combined with Delta wing would cause additional Drag on Tejas.
The wing configuration of Tejas looks more like Reverse Compound Delta

Compound Delta.
The inner part of the wing has a very high sweepback, while the outer part has less sweepback, to create the high-lift vortex in a more controlled fashion, reduce the drag and thereby allow for landing the delta at acceptably slow speed

The wing Design of Tejas is reverse of above where first contact surface of the wing has bigger angle with fuselage than the rest of the wing’s leading edge.
312911_196635097133576_803672876_n.jpg


This would result in additional drag.
Naval Version:
As per news pieces the only Naval version of Tejas would have leading edge vortex controller to reduce the fighter's required speed on approach to the vessel. This is to compensate for the delta wing limitation in low speed manoeuvrability approaching an aircraft carrier.


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

From the above it would appear that Tejas would be subpar when in terms of achieving high AoA.
The choice of wing configuration is different to any of the current top of the line fighter aircrafts, and some aerodynamic features suggest that Tejas might not be best suited for roles where manoeuvrability and agility is paramount.
 
The Tejas would be a very good interceptor in terms of air to air combat.But,in a turning fight,I don't think it would be any better than the Mig-29(maybe even inferior).The reverse cranked wing profile can allow a very good vertical flight performance.But,in a turn,it simply won't bleed of energy fast enough.Also,in a spin,the wing simply will not generate enough lift.It's a good fighter for what it's intended to be.But 3rd generation fighters will still be on par with it.The F-7PG has a compound delta wing configuration like the previous user explained.It would be interesting if these two went head to head in a dogfight.In the end though,it all comes down to pilot training.
 
The next question is whether we add anything to its maneouverability by adding canards.
Araz
 
LCA uses a tailless, compound delta planform, 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.

Configurations with canards and LERX were tested and deemed unnecessary, use of this platform also minimizes the control surfaces needed (no tailplanes or foreplanes, just a single vertical tailfin), permits carriage of a wider range of external stores, and confers better close-combat, high-speed, and high-alpha performance characteristics than comparable cruciform-wing designs

tejas4-797363.JPG


From ADA's website the following info is derrived

Flight Envelope:
" AoA: 25 deg.
" Roll-rate : 290-300 deg/sec
" Sustained load G-limit : 8/-3.5g
" Short take-off and landing capabilities.

AOA of F16 and F18 is upto 30 deg, and specifically military aircraft usually will not obtain such high alpha in combat, as it robs the aircraft of speed very quickly.

tejaspayload1.JPG


The cranked planform has upward cranked tips, the tip section dihedral differs from the main section. The configuration is useful for achieving lateral instability.

The angle of attack as per deign requirements is satified by the LCA tejas, It was not meant to be a Su30, it was designed to be a low cost, nimble,user friendly, light fighter not a heavy air dominance fighter with pugachev cobras
 
The next question is whether we add anything to its maneouverability by adding canards.
Araz

They are using LEVCONS like the PAK-FA instead..More compact and elegant..
The tejas Uses a very similar wing shape to that of the delta on the Atlas Cheetah(The best a Mirage III can be).
Its definitely not a turning fighter.. but in todays days of High G off boresight systems...that will only be needed if it or its opponents survive the merge.
 
how much money so far has been spent on tejas project in dollars?
.

please bear in mind that program concept for LCA was generated in 83, the actual funding started in 93..about the program cost.. similar gripen program of sweeden costs around 13.5 Bn whereas LCA around 1.28 Bn including the inflation index for forex. Keep in mind Sweden was coming from successful viggen platform to develop the gripen... ADA otherwise had to develop an entire Aeronautical ecosystem for the LCA

When a sword arm is worth it
 
LCA uses a tailless, compound delta planform, 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.

Configurations with canards and LERX were tested and deemed unnecessary, use of this platform also minimizes the control surfaces needed (no tailplanes or foreplanes, just a single vertical tailfin), permits carriage of a wider range of external stores, and confers better close-combat, high-speed, and high-alpha performance characteristics than comparable cruciform-wing designs

the most prominent or characteristic feature of this plane is the shape of the wing near the fuselage.
if the angle of the wing from the edge is (for example 45 degrees) then as it nears the fuselage it suddenly takes a dip to a 60 or 70 degrees.

what is the significance of that shape and design? there must have been a lot of debate over doing it. but I cant find anything on web

what are your thoughts? what did the designers plan to achieve with this (sorry for the lack of word) radical design

scaled.php


any thoughts, any comments or theories?
 
the most prominent or characteristic feature of this plane is the shape of the wing near the fuselage.
if the angle of the wing from the edge is (for example 45 degrees) then as it nears the fuselage it suddenly takes a dip to a 60 or 70 degrees.

what is the significance of that shape and design? there must have been a lot of debate over doing it. but I cant find anything on web

what are your thoughts? what did the designers plan to achieve with this (sorry for the lack of word) radical design

scaled.php


any thoughts, any comments or theories?
Oscar is the man to answer this, however....
Could it be to help the pilot in downward weapon sighting visibility, had the wings continued with the 45 degrees, the pilot would be oblivious to the ground environment unless he tilted the aircraft......just my two cents. ???
 
the most prominent or characteristic feature of this plane is the shape of the wing near the fuselage.
if the angle of the wing from the edge is (for example 45 degrees) then as it nears the fuselage it suddenly takes a dip to a 60 or 70 degrees.

what is the significance of that shape and design? there must have been a lot of debate over doing it. but I cant find anything on web

what are your thoughts? what did the designers plan to achieve with this (sorry for the lack of word) radical design

scaled.php


any thoughts, any comments or theories?


Source:From B_R's tsarkar:

Cranked refers to the difference or change in longitudinal dihedral starting from wing root to wing tip. Longitudinal dihedral is the angle of wing with respect to the fuselage. Best way to notice a crank is side view.

Tejas wing root section is at a higher dihedral vis-à-vis rest of the wing. Side views make it apparent.



Note the longitudinal angle of the wing root with respect to the fuselage.
Then note the longitudinal angle of the wing tip with respect to the fuselage.
You will notice a change in this longitudinal angle from wing root to wing tip. The change in this longitudinal angle is called “crank”.

Added later -
Since the leading edge at root is at a higher dihedral than the rest of the wing, pitches the nose down before a stall at high AoA. The crank negates the need for a canard. The crank also, in some ways, makes the aircraft unstable and enables maneurability. Because the max AoA will differ from root to tip, validating the FBW software is critical before testing the aircraft.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom