HAL LCA as Fourth Generation Aircraft

Military aircraft - Post cold war aircraft, including for example B-2, Gripen, F-18E/F Super Hornet, Rafale, and Typhoon.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

IndianAirForce

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 28
  • Joined: 04 Aug 2005, 16:37

Unread post10 Jan 2006, 01:55

http://english.people.com.cn/200601/09/ ... 34043.html

This link to the people daily online article which states that the HAL Tejas is a "Fourth Generation Aircraft"

It also stated that the IAF is only ordering 20 some aircraft.

I was wondering if the HAL tejas is really a fourth generation aircraft. It was designed around the 80s along with many delays. I wouldn't exactly call it a fourth generation aircraft. It does not have as advances technology as the gripen, Raptor, or any other fourth generation aircraft.

It also said that the IAF is only buying some 20 aircraft. I have read previously that they were planning to buy at least 70 aircraft buy 2011.

There would be no point to buy only 20 aircraft.
Offline

Raven11

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 68
  • Joined: 07 Oct 2003, 02:25
  • Location: United States of America

Unread post14 Jan 2006, 21:26

looking at the spec. it really looks like its on par with the F-16 10- 30's or maybe.. the J-10 i mean it was built to just replace the mig-21 untill i get into the cockpit or see an airshow it really looks like a third gen.

to me you are right there is no point to buy only 20 of the aircraft, i'm all for making indiginous aircraft from your own country (adlest you won't get embargoed) but 20 dosen't even break even on development cost even with F-16 you don't order 20 of anything expecialy if you have a lot of sky to defend i really hope the order is increaced or at least they must have capibilitys the plublic isn't aware of
Offline

Yugandhar

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 14
  • Joined: 22 Jan 2006, 13:28

Unread post22 Jan 2006, 13:32

The LCA Tejas is a 4th generation jet due to some salient features:

1] Quadruplex fly-by-wire.
2] All weather, multi-role capability.
3] Multi-mode radar of range 100 kms.
4] Cockpit of international standards with HOTAS, multiple MFDs, and advanced HUD.
(Photo of cockpit: http://www.aerospaceweb.org/aircraft/cockpits/)
5] Capability to carry BVR weapons, and laser-guided bombs. Has laser pod, and FLIR.

Link:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ ... ia/lca.htm

It can easily compare to any 4th generation fighter jet of today like the JAS-49 Grippen, J-10, or even the F-16.
Offline

Aks_20

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 25
  • Joined: 11 May 2006, 05:49

Unread post11 May 2006, 07:07

Dude 20 a/c is just the initial tranche for the IAF to evaluate it and lend support to the program!

Overall prod numbers are to be in the 150-200 range.
Offline

snypa777

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1683
  • Joined: 26 Jul 2005, 02:00

Unread post11 May 2006, 09:02

Any data-link capability onboard the LCA?

It is a 4th gen` fighter....According to the Russian classification system.

Generally, a fourth gen` fighter was designed between 1970 and 1990. A 4.5 gen` 1990 to 2000. It is really a Russian classification for fighter classes. Outside of Russia, does anybody use the system officially? Is it even official in Russia?

I would suppose that the difference between a 4 and 4.5 would be limited stealth application and enhanced electronics. I don`t know if the LCA uses any stealthy features, like "S" shaped engine inlets and signature reduction from frontal aspect.

It is pretty subjective. A fighter designed in the 1980s as a 4th gen` fighter can be upgraded. Stealthy features being added. RAM coatings/ advanced electronics and radar/ TVC/ improved missiles.....would it then become 4.5 gen`?

I wouldn`t get hung up on that kind of classification. A better barometer would to compare like for like. The LCA versus XYZ in it`s peer group, in terms of the whole package... rather than when it was designed.
"I may not agree with what you say....but I will defend to the death your right to say it".
Offline

Aks_20

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 25
  • Joined: 11 May 2006, 05:49

Unread post12 May 2006, 02:39

Original LCA datalink was A2A and A2G with datarate = russian types, ie kbps
Now IAF is getting a new class of datalinks in preparation for the Phalcon, mostly Israelui hardware and Indian software and integration. So that will go on the LCA as well.
LCA has significant signature reduction, its RCS is claimed to be a 3rd of standard fighter aircraft.
Offline

snypa777

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1683
  • Joined: 26 Jul 2005, 02:00

Unread post12 May 2006, 06:42

AKs 20, thanks for the info.

I have done some reading, what I gather is that the LCA has no inherent stealth characteristics. It presents a smaller radar signature by virtue of it`s small size. It is actually a smaller aircraft than the JAS39 Gripen, a metre shorter. The LCA is the worlds smallest combat fighter. I don`t include trainer aircraft which can be used as emergency combat aircraft like the Korean Golden Eagle.

I think it is very impressive that India has developed this aircraft from scratch. A lot of the systems had new industries created to build them.
I don`t think any modern fighter of 4th or even 5th gen` is ever created totally indigenously. Even the F-22 has foreign components.

The LCA was built with help/input from Lockheed Martin, until sanctions put an end to it`s involvement. SNECMA, BAE Systems, Martin Baker, GE and MIG (engine testing) have had input into the design. The two most difficult areas seemed to be FBW (Fly by wire) and the "Kaveri" engine. The FBW, FCS problems were solved. The flight control laws were proven onboard F-16 VISTA simulators and aircraft I believe. That was impressive as no country used to export FBW know how which was classified AFAIK.

The biggest problem is certainly the local "Kaveri" engine. It must be very tough to build a modern combat jet engine from scratch. A variable cycle type no less. Even a local FADEC. GE flew in some retired engine experts at the request of the Indian government to help solve the problems. No one is saying what those difficulties were though. Everything else seems top notch. India is doing some things with composites that NO-ONE else is doing. I hope India solves the "Kaveri" problems soon.

The GE-F-404 will be used in the LCA for the first few squadrons. I think it would be wise to stick with the `404 in terms of export potential. Customers know what they are getting with that engine. Especially in terms of support, spares, upgrades.

Apparently IAF pilots would prefer the F-404 unit, it is a proven engine.

Overall though, good show from India which was brave enough to go it alone and produce the thing. 8)
"I may not agree with what you say....but I will defend to the death your right to say it".
Offline

toan

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 535
  • Joined: 27 Nov 2004, 16:14

Unread post12 May 2006, 07:15

The RCS of standard fighter, in western opinion, is 5m2 (MIG-29) class.

In Russian opinion, it is 3m2 (MIG-21) class.
Offline

snypa777

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1683
  • Joined: 26 Jul 2005, 02:00

Unread post12 May 2006, 08:08

Toan, do you know the RCS of the LCA Tejas? I don`t think it will be published though.
"I may not agree with what you say....but I will defend to the death your right to say it".
Offline

GhostOfRazgriz

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 3
  • Joined: 15 May 2006, 00:55

Unread post15 May 2006, 01:28

Not the prettiest fighter.
Attachments
Tejas50.jpg
Offline

Angels225

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 113
  • Joined: 26 Jul 2005, 14:48

Unread post15 May 2006, 07:00

Looks like the illigit love child of the Rafale and M2K
Offline

Vinay

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 4
  • Joined: 05 Jun 2006, 18:15
Offline

RoAF

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 632
  • Joined: 15 Feb 2006, 22:45
  • Location: Romania

Unread post05 Jun 2006, 19:31

It doesn't need to be pretty, as long as it gets the job done. The A-10 is really ugly but VERY useful and loved by the ground troops...
"It's all for nothing if you don't have freedom" (William Wallace 1272-1305)
Offline

Angels225

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 113
  • Joined: 26 Jul 2005, 14:48

Unread post09 Jun 2006, 11:27

somehow i think the IAf was better of gettin more Su-30's or Migs than this thing
Offline

RoAF

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 632
  • Joined: 15 Feb 2006, 22:45
  • Location: Romania

Unread post09 Jun 2006, 11:41

somehow i think the IAf was better of gettin more Su-30's or Migs than this thing

You can't buy a new Su or MiG at 15-20 mil. a piece
"It's all for nothing if you don't have freedom" (William Wallace 1272-1305)
Next

Return to Modern Military Aircraft

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot], mrigdon, wrightwing and 15 guests