HAL Tejas | Updates, News & Discussions

[x_man]

Agree But what will you call F-22 Multi Role Plane???

Nopes...Its not a true MR fighter....With F-15 C / D reaching their airframe life, USAF needed a pure kickass Air Dominant fighter that could serve them for another 30 years ( atleast)...and the answer was F-22 Raptor....designers put all the gadgets and tit bits available in the market at the moment...stealth technology, super cruise, thrust vectoring etc....Its a true air-air fighter...Although it can carry JDAM and some other ordnance but basically it is an Air Superiority fighter....USAF would probably not employ Raptors for a strike role...because there are many other aircrafts that can do this job...

As far as Jaguar is concerned , its not a MR at all...its a strike/attack aircraft ....putting few missiles on it doesn’t qualify it to be a MR....A-5 also carries 2xAIM-9P or Mirage III / V carries Matra R530 ( i am not discussing ROSE modified here ) .. ....does this means that these are also MR fighters...No Sir......Why not, because none of these carry an AI ( airborne interceptor)....The missile they carry are mere heat seeking and for their own protection in case someone decides to give them a chase while they are carrying out their primary task.......

Let’s discuss that what qualifies an aircraft to be called a Multi Role fighter....A multirole combat aircraft is an aircraft that can be used as both a fighter aircraft and a ground attack aircraft.....Along with the decent array of air-ground weapons ( dumb / smart ) , it should also be having a Air Borne radar in its nose along with choice of long range / short rang / heat seeking missiles......and it should also be able to perform all tasks during night as well ....


I like the way USAF nomenclature goes...its very straight forward and even if one hasn’t seen the aircraft, one can tell that what’s its basic role...e.g.

F for Fighters....F-86 , F-5 , F-15 , F-16 , F-22 etc

B for Bombers...B-57 , B-52 , B-1 ,B-2 etc

T for trainers....T-37 , T-38 , T-45 etc

C for Cargo...C-130 , C-5 , C-17...

A for Attack...A-10 , AC-130 , AV-8

 

[Joodi]

Well LCA is going to be fitted with AESA Radar, while JF 17 dont have any road map on AESA ... Their it makes difference.

Dear talk and compare only those things which have been achieved in this LCA project, AESA on LCA is a far cry. 1. The integration issues of an imported radar to the aircraft needs to be resolved. every body knows that Domestic multi mode radar program for LCA has ended in a failure.
the MMR is not even ready for LCA it will still take atleast 3 yrs and u are making hypothetical claims of LCA with an AESA .first make a basic multimode radar for LCA integrate it with LCA and then think about AESA radar.

 

[JEFF]

Dear talk and compare only those things which have been achieved in this LCA project,

Well if this is the case then I am requesting you not to participate in fighter jet related discussions.

AESA on LCA is a far cry.

How spontenous!

I don't understand your any specific reason for agony. You can simply said that you don't want AESA with LCA. Already Isreali Elta is pitching high to integrate their own within LCA.

1. The integration issues of an imported radar to the aircraft needs to be resolved.

There were never been any issues with Integration of imported radar with LCA because leaving aside talks of having collabration with foriegn company for its radar, there were never been any imported radar ever integrated with LCA and hence issues with the integration of imported radar with LCA not even arises. I don't know where did you get this particuler feeling, but hope even only you can resolve it to create realistic picture.

every body knows that Domestic multi mode radar program for LCA has ended in a failure.

Oh really, now who are this everybody? atleast we are not one among them, this is the one and only thing we needed to listen about from you. Kindly bring me a link which state above sentence.

the MMR is not even ready for LCA it will still take atleast 3 yrs and u are making hypothetical claims of LCA with an AESA.

Then tell me what kind of a technical parameters or information did encountered which makes integration of AESA into LCA a very complex issue before the integration of MMR?

first make a basic multimode radar for LCA integrate it with LCA and then think about AESA radar.

It would be of your immense grace, if you can suggest above sentence in tadem with Technical parameters which makes intregration of MMR as a prerequistic for the integration of AESA into LCA?

 

[nitesh]

Dear talk and compare only those things which have been achieved in this LCA project, AESA on LCA is a far cry. 1. The integration issues of an imported radar to the aircraft needs to be resolved. every body knows that Domestic multi mode radar program for LCA has ended in a failure.
the MMR is not even ready for LCA it will still take atleast 3 yrs and u are making hypothetical claims of LCA with an AESA .first make a basic multimode radar for LCA integrate it with LCA and then think about AESA radar.

Hey just check this link for radars
Radar-fitted Tejas this year-Nagpur-Cities-The Times of India

The Indian MMR was ready but was not fit for A2G roles. So israel's Elta has been roped in and they are helping in getting the radar fixed.

The difference between MMR and AESA in very basic terms is the range. AESA has better range then the MMR. But AESA has bigger size then the MMR. So there might be an issue. But the way the technology is maturing. i don't think it will take much time to fit an AESA to LCA, and rest all is system integration.

 

[p2prada]

First of, Whoopee my first post

Secondly, India has no plans of equiping any AESA on the LCA. An AESA is possible if we sit and redesign the nose cone cause it is too small.
But before that we need to change the mission computer with something more powerful. Then we need to change the cockpit displays from 2D to 3D. Lets not forget the additional 1million+ lines of codes for processing of data that the radar generates. Oh, did i mention we will have to change the data bus too. Which would mean re-working on the FBW. Then comes the weapons integration, since we are using a new processor and BUS. Same with the other avionics. I doubt DRDO and HAL have time on their hands even to make the AESA possible on the next upgrades until the MCA comes out.

An AESA is far off. It would be better to use the AESA on the AWACS or the Aerostats. The AESA is capable of datalink using their radar beams which can be picked up by the LCA for target detection and engagement. Or even using the MKIs.

There will come a time(probably by 2013) when India will have complete coverage of North India and its borders with the AESA, ground and air based). So, as of now equipping the LCA with AESA is not a priority.


As of now the avionics on JF-17 and LCA are the similar if not the same. If we need an edge, we need to go for the fastest possible datalink capability to help the aircraft get first shot, first kill capability. Thats where AWACS and GCI comes into the picture.

Cheers!!

 

[ahussains]

LCA is still hanging in the Air when its issuese going to resovle they are talking with P&W to devolped the engine guys the JF17 is in the AIR and in serial production toooo... ???

 

[JEFF]

LCA is still hanging in the Air when its issuese going to resovle they are talking with P&W to devolped the engine

It has been reiterated by both IAF and the maker of LCA to the death that first 40 LCA's would be fitted with GE engines. Engine problem is there but it is not that sufficient enough to stop LCA from joining the IAF.

guys the JF17 is in the AIR and in serial production toooo... ???

So does this mean that has it much more versatile then LCA or for that matter any other aircraft it supposed to face? Another thing is that, Has it even achieved its FOC? just because its production has commensed, it doesn't mean that JF-17 has complied by all the pre-requistic requirement. If I go with your life of thinking then already our two production model are flying and one with improved engine.

 

[x_man]

Many JF-17 are already flying in PAF ...a test and conversion unit has been established....and its converting new pilots onto Thunder regularly.....Although full operational capability (FOC) hasn’t been achieved yet, but its not late that we will have a fully operational squadron up and running...These squadron pilots are regularly pitching the fighter against F-16, Mirage etc and flying all sort of air-ground missions...getting their hands on day and night as well....However, like any other fighter, Thunder will continue to evolve and improve in coming years....

 

[nitesh]

Some pics of LSP2

http://www.ada.gov.in/lsp2/lsp2.exe

 

[SU 30 MKI]

Dear talk and compare only those things which have been achieved in this LCA project, AESA on LCA is a far cry. 1. The integration issues of an imported radar to the aircraft needs to be resolved. every body knows that Domestic multi mode radar program for LCA has ended in a failure.
the MMR is not even ready for LCA it will still take atleast 3 yrs and u are making hypothetical claims of LCA with an AESA .first make a basic multimode radar for LCA integrate it with LCA and then think about AESA radar.

Israel has offered India Its El/M 2052 AESA Radar to India while Currently Indian LCA will fly with EL/M2032 Radar From Israel Till India will not develop its own MMR with Israel Help.

http://www.iai.co.il/Default.aspx?docID=26591&FolderID=34481&lang=en&res=0&pos=0&btl=1

http://www.iai.co.il/ELTA.aspx?docID=34455&FolderID=33796&lang=EN&res=0&pos=0

India also developing its own AESA ... Radar

http://www.acig.org/artman/uploads/in_rad_001.jpg
T/R Module Technology

 

[blain2]

Well .. this is was talking about Engine only with greater payload capacity....

Well LCA is going to be fitted with AESA Radar, while JF 17 dont have any road map on AESA ... Their it makes difference.

Every plane divided based on its functions .... if u see SU 30 is Air Superiority fighter, Multirole Fighter, Strike fighter, Heavy class fighter

while MIG 29 is Multirole fighter plane like this.

Not entirely true. PAF is fishing the market for the AESA capability on the JF-17 as well. This is as per the Chief of the Pakistan Air Force and looking at the past, the JF-17 may have an operational AESA capability before LCA.

The idea of MR is to provide an aircraft that can do multiple things instead of having a dedicated aircraft. That gets too expensive for most airforces. The idea is to integrate multiple roles into one aircraft. Thus you have Multi Role, Swing Role etc.

The terms such as "Heavy class" etc. etc. are all terms that arm chair analysts have coined. In reality the more MR the platform, the more ideal the deal. MKI is slated to be a MR aircraft...heavy etc. etc. means very little from a classification standpoint.

At the end of the day, a JF-17 (like LCA) would be able to take off with A2G ordnance plus BVR/WVR AAM loadout. It will also have a decent EW suit so it can conduct some jamming to press home attack or jam the other side's ability to see it, drop the ordnance and then return back safely. On the way if it needs to take on some other aircraft, it would do that as well.

The other more expensive alternate is to have dedicated aircraft for specific roles (which was the case in the past but now only a certain airforce (USAF only) can afford).

 

[blain2]

Just read X_man's post. I think he nailed all of the points that I am trying to make with regards to JF-17 being a MR platform.

 

[SU 30 MKI]

Not entirely true. PAF is fishing the market for the AESA capability on the JF-17 as well. This is as per the Chief of the Pakistan Air Force and looking at the past, the JF-17 may have an operational AESA capability before LCA.

The idea of MR is to provide an aircraft that can do multiple things instead of having a dedicated aircraft. That gets too expensive for most airforces. The idea is to integrate multiple roles into one aircraft. Thus you have Multi Role, Swing Role etc.

The terms such as "Heavy class" etc. etc. are all terms that arm chair analysts have coined. In reality the more MR the platform, the more ideal the deal. MKI is slated to be a MR aircraft...heavy etc. etc. means very little from a classification standpoint.

At the end of the day, a JF-17 (like LCA) would be able to take off with A2G ordnance plus BVR/WVR AAM loadout. It will also have a decent EW suit so it can conduct some jamming to press home attack or jam the other side's ability to see it, drop the ordnance and then return back safely. On the way if it needs to take on some other aircraft, it would do that as well.

The other more expensive alternate is to have dedicated aircraft for specific roles (which was the case in the past but now only a certain airforce (USAF only) can afford).

We all agree it is MR Platform ........... but can tell which AESA radar did countries offered you?
and if they did why PAF going for 40 fitted with chinese radar?

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

We all agree it is MR Platform ........... but can tell which AESA radar did countries offered you?
and if they did why PAF going for 40 fitted with chinese radar?

I don't think Blain said that the Thunder has an AESA already chosen.

He said that Pakistan is "fishing the market for one".

We know that after the first batch of 40 to 50 thunders we will most likely see changes/improvements in the radar and other features. So Pakistan still has time to decide on what long term package it wants to install.

With respect to having a potential AESA before the LCA, I think Blain is referring to the amount of time the LCA has to make up before it reaches the stage the Thunder is in for Pakistan - in which case the Thunder may be equipped with an AESA before the LCA.

But at the end of the day, one has to remember that you need to compare weapon systems, and not just specific capabilities. The capability of the LCA vs Thunder is best measured by taking into account the entire gamut of deployed assets - net centric capabilities, platforms, missiles, etc.

 

[Keysersoze]

We all agree it is MR Platform ........... but can tell which AESA radar did countries offered you?
and if they did why PAF going for 40 fitted with chinese radar?

Simple flame boy.........Selex/Vixen 500E




Thales

And the RBE2 which will have AESA capability. and the first 40 with Chinese are for a simple reason.....to gain capability faster rather than take 30 years and constantly moving the requirements and receiving no aircraft. When you induct the LCA come and post then. Otherwise go away because I am tiring of your attempts to flame.