What's new

India to build its own stealth fighter jet.

Why bother with a new stealth, in 4/5 years LCA would automatically become stealth (read invisible)....................:):lol:
just kidding

LCA has already been inducted and 2 squadrons will be based in TN. In the mean time you make sure that the state of Pakistan doesnt become stealth !
 
.
Why bother with a new stealth, in 4/5 years LCA would automatically become stealth (read invisible)....................:):lol:
just kidding

When you do not have the capability to build even a screw for the aircraft, do not criticize others who perform better in global arena, what you have done with your much esteemed JF-17, we had done it in the late 1960's with Marut.
 
. . .
Lol lol lol looks how pakistanis are burning out here sum body give them burnol fast after all why wouldnt sum 1 be proud of a jet made by china using a russian engine which for the matter of fact chinese also dont want to induct
 
.
The best way to stop troll is ignore it... Pakistani brothers, if you have some logical concern please come forward, We will reply it...

AMCA will not follow the LCA way, coz..
1. LCA was something new, we didn't had infrastructure (wind tunnel, testing sites) we will save 50% time as these infrastructure all-ready exxist now.
2. Experience gain by LCA and PAK-FA will be helpful.
and most important thing
Not all development projects taste the success, It may happen that HAL will be unable to make AMCA and they will buy something available..



If India plans a project for stealth then it would be an non-ending project and will never be implemented.


May be. There are many projects who doesn't see there fate..
 
.
The problem (or advantage) with so-called 'fifth generation' fighters is that they are deliberately designed to be discarded in the 'Detection' stage, leaving the radar system with nothing to 'Track'. Any fighter prior to this admitted arbitrary 'fifth generation' classification will have its RCS very trackable.
Can you explain bold part in detail?
Sure...

I already outlined the three stages of radar operations:

- Detection
- Tracking
- Targeting

For your question, I will explain the 'Detection' stage.

If you take an antenna, regardless of shape, you can tune it sensitive enough to pick up even cosmic background radiation (CBR), as well as music radio, or TV. Inside the 'Detection' stage, there is usually a process where we take these known signals and immediately reject them. We call this process 'clutter rejection' and the electronic line is called the 'clutter rejection threshold'. Essentially, what is 'clutter' is just stuff that we do not want to bother displaying.

But there is a catch...

For a meteorologist, a storm formation is desirable for display but an aircraft is not desirable. For the air traffic controller, both are desirable but he will have the aircraft on one display and the nearly storm cloud on another display. For the fighter pilot, sometimes weather phenomena and mountains are desirable, sometimes not. It all depends on the situation. The fighter pilot does not care to see birds, but for the biologist trying to study bird migration for the Agricultural dept birds are very desirable for display. In sum, what is 'clutter' is arbitrary from interest to interest.

Still...There are certain TYPES of radar echoes and signals that an antenna may pick up that we simply do not want to display. For military aviation, those signals are CBR, assorted civilian communication signals, birds, and many others. These 'junk' signals are grouped into that 'clutter rejection threshold'. What a so-called 'fifth generation' fighter does, or was designed, is to be inserted into that automatic rejected region.

Before the F-117, the most popular method of being inserted into that rejection region is to fly as low as possible so as to blend in with ground return, meaning as the radar looks at the Earth, which is a very large target with many features like mountains, plants, and animals, the radar will be so inundated with echoes that its automatic gain control (AGC) circuits will kick in to reject these signals. The fighter that is flying so low in altitude and among these signals will be discarded by the radar. The tactic works very well but it does have high risks for the fighter, mainly very limited maneuvering room.

The F-117 and later fighters were deliberately designed, or body shaped, to the point where even though they will produce radar echoes, those signals are so small and so briefly detected that such signals, when they are detected, they are immediately discarded when they are held against the table of known signals that the radar system is authorized to dismiss.

So...If you are immediately dismissed how can anyone track you, let alone mark you as a target?
 
. .
from how long Tejas took to develop we should see AMCA by 2030 if it started today

We respect your view, But if you follow the LCA thread you will come to know, what cause the delay and what could be rectified in case of AMCA... Just look on these points..

1. Do we need to make huge infrastructure what we made in case of LCA, or we can use the LCA infrastructure to make/test AMCA???
2. Will the massive experience gained in developing LCA help AMCA ?? or won't it??
3. ALH dhruv took many years to developed, LCH took less than half of its time, Won't this happen in case of LCA and AMCA??
4. Will the experience gained in PAK-FA be useful for AMCA or won't it??


Likewise there are many points, If you think logically, you may be little optimistic...
 
.
So...If you are immediately dismissed how can anyone track you, let alone mark you as a target?

However is the target is manuevering, lets say both lazy and evasive?, does that reflect the same RADAR signature (im sure not). Then how does the entire cluttre detection system works in accordance with the approaching fighter's RCS? How does the RCS reduction works here?
 
. .
^^Damn PDF has some great senior members.

Dear Bharadwaj -

I understand ur feeling. However-
No need to follow the troller by calling him a troller. Please report such posts by acting saner than the troller. We need to follow discipline if someone follows or not.

Regards,
Dash
 
.
Ive always said the benefits of LCA far outweigh its short comings. Its operational importance might be limited by the simple fact that the IAF will have and already has far greater aircraft in its inventory, that is not a slight to the LCA, instead the 21st century reality of an airforce that is very powerful. The real benefits of the work that has been done on the LCA is in the understanding of the process of building an indigenous project, from the drawing board to the eventual induction. Efficiency is often a result of experience and without the initial project, these follow on projects would hardly be possible.
Assuming HAL trully learns from its experience with the LCA, this stealth fighter project should be far smoother and as a result have greater success.
 
.
Ive always said the benefits of LCA far outweigh its short comings. Its operational importance might be limited by the simple fact that the IAF will have and already has far greater aircraft in its inventory, that is not a slight to the LCA, instead the 21st century reality of an airforce that is very powerful. The real benefits of the work that has been done on the LCA is in the understanding of the process of building an indigenous project, from the drawing board to the eventual induction. Efficiency is often a result of experience and without the initial project, these follow on projects would hardly be possible.
Assuming HAL trully learns from its experience with the LCA, this stealth fighter project should be far smoother and as a result have greater success.

+, you are creating an industrial base, starting from small scale suppliers, to large R&D contributor and give the talented the motivation to work better...
 
.
Ive always said the benefits of LCA far outweigh its short comings. Its operational importance might be limited by the simple fact that the IAF will have and already has far greater aircraft in its inventory, that is not a slight to the LCA, instead the 21st century reality of an airforce that is very powerful. The real benefits of the work that has been done on the LCA is in the understanding of the process of building an indigenous project, from the drawing board to the eventual induction. Efficiency is often a result of experience and without the initial project, these follow on projects would hardly be possible.
Assuming HAL trully learns from its experience with the LCA, this stealth fighter project should be far smoother and as a result have greater success.

Sir,

Thank you for your kind words. People do not realise how difficult it is to design and finally operationalize a very complex system especially when you have all kinds of bottlenecks --- both home-made and external --- in such an endeavour. This is why the achievements of the Chinese in the past 10 - 15 years must be highly appreciated.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom