LCA Tejas Mk1 & Mk1A - News and discussions

[Milspec]

About the PKS thing about gun, I think he meant if FADEC and radar are not transferring data back to the mission computer, the CCIP cannot be activated. And you have to go with manual mode.

Continously Computed Impact Point (CCIP)

And it require to optimize HOTAS sensitivity with FADEC during ACM mode.

Interesting, CCIP of system utilizing FBW will be determined by it's vector, that is provided to the mission com by the combination of information from the RLG, Altimeter and the Air speed from the pitot tube.
Fadec in an engine cannot tell you the relative position of the aircraft.
Now impact points for the different munition are calculated by the mission computer. We have seen precision delivery if ordnance by LCA in multiple exercises.

From all the internal info I have on LCA, there is no such concern.

 

[Arpit]

Interesting, CCIP of system utilizing FBW will be determined by it's vector, that is provided to the mission com by the combination of information from the RLG, Altimeter and the Air speed from the pitot tube.
Fadec in an engine cannot tell you the relative position of the aircraft.
Now impact points for the different munition are calculated by the mission computer. We have seen precision delivery if ordnance by LCA in multiple exercises.

From all the internal info I have on LCA, there is no such concern.

CCIP is not using FBW, there is no requirement of FBW. Neither I think PKS said anything about FBW.
Neither it is about airspeed or etc, it is about engine performance during high AoA maneuvers during ACM mode (and sub ACM for gun).

Here:http://trace.tennessee.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3700&context=utk_gradthes

This is the whole Departure study of F/A-18C Hornet during high AoA and mainly during ACM mode. That is all about optimization and protecting the aircraft.

As for ADA, they don't know everything about combat, and we all know IAF was not involved in this project for so long . if every AF on planet earth faced such problem and optimized and developed the solution. We are not different, and I dont think our LCA is some macho which not going to face such a problem.

 

[vstol Jockey]

Sir
What about ACM?












Source:
http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a129168.pdf
http://trace.tennessee.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3700&context=utk_gradthes


It looks like to me you need to change FADEC laws as Mission computer give command of ACM mode. One cant use normal FADEC laws to accommodate ACM. @vstol might be able to clear this thing.

FADEC has nothing to do with weapon aiming as it is engine control. BUT it does provide info to the weapon aimin g computer in terms of variation in thrust which can effect the air speed and therefore the impact point. The basics of weapon firing involve aircraft flight path vectors like its speed, heading and attitude, lateral and longitudinal velocity & acceleration including G-force in play and wind speed plus the weapon ballistics. This data comes from the laser gyros based INS or other such means while the weapon ballistics are fed as a data within the mission computers. This weapon data includes weapon speed in case of rockets and guns and aerodynamics of the bombs. Based on these parameters, the mission computer calculates the impact point and the impactline shows how the weapon will actually travel based on aircraft flight path and wind direction.
This was developed for basically bomb drops using "Lay down Attack" method. Normally we used to do dive bombing, that is we will approach the target at very low level and than pull up sharply to recognise the target, aim and fire and pull out to leave the area. But as the AA became more effective, the pull up became risky as the second and subseqiuent aircraft could be targeted easily. so this non pull up attack method was developed based on accuracy of navigation systems. In this we continue to fly level and as the pipper rides up to the target, we would release the bombs and continue at low levels to vacate the area. This exposed the strike to minimum time for AA to take them out. But another problem cropped up. The bomb after release travels under the aircraft and so aircraft is within the debris zone while overflying the target and a damage due to bomb explosion was a reality. So special bombs called retarders with a small drag chute were designed for such low level Lay down Attacks.
For rocket firing, CCIP is very effective as it is better than the gyro gunsights which we used in earlier gen aircraft. For front gun firing on ground targets, the good old fixed sight method was better but for moving target, the CCIP was better and in air to air to mode CCIP was a huge advantage.
Regarding ACM, The engine is used mercilessly and it needs to go from idle thrust to full bore in shortest time without fail and most pilots don't look at engine instruments during ACM as you need to be head out and we go by purely engine sound to know how the engine is behaving. This is what is called seat of the pants flying. You have to klnow your aircraft so well that it talks to you, meaning, you must be able to decide what the aircraft is doing and what your energy levels are based purely on engine sound, airframe sound and flight control feel pressures.
However now we are in days of LGBs and GPS guided bombs and CCIP is used mostly for air to air and rocket firing or for releasing dumb bombs.

 

[vstol Jockey]

CCIP is not using FBW, there is no requirement of FBW. Neither I think PKS said anything about FBW.
Neither it is about airspeed or etc, it is about engine performance during high AoA maneuvers during ACM mode (and sub ACM for gun).

Here:http://trace.tennessee.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3700&context=utk_gradthes

This is the whole Departure study of F/A-18C Hornet during high AoA and mainly during ACM mode. That is all about optimization and protecting the aircraft.

As for ADA, they don't know everything about combat, and we all know IAF was not involved in this project for so long . if every AF on planet earth faced such problem and optimized and developed the solution. We are not different, and I dont think our LCA is some macho which not going to face such a problem.

A good pilot will know when he is reaching a departure situation good about 5-7 knots before it actually happens. Sudden departure happens when you hit the jet wake of the target aircraft as that can completely disturb the airflow over your wings.
A good pilot will never get into a situation of high alpha and low speeds during ACM. The best perf of an aircraft is always at its corner speed and it is better to conserve energy by using 3D airspace than to reduce thrust or speed. Energy maintenance during combat is what is most important. If the enemy is slowing down, do not throttle back, instead use vertical and convert speed to energy, you will also go into low speeds but you will have higher height, full throttle which can be converted back to speed very quickly. In combat, the sky above has no value, its the sky below which matters.
You must have seen TOPGUN movie and there you must have heard about hard hight. or deck height/floor. Once you go above your opponent with higher energy than him, you can force him into the ground as he will not be able to escape. You will retain full advantage.

 

[randomradio]

Sir
What about ACM?


Source:
http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a129168.pdf
http://trace.tennessee.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3700&context=utk_gradthes


It looks like to me you need to change FADEC laws as Mission computer give command of ACM mode. One cant use normal FADEC laws to accommodate ACM. @vstol might be able to clear this thing.

There is no such thing as "ACM mode". ACM simply means dog fight. BFM is for training rookie pilots in the art of dog fighting, which is particularly done on trainers.

 

[Parthu]

 

[Arpit]

There is no such thing as "ACM mode". ACM simply means dog fight. BFM is for training rookie pilots in the art of dog fighting, which is particularly done on trainers.

Are you kidding? Dont make me laugh.

Radar mode needs to change during close combat. And there is sub ACM mode during usage of gun(it change the search range and elevation), where we get a lock on during gun operation and that's how CCIP is calculated.

Read it in operational modes and air to air modes.
Still don't believe me, here is the manual of F/A-18 E/F

 

[vstol Jockey]

@Arpit, You probably misunderstood @randomradio. He meant that Fadec has no ACM mode nor do FBW has any ACM mode. Air intercept radars have ACM mode. In Sea Harrier Bluefox radar this mode was called supersearch mode and used during ACM. This mode selection was part of HOTAS controls.

 

[randomradio]

Are you kidding? Dont make me laugh.

Radar mode needs to change during close combat. And there is sub ACM mode during usage of gun(it change the search range and elevation), where we get a lock on during gun operation and that's how CCIP is calculated.

View attachment 3932

Read it in operational modes and air to air modes.
Still don't believe me, here is the manual of F/A-18 E/F

View attachment 3931

Yeah, but it has nothing to do with engine and FBW.

 

[Ashwin]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1081908586169552896

 

[Milspec]

Are you kidding? Dont make me laugh.

Radar mode needs to change during close combat. And there is sub ACM mode during usage of gun(it change the search range and elevation), where we get a lock on during gun operation and that's how CCIP is calculated.

View attachment 3932

Read it in operational modes and air to air modes.
Still don't believe me, here is the manual of F/A-18 E/F

View attachment 3931

I think the original contention was GSH30 integration needs fatigue testing of air frame.
That clearly is not the case.

Next was the ECM/Fadec is not compatible with the Mission comp;
given all it needs is figuring out whatever the i/o protocol is, it either comes with support from GE to integrate, which can as simple as i/o card and it's firmware. If the ladder logic is provided for the control system, it's quite simple to write the HMI for integrating FADEC or any ECM for that matter. The simplest route being with a Modbus convertor and writing subroutine in you misson comp for the needed i/o's.

Then the contention was HOTAS was reliant on the FADEC,
again not true at all.
I don't remember seeing anything related to CCIP in the @_Anonymous_ post.

Now coming to CCIP, I am sure that IAF won't be accepting an aircraft that has nonfunctional targeting system, especially when we have integrated litening with everything under the sun.

 

[_Anonymous_]

FOC approved! on jan 4 as said here by @randomradio


well - i have to accept i was absolutely not confident of this:

The Centre for Military Airworthiness and Certification (CEMILAC) has given the green signal to start manufacturing of Tejas Mk1 under Final Operational Clearance (FOC) configuration, he said.


Read more at:
//economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/67379924.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst

Don't be too happy. It's another via media concocted by the powers that be, like the IOC. See it as IOC - Part 2. The FOC is reportedly coming around October 2019 or later as per the report.

 

[vstol Jockey]

I think the original contention was GSH30 integration needs fatigue testing of air frame.
That clearly is not the case.

Next was the ECM/Fadec is not compatible with the Mission comp;
given all it needs is figuring out whatever the i/o protocol is, it either comes with support from GE to integrate, which can as simple as i/o card and it's firmware. If the ladder logic is provided for the control system, it's quite simple to write the HMI for integrating FADEC or any ECM for that matter. The simplest route being with a Modbus convertor and writing subroutine in you misson comp for the needed i/o's.

Then the contention was HOTAS was reliant on the FADEC,
again not true at all.
I don't remember seeing anything related to CCIP in the @_Anonymous_ post.

Now coming to CCIP, I am sure that IAF won't be accepting an aircraft that has nonfunctional targeting system, especially when we have integrated litening with everything under the sun.

AM Nambiar has already clarified on multiple occassions that LCA had best scores in weapon delivery of all IAF aircraft. This clearly shows that there are no issues with weapon delivery computers including CCIP.

 

[Shekhar Singh]

Nice! The LCA Tejas heads to Langkawi, Malaysia for LIMA 2019 in March, its 2nd foreign sojourn after the Bahrain Air Show in 2016. Will be part of the flying display. Livefist on Twitter

https://twitter.com/x/status/1082931304453365760

 

[randomradio]

LCA is probably going to be part of Malaysia's Light MRCA program.

 

[Milspec]

Nice! The LCA Tejas heads to Langkawi, Malaysia for LIMA 2019 in March, its 2nd foreign sojourn after the Bahrain Air Show in 2016. Will be part of the flying display. Livefist on Twitter

https://twitter.com/x/status/1082931304453365760

I really wish IAF would hire a decent film crew to capture a some good flying videos of the LCA.

 

[Bharath]

LCA is probably going to be part of Malaysia's Light MRCA program.

they built a grand total of 10 aircraft and yet to fulfill IAF order - how can they compete for export orders? where is the infra to build faster?

 

[randomradio]

they built a grand total of 10 aircraft and yet to fulfill IAF order - how can they compete for export orders? where is the infra to build faster?

Even the Malaysians are just starting the process. By the time orders are placed, we will have delivered a lot of Mk1As already. And they will give us a further 3 years minimum for delivery. I doubt they expect deliveries before 2025, which coincides with the time frame for IAF's last delivery of 83 jets. And then it's not like the Malaysians will expect a squadron a year or anything, so even if the IAF exercises options, there will be room for production of extra jets by then.

By 2021, HAL will be able to deliver 21 jets per year, which is expandable by 8 more if necessary, potentially taking it to 27 per year. This is more than what IAF will be willing to absorb. HAL has thought things through.

What can make the offer more sweet is absorbing their Mig-29s into our fleet.

I wonder what the Malaysians will do about the radar and EW suite though, since they are Israeli. We may have to look at Italian or French options instead, which will allow us to market it to the Middle East, Indonesia and some parts of Africa as well. The Meteor+ASRAAM combo will make it far more marketable in these countries.

 

[Milspec]

Even the Malaysians are just starting the process. By the time orders are placed, we will have delivered a lot of Mk1As already. And they will give us a further 3 years minimum for delivery. I doubt they expect deliveries before 2025, which coincides with the time frame for IAF's last delivery of 83 jets. And then it's not like the Malaysians will expect a squadron a year or anything, so even if the IAF exercises options, there will be room for production of extra jets by then.

By 2021, HAL will be able to deliver 21 jets per year, which is expandable by 8 more if necessary, potentially taking it to 27 per year. This is more than what IAF will be willing to absorb. HAL has thought things through.

What can make the offer more sweet is absorbing their Mig-29s into our fleet.

I wonder what the Malaysians will do about the radar and EW suite though, since they are Israeli. We may have to look at Italian or French options instead, which will allow us to market it to the Middle East, Indonesia and some parts of Africa as well. The Meteor+ASRAAM combo will make it far more marketable in these countries.

Given the recent development; would this government even let HAL survive that long?

 

[Bharath]

Given the recent development; would this government even let HAL survive that long?

lets see:

FY 2016-17: HAL Turnover Soars to All Time High at Rs. 17,406 Crores; Receives Orders worth Rs. 21,000 crores

HAL Opens New Chapter in Defence Equipment Maintenance through PBL for ALH; Signs Rs. 8,000 Crore Contract with Indian Navy & Indian Coast Guard

Defence Minister Launches Production of HAL Designed LCH; Dedicates Hawk-i to the Nation

HAL Signs MoU with Government; Aims Higher Revenue

HAL Gets Orders for 41 Advanced Light Helicopters

HAL Facilities Are of National Importance, Cannot be Allowed to be Idle: RRM, HAL to Invite Private Entities for Manufacturing ALH Dhruv (Civil Version)

and this in April 2018:
HAL Achieved all time High Turnover of Over Rs. 18K Crores