LCA TEJAS MK-I & MK-IA: News and Discussion

[Anants]

Tejas is well optimised to maintain airspeed. It's manoeuvres aren't like Mirage-2000, they keep doing back to back turns to demonstrate that.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUMCZh9sXU0

The first few minutes maneuver, the turns seem sharp during 2nd turn is because tejas lost hieght to gain speed and then execute sharp turn. Turn Radius would be bigger if 2nd turn was executed on same altitude.

Its all about leveraging all possible advantages of aerodynamic profile that your aircraft has.

 

[Bleh]

...the turns seem sharp during 2nd turn is because tejas lost hieght to gain speed and then execute sharp turn. Turn Radius would be bigger if 2nd turn was executed on same altitude.

.

It did a loop... You lose speed going up & gained some back coming down. And i don't see any altitude drop for the 2nd ½-turn that followed the max-rate turn (not-min radius)

 

[Anants]

It did a loop... You lose speed going up & gained some back coming down. And i don't see any altitude drop for the 2nd ½-turn that followed the max-rate turn (not-min radius)

what I mean is Tejas did 2nd turn in a downward spiral type maneuver. Going down purposefully allows it to gain speed and thus its cranked Delta allows it take 2nd turn also tight(Deltas and instataneous turn rates). Had Tejas tried 2 loops at same-ish altitude - the radius would have been bigger(Deltas and sustained turned rate)

 

[Bleh]

what I mean is Tejas did 2nd turn in a downward spiral type maneuver. Going down (purposefully allows it to gain speed and thus its cranked Delta allows it take 2nd turn tight(Deltas and instataneous turn rates). Had Tejas tried 2 loops at same-ish altitude - the radius would have been bigger(Deltas and sustained turned rate)

Oh yes all that is agreed.

My point was, Tejas does surprisingly well at sustained turns for a delta. That was a 360+360+180 degree combo. You won't see a mirage-2k or gripen showing off these moves in public. Rafales do.

 

[Anants]

Oh yes all that is agreed.

My point was, Tejas does surprisingly well at sustained turns for a delta. That was a 360+360+180 degree combo. You won't see a mirage-2k or gripen showing off these moves in public. Rafales do.

It may perform better than Mirage due to it having a cranked delta, but I doubt it shall have better sustained turn rates than rafale. Rafale has close coupled canards with Delta and good twr. Gives it better sustained turn rate (courtsey CCCds). its precisely the reason why Tejas Mk2 is having CCCds and is not carrying same wing as LCA MK1 (which was actually the earlier plan).

But you dont need to fret over it. As I said Sustained Turn Rate is Just one Maneuver tactic- For Dog fights pilots have many maneuver in their quiver. Deltas have better performance at higher speeds. So it all depends on Pilot skill on how it can leverage its own plane's aerodynamic profile in best possible manner. Every plane wing design has some pros and some cons. Dont fret over it

 

[BON PLAN]

That's the charm of delta wing - it will always complete the first circle well... first but what happens after that??

Quality of 'classical" Delta, as Mirage, is their instantaneous turn rate. But doing so it lose a lot of energy, so as said by a Mirage 2000 pilot (against a F16) : "you have to take the lead at the very beginning of a dog fight if not you are dead".
The close canards reduces the loss of energy in sharpe turns. Add better thrust to weight ratio, and you now have a fighter with the higher instantaneous turn rate and a very good sustain rate. It was the Gripen, Lavi, JF-10 and Rafale choice.
The long arm canards is another thing. This choice was made by Eurofighter because they had in mind to add a vectorised engine thrust. Without it it's not so pertinent.

 

[Neil (नील/Нил)]

"Humara Tejas!"

 

[Lcafanboy]

View: https://x.com/Indrani1_Roy/status/1830001890102559237


View: https://x.com/Indrani1_Roy/status/1830006046775235059

India's own stealth Platform.....

 

[DumbPilot]

View: https://x.com/Indrani1_Roy/status/1830001890102559237


View: https://x.com/Indrani1_Roy/status/1830006046775235059

India's own stealth Platform.....

Then it would be correct to assume we have something like a LINK16 set up for ourselves no ?

Which means it's not just limited to missiles, it should theoretically be able to be connected to the infantry/JTAC on the ground, ships in the sea, any tracks that AWACS/etc gives, .. which is pretty much an entirely network centric force. Would be cool if that was the case, because that's a very large force multiplier

 

[Spitfire IX]

I see on idrw today that 40 Tejas Mk1A are being offered to Philippines. I think it is a bad move. I do not think it fits the requirement, so is extremely unlikely to be selected. I think it does the marketability of Tejas Mk1A no good at all putting it forward for deals it will not get.

In any event, it looks like Tejas Mk1A production will be constrained for some time by GE's ability to supply engines. If HAL cannot produce aircraft to meet contracts with the government of India, are they in a position to take on a contract to supply the Philippines? Would the Philippines want to sign for an aircraft knowing there was a high risk of it being delivered late or very late?

 

[saturatedfat]

just a question
How does our mirage 2000 compare with mirage 2000 and mig 29?

 

[shauryaman65]

just a question
How does our mirage 2000 compare with mirage 2000 and mig 29?

I dont know how I can compare mirage 2000 with mirage 2000.

But for the Mig29, It's only defined and considerable edge over the mirage 2000 is a close range engagement where its superior performance, turn rate etc. would play a role. (Plus point for IRST)
And it could go either way for a BVR engagement tbh.
Mirage has better radar but the Mig29 has the better missile**

** though i dont know how much better astra is or if it is better at all compared to MICA. Its tricky since MICA is one of the few missiles to be both heat seeking and radar homing at once but Astra outranges it by 30-40 km.


Otherwise for anything else Mirage 2000 is simply a better platform.
It has considerably more payload and hardpoints (nearly 50% more), has better air to ground weapons, somewhat better targeting pod and is actually optimised for that role. Since its a multirole fighter rather than the air superiority role for the Mig29.


Indeed, this isn't just my opinion since during the kargil war Mig29s were used for escorting the Mirage 2000s performing air to ground missions.

 

[Blood+]

I dont know how I can compare mirage 2000 with mirage 2000.

But for the Mig29, It's only defined and considerable edge over the mirage 2000 is a close range engagement where its superior performance, turn rate etc. would play a role. (Plus point for IRST)
And it could go either way for a BVR engagement tbh.
Mirage has better radar but the Mig29 has the better missile**

** though i dont know how much better astra is or if it is better at all compared to MICA. Its tricky since MICA is one of the few missiles to be both heat seeking and radar homing at once but Astra outranges it by 30-40 km.


Otherwise for anything else Mirage 2000 is simply a better platform.
It has considerably more payload and hardpoints (nearly 50% more), has better air to ground weapons, somewhat better targeting pod and is actually optimised for that role. Since its a multirole fighter rather than the air superiority role for the Mig29.


Indeed, this isn't just my opinion since during the kargil war Mig29s were used for escorting the Mirage 2000s performing air to ground missions.

I think the Zhuk ME of the Mig 29UPG is somewhat more powerful than the one in the Mirage.

 

[BON PLAN]

I dont know how I can compare mirage 2000 with mirage 2000.

It depends of the exact model of Mirage 2000.

In air to air : Mirage 2000-9 > Mirage 2000-5 mk2 > Mirage 2000-5 > Mirage 2000 C with RDI radar > Mirage 2000 C with RDM radar > Mirage 2000 D & N

In air to ground : Mirage 2000 D 1 N > Mirage 2000-9 & -5 > Mirage 2000 C

 

[BON PLAN]

I think the Zhuk ME of the Mig 29UPG is somewhat more powerful than the one in the Mirage.

power is one thing, signal treatment another. I think the Thales radar are better in this field.
And in this equation you also have to weight the RCS of each (if they are opposed). Mig29 RCS > Mirage RCS.

 

[BON PLAN]

But for the Mig29, It's only defined and considerable edge over the mirage 2000 is a close range engagement where its superior performance, turn rate etc. would play a role.

Is it so sure ?
Instantaneous turn rate of Mirage 2000 is among the best (only exceeds by european euro canards).
That means that in a Mig29 to Mirage fight, as against a F16, Mirage pilot has to take the lead in the very beginning turns. If it failed after 3 or 4 turns, it has lost too many kinetic energy and will loose the match.

 

[BON PLAN]

since during the kargil war Mig29s were used for escorting the Mirage 2000s performing air to ground missions.

Why?
Not because the Mirage was unable to defeat pak fighters, but because they were THE SOLE indian fighter able to carry a laser guided bomb at such an altitude.
And at those time the Indian Mirage were fitted with RDM radars, and can't carry heavy air to ground ordnance + laser pod and medium range air to air missiles. With the RDY radar and MICA, Mirage 2000 can now carry air to air medium range and air to ground weapons.

 

[shauryaman65]

Not because the Mirage was unable to defeat pak fighters, but because they were THE SOLE indian fighter able to carry a laser guided bomb at such an altitude.

Yep, they were simply better air to ground.

Is it so sure ?

I'm relying on the interview with the IAF pilot for this claim.

MiG-29 versus Mirage 2000: personal account from Air Marshal Harish Masand

The MiG-29 and Mirage 2000 are both fast and extremely agile fighter aircraft — but which of these formidable machines would win in a dogfight — the French beauty or the Russian beast? We s…

hushkit.net

 

[Binayak95]

Is it so sure ?
Instantaneous turn rate of Mirage 2000 is among the best (only exceeds by european euro canards).
That means that in a Mig29 to Mirage fight, as against a F16, Mirage pilot has to take the lead in the very beginning turns. If it failed after 3 or 4 turns, it has lost too many kinetic energy and will loose the match.

the Su30MKI and the MiG 29 have beaten the Mirage 2000 in WVR combat ad nauseum in IAF hands - and all three birds have pilots who vehemently defend their respective fighter.

 

[saturatedfat]

just a question
How does our mirage 2000 compare with mirage 2000 and mig 29?

oh damn it was supposed to be "How does our tejas mk1a compare with...."
My mistake