Indian Air-Force News
- Thread starter Indianfighter
- Start date
ajaybhutani
New Member
i m lost here..Indianfighter said:
As a Consequence of what is
"the load carried by the fuselage of the Gripen must be lesser, or not much in difference as compared to the LCA" ?
Indianfighter
Junior Member
Well, the LCA and Grippen both have the design definition of delta-winged, tail-less aircraft. The difference is in the addition of canards on the Grippen.
Smaller details such as wing-area or the consequent wing-loading do not imply design differences. The Mirage-200-V, Rafale, Eurofighter, J-10, Grippen, LCA Concorde all have the basic tail-less delta-winged design, but the finer details such as wing-area, loading etc. are different obviously.
There are several variants in the delta-winged design also, as follows :-
pure delta (F-106),
cranked (space shuttle),
cropped (Mirage-2000),
cranked & cropped (LCA),
ogee (concorde),
with foreplanes (J-10, EF, Grippen),
without foreplanes (LCA, Mirage-2000)
Whether these are major design differences or not, may be a matter of debate.
wings (than the LCA), thus the load on its fuselage must be quite lesser than that of the LCA (or not much different if not much lesser).
------------
I admit that I made a mistake in my statements about the LCH. I mistook the LCH for the LAH, which is a local variant of the light-weight Chetak or Cheetal helicopters (2.5 ton class).
About the LCH, it appears that it is indeed a 'gunship' variant of the Dhruv, although an armed variant of the Dhruv (with Lahat and mistral missiles, and rocket launchers) is already in service with the Indian Army.
Smaller details such as wing-area or the consequent wing-loading do not imply design differences. The Mirage-200-V, Rafale, Eurofighter, J-10, Grippen, LCA Concorde all have the basic tail-less delta-winged design, but the finer details such as wing-area, loading etc. are different obviously.
There are several variants in the delta-winged design also, as follows :-
pure delta (F-106),
cranked (space shuttle),
cropped (Mirage-2000),
cranked & cropped (LCA),
ogee (concorde),
with foreplanes (J-10, EF, Grippen),
without foreplanes (LCA, Mirage-2000)
Whether these are major design differences or not, may be a matter of debate.
Since the weapons load of the Grippen and LCA are very similar, and because the Grippen carries more load on its
wings (than the LCA), thus the load on its fuselage must be quite lesser than that of the LCA (or not much different if not much lesser).
------------
I admit that I made a mistake in my statements about the LCH. I mistook the LCH for the LAH, which is a local variant of the light-weight Chetak or Cheetal helicopters (2.5 ton class).
About the LCH, it appears that it is indeed a 'gunship' variant of the Dhruv, although an armed variant of the Dhruv (with Lahat and mistral missiles, and rocket launchers) is already in service with the Indian Army.
ajaybhutani
New Member
to give an idea of how different the wings are..gripen has canards to improve manouverability while when canards were put in lca they were found to be giving no improvements in manouverability ( due to the difference in shape of the aircraft) .. changes from pure delta to delta with canards to cranked and cropped changes the aerodynamic characterstics of the planes considerably to call them the same design..Indianfighter said:
otherwise we can always call " all fighter planes as same design they all have wings. "
it might sound like small details but they change a lot of things..
All that we know about LCA's is more of a speculation and expected load from the design.. but we need to see what it really comes out to be..
Indianfighter
Junior Member
Canards are technically termed as foreplanes (I have included them in the list of delta-winged categories). The likely reason for canards being present on the grippen is because, its delta-wing is not cranked. It has been observed by me* that usually, ogee or cranked designs do not possess canards. I do not know the reason for it.ajaybhutani said:
The aeronautic merit of canards is presently a matter of debate. It is argued that they increase interference drag, although movable canards increase manoueverability.
As known to me, canards were proposed for the Naval LCA only, when it already possessed the cranked design. It was rejected (confirming my observation*). A new concept of LEVCONs or (Leading Edge Vortex Extensions) was adopted, which has been implemented for the first time in the world.
Yes. Many aspects such as Flight-control laws, manoeuverability etc. are changed, but they all belong to the category of delta-winged, tail-less, single elevon aircraft. This family is more specific and particular than "all aircraft have wings" category as mentioned by you earlier.
Again, the subjective magnitude of difference is a matter of debate.
Last edited:
Indianfighter
Junior Member
Indo-Russia joint stealth fighters programme flies into turbulence
Shiv Aroor
Posted online: Friday, August 04, 2006 at 0000 hrs
NEW DELHI, AUGUST 3: A team from Russia’s Sukhoi Design Bureau and Irkut gave a detailed classified presentation to the Defence Ministry on Thursday on its fifth generation fighter concept, but discrepancies have already begun to surface between New Delhi and Moscow over the proposed multi-billion dollar joint programme to develop and produce advanced stealth fighters for both countries in the next decade.
In essence, South Block has communicated to Moscow that the Russian fifth generation fighter programme, designated PAK-FA, is already at an advanced stage of design, which effectively negates the aspect of ‘‘joint-development’’ and has asked it to come up with a more ‘‘equal’’ proposal.
The Sukhoi-led consortium’s concept, based on the PAK-FA, is being pitched vigorously to India as part of a protocol signed by the two countries in 2004 to build a fifth generation fighter.
In fact, the government plans to tell Moscow in December at the sixth meeting of the India-Russia Inter-Government Commission that if billions of dollars are to flow from the Indian side for the joint project, then the IAF and HAL must be on board from scratch, so that the aircraft platform incorporates IAF operational needs as well.
The fifth generation joint project is still a futuristic one, though it was clear from Defence Minister Pranab Mukherjee’s comments in Parliament today, that the government is taking strong note of lessons learnt from the Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) programme for its other proposed project, the Medium Combat Aircraft (MCA).
‘‘For expediting development work on MCA, government may consider collaboration with friendly countries,’’ he said. The Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA) in Bangalore has already begun to conceptualise the MCA, possibly as India’s fifth-generation platform. The only operational fifth generation fighter right now is the American F/A-22 Raptor, with the F-35 Lightening II set to make its first flight this year.
At the most basic level, the wish-list that the IAF has for a fifth generation fighter, which should ideally begin flying operationally between 2015-2020, includes comprehensive stealth, a single engine, supercruise capabilities, an active electronically scanned array (AESA) combat radar and swing-role capabilities that allow seamless switching between air-to-air and air-to-ground modes inflight. This of course is in addition to the capability to operate entirely beyond visual range (BVR) of the enemy and perform short take-offs and landings.
Source:
Shiv Aroor
Posted online: Friday, August 04, 2006 at 0000 hrs
NEW DELHI, AUGUST 3: A team from Russia’s Sukhoi Design Bureau and Irkut gave a detailed classified presentation to the Defence Ministry on Thursday on its fifth generation fighter concept, but discrepancies have already begun to surface between New Delhi and Moscow over the proposed multi-billion dollar joint programme to develop and produce advanced stealth fighters for both countries in the next decade.
In essence, South Block has communicated to Moscow that the Russian fifth generation fighter programme, designated PAK-FA, is already at an advanced stage of design, which effectively negates the aspect of ‘‘joint-development’’ and has asked it to come up with a more ‘‘equal’’ proposal.
The Sukhoi-led consortium’s concept, based on the PAK-FA, is being pitched vigorously to India as part of a protocol signed by the two countries in 2004 to build a fifth generation fighter.
In fact, the government plans to tell Moscow in December at the sixth meeting of the India-Russia Inter-Government Commission that if billions of dollars are to flow from the Indian side for the joint project, then the IAF and HAL must be on board from scratch, so that the aircraft platform incorporates IAF operational needs as well.
The fifth generation joint project is still a futuristic one, though it was clear from Defence Minister Pranab Mukherjee’s comments in Parliament today, that the government is taking strong note of lessons learnt from the Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) programme for its other proposed project, the Medium Combat Aircraft (MCA).
‘‘For expediting development work on MCA, government may consider collaboration with friendly countries,’’ he said. The Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA) in Bangalore has already begun to conceptualise the MCA, possibly as India’s fifth-generation platform. The only operational fifth generation fighter right now is the American F/A-22 Raptor, with the F-35 Lightening II set to make its first flight this year.
At the most basic level, the wish-list that the IAF has for a fifth generation fighter, which should ideally begin flying operationally between 2015-2020, includes comprehensive stealth, a single engine, supercruise capabilities, an active electronically scanned array (AESA) combat radar and swing-role capabilities that allow seamless switching between air-to-air and air-to-ground modes inflight. This of course is in addition to the capability to operate entirely beyond visual range (BVR) of the enemy and perform short take-offs and landings.
Source:
Last edited:
Indianfighter
Junior Member
Indian AF Su-30MKIs Nearly Ready
by Michal Fiszer
Mar. 10, 2005
The Batch 3 standard will not quite be the "ultimate," since a future modernization is planned. The N011M Bars radars are to receive new transmitter components that will increase their range to 180 km, and new gimbals for the antenna mount to increase the field of view to about 90-100 degrees to both sides. New software will enable a Doppler-sharpening mode and the capability to engage up to eight air targets simultaneously.
Source:
Courtesy of JCage, Bharat-rakshak forum. The above is a combination of a news report and the personal conversation between JCage and the author of the news report.
by Michal Fiszer
Mar. 10, 2005
The Batch 3 standard will not quite be the "ultimate," since a future modernization is planned. The N011M Bars radars are to receive new transmitter components that will increase their range to 180 km, and new gimbals for the antenna mount to increase the field of view to about 90-100 degrees to both sides. New software will enable a Doppler-sharpening mode and the capability to engage up to eight air targets simultaneously.
Source:
Courtesy of JCage, Bharat-rakshak forum. The above is a combination of a news report and the personal conversation between JCage and the author of the news report.
well, I have a feeling that once the su-35 becomes available for export, the Russians will offer some form of upgrade on the existing su-30MKIs using the technologies from su-35 (mostly avionics and possibly newer engines).Indianfighter said:
eecsmaster
Junior Member
to be quite honest, I don't think BARS needs more output power. What it needs is more processing power.
Indianfighter
Junior Member
The version of Bars radar (of range 180 kms) had been planned as the N011M (after Mk.3) of the evolution of the Su-30 MKI. The improvement in the detection range shall be made by both mechanical hardware and newer computers.
Aircraft Radar Remarks
Su-30MKI Phase-I N011M Mk.1 > Only Air-to-Air
modes
Su-30MKI Phase-II N011M Mk.2 > Ability to
engage targets
with four R-77
> Ground
mapping
> Ground/Sea ta
rget search and
lock
> Integrated with
Kh-31A and
Kh-59ME
Su-30MKI Phase-III N011M Mk.3
> Russian C101
radar computer
replaced by
Indian processor.
> Ground attack
mode with
simultaneus
air target search
> Integration with
Rafael Litening pod
Su-30MKI N011M > 2007 debut
> New gimbals for
the moving
antenna: +/-100
degrees azimuth &
elevation
> New
computer:
180 km tracking
range
Su-30MKI Irbis > 2010 debut
Aircraft Radar Remarks
Su-30MKI Phase-I N011M Mk.1 > Only Air-to-Air
modes
Su-30MKI Phase-II N011M Mk.2 > Ability to
engage targets
with four R-77
> Ground
mapping
> Ground/Sea ta
rget search and
lock
> Integrated with
Kh-31A and
Kh-59ME
Su-30MKI Phase-III N011M Mk.3
> Russian C101
radar computer
replaced by
Indian processor.
> Ground attack
mode with
simultaneus
air target search
> Integration with
Rafael Litening pod
Su-30MKI N011M > 2007 debut
> New gimbals for
the moving
antenna: +/-100
degrees azimuth &
elevation
> New
computer:
180 km tracking
range
Su-30MKI Irbis > 2010 debut