Ok Ajay, since you haven't seen much of the shit Indians in general put on forums, I'll excuse you.
"even u dont have any experience in aerospace.. but still u mind indians making comments while at the same time making ur own judgements in this forum..
Secondly stop generalizing to "all indians in all forums".. "
That's Electrical with emphasis on SIGNAL PROCESSING. So I can assure you that
1) I know what a real time system is
2) You, being CS and NOT aerospace or EE, do not know the demands of a real time system like a FBW
3) We've had 3 Indians on this board, and ALL of them say the same crap over and over. At least you actually have some sort of engineering degree (CS is broken up into LSA and CoE divisions at University of Michigan)
"1. LCA FBW isnt ready yet.. we all know it.
2. first prototype on which it was tested flew in 2001.. and right now there are 4 prototypes flying on which the system is being tested.. its already 4 years.. and LCA will be completed in 2010.. thats 9 years to finish the FBW.."
Why don't you ask Indianfighter why he made that dumbass comment? Actually, why don't you ask probably 80% of the Indians on military forums why they say what they say? Because the general impression I get is that LCA is already combat ready and shot down a few FC-1s in trial... you get my drift now?
" have finished CS degree( worked on embedded systems in college) and now working on distributed systems.. and i can assure you theres a lot of difference between real time systems(in case u dont know FBW is a real time system) and supercomputers.. and FBW doesnt need a supercomputer(just to give u a reason any layman can understand => ef2000 doesnt have a supercomputer in it.). "
don't patronize me, you're not in a place to. Until you've worked with integrated circuits and control, you SHOULD have no true understand of how something like FBW works (unless the embedded SYSTEM is a control box). Of course I know it's not about supercomputers, but THERE IS A POSITIVE CORRELATION BETWEEN SUPERCOMPUTER RANKINGS AND SEMICONDUCTOR INDUSTRY. Do I have to write in binary here to make you understand? EF might not have a supercomputer, but it's processing power is a lot greater than an MKI's.
"well its equipped because there are 3 statically unstable planes flying regularly without crashes/crash landing/grounding with only this FBW and no backup... if the FBW fails pilot can do nothing to save the plane..
i guess 4 years is nough to show that the prototype/half developed FBW doesnt have major problems.. "
any DEMANDING applications here? I honestly don't know just how hard the LCA was pushed. But let's put this in scope here. J-10 flew for a few years, then the first second prototype crashed due to engine/FBW problem. T-10, which was Su-27's parent, crashed. F-16 had a few mishaps with FBW. Eurofighter had a bit of problems with flight control. You get the point here? Also, I wonder just how many hours of flight time the LCA had, after all, you have very little engine spares.
"how does small size of LCA make it a bad plane?? its designed as a point defence fighter to be deployed in airstrips on border.. and its desinged keeping these requirements in mind( replacing the mig 21s)..
1. whats the resolution of kopyoM..
2. its not about gen of the mig21. its about wether it can do the job or not.. its job is to face pakistani f16s(the best plane in their inventory) which dont have any BVR capable missiles at all. the upgrade can give a good chance for these mig21's to stand against these F16's. "
No, No, and No. You think a plane designed to replace a point defense fighter is a good plane? You must be joking. One of the reasons why India is procuring MKI/MRCA is because they can't make ANYTHING that'll fullfil this role. It is my opinion that LCA was chosen because IT IS THE EASIEST THING TO BUILD, and that didn't work out too well, did it? The reason why I doubt LCA's performance is because your radar's ability is directly effected by emitter radius. It doesn't matter what kind of processing power or what band you operate in, you can't get combat resolution unless you have enough elements, passive or active. This is the reason why I mock the Indians for the Bison upgrade-a radar that costs as much as the airframe, but won't do anything beyond 45 km. And this is the reason why I think LCA doesn't have much combat potential in a MODERN battlefield.
I gotta go to class, and Ajay, try to bring your compatriot in line please.
"even u dont have any experience in aerospace.. but still u mind indians making comments while at the same time making ur own judgements in this forum..
Secondly stop generalizing to "all indians in all forums".. "
That's Electrical with emphasis on SIGNAL PROCESSING. So I can assure you that
1) I know what a real time system is
2) You, being CS and NOT aerospace or EE, do not know the demands of a real time system like a FBW
3) We've had 3 Indians on this board, and ALL of them say the same crap over and over. At least you actually have some sort of engineering degree (CS is broken up into LSA and CoE divisions at University of Michigan)
"1. LCA FBW isnt ready yet.. we all know it.
2. first prototype on which it was tested flew in 2001.. and right now there are 4 prototypes flying on which the system is being tested.. its already 4 years.. and LCA will be completed in 2010.. thats 9 years to finish the FBW.."
Why don't you ask Indianfighter why he made that dumbass comment? Actually, why don't you ask probably 80% of the Indians on military forums why they say what they say? Because the general impression I get is that LCA is already combat ready and shot down a few FC-1s in trial... you get my drift now?
" have finished CS degree( worked on embedded systems in college) and now working on distributed systems.. and i can assure you theres a lot of difference between real time systems(in case u dont know FBW is a real time system) and supercomputers.. and FBW doesnt need a supercomputer(just to give u a reason any layman can understand => ef2000 doesnt have a supercomputer in it.). "
don't patronize me, you're not in a place to. Until you've worked with integrated circuits and control, you SHOULD have no true understand of how something like FBW works (unless the embedded SYSTEM is a control box). Of course I know it's not about supercomputers, but THERE IS A POSITIVE CORRELATION BETWEEN SUPERCOMPUTER RANKINGS AND SEMICONDUCTOR INDUSTRY. Do I have to write in binary here to make you understand? EF might not have a supercomputer, but it's processing power is a lot greater than an MKI's.
"well its equipped because there are 3 statically unstable planes flying regularly without crashes/crash landing/grounding with only this FBW and no backup... if the FBW fails pilot can do nothing to save the plane..
i guess 4 years is nough to show that the prototype/half developed FBW doesnt have major problems.. "
any DEMANDING applications here? I honestly don't know just how hard the LCA was pushed. But let's put this in scope here. J-10 flew for a few years, then the first second prototype crashed due to engine/FBW problem. T-10, which was Su-27's parent, crashed. F-16 had a few mishaps with FBW. Eurofighter had a bit of problems with flight control. You get the point here? Also, I wonder just how many hours of flight time the LCA had, after all, you have very little engine spares.
"how does small size of LCA make it a bad plane?? its designed as a point defence fighter to be deployed in airstrips on border.. and its desinged keeping these requirements in mind( replacing the mig 21s)..
1. whats the resolution of kopyoM..
2. its not about gen of the mig21. its about wether it can do the job or not.. its job is to face pakistani f16s(the best plane in their inventory) which dont have any BVR capable missiles at all. the upgrade can give a good chance for these mig21's to stand against these F16's. "
No, No, and No. You think a plane designed to replace a point defense fighter is a good plane? You must be joking. One of the reasons why India is procuring MKI/MRCA is because they can't make ANYTHING that'll fullfil this role. It is my opinion that LCA was chosen because IT IS THE EASIEST THING TO BUILD, and that didn't work out too well, did it? The reason why I doubt LCA's performance is because your radar's ability is directly effected by emitter radius. It doesn't matter what kind of processing power or what band you operate in, you can't get combat resolution unless you have enough elements, passive or active. This is the reason why I mock the Indians for the Bison upgrade-a radar that costs as much as the airframe, but won't do anything beyond 45 km. And this is the reason why I think LCA doesn't have much combat potential in a MODERN battlefield.
I gotta go to class, and Ajay, try to bring your compatriot in line please.
