While not foolproof its a relative accurate way to measure a fighters str, especially if its done by same people with same camera (same fps), In all videos LCA takes ages compared to Gripen/F-16 to complete a full turn.

read my post above regarding pulling 9Gs and 6Gs and how much of a difference that makes. If you have a science background then you must have studied centrifugal forces and then you SHOULD how as the radius of the turn has to be decreased (meaning a tighter turn), the centrifugal forces will increase leading to higher G forces on the airframe?

You must think a little before going into all these very very generic statements that you make.

Its not all due to Lack of Power only. The Gripen C/D with the RM12 which has lower thrust than the Ge F404IN runs rings around the LCA in terms of STR & AoA.

agreed that lack of power is not the only issue, drag is also an issue. But, there are remedies for these issues and the Tejas Mk2 aims to address that specific issue through increase in fine-ness ratio of the airframe.

Regarding AoA, the Gripen’s limits are +26 deg /-10 deg. The Tejas when it will reach FOC will be at around that same figure.

Since spin tests are yet to be conducted, pilots will not be allowed to go anywhere beyond 22 deg AoA which the Tejas has achieved as of date. And no pilot would want to go beyond that either, without the anti-spin chute to pull him out of a spin should he enter one.

I really feel you need to educate yourself a bit more before going into all these comparisons without getting the full picture clear.

HJT-36 Sitara display routine

HJT-36 display

Some more shots by Hayath.

lovely Tejas shot !

2. Possibly because the F 16s are not renowned for its RCS, but neither is the LCA built with RCS reduction in mind, the MK2 doesn’t make serious changes to the design. Hence the RCS advantage will be nominal.

The fact is that the Tejas Mk1/2 will be much smaller than the F-16 Block 52. And it has a much higher percentage of composites in the fuselage and wing skin that will lead to a RCS smaller than any other non-treated IAF fighter. And definitely smaller than the F-16. Plus, with an engine compressor deeply buried in the fuselage, very little RCS scatter will occur from the compressor face.

3. ELTA 2032 vs APG 68 (v9) is again debatable. The Israelis wanted the ELTA radar in their Desert Falcons (Americans didn’t let them) but that may be because of preference to an indigenous radar. IIRC the MK2 will also have a Mechanical array with a planned AESA coming much later.

The Elta 2032 is reputed to be a good set but the MMR is not the Elta 2032 in full..and the only difference may be in the radiated power of the APG-68(V)9 vs the MMR on the Tejas. Here, maybe the F-16 will have an advantage, but with the more powerful F-414, the Tejas Mk2’s average kW will be higher.

4. The Block 52 has excellent T/W ration and proven Aerodynamics. The MK2 will gain more thrust but likely to gain a bit more weight as it gets more advanced subsystems.

Tejas Mk2 will still likely be lighter than the Gripen NG since first they’ll reduce weight wherever they can and also that they didn’t go in for additional control surfaces, pylons, strengthening for that, etc. Mostly it involves new avionics inside the additional space created and relocating avionics to use the space more optimally.

5. Being a delta without canards LCA will not have the STR of the Block 52. The Mirage 2000 vs F 16 case is an ideal example, Mirage has better ITR while the F 16 has better STR.

6. The Block 52 is not fat especially without the CFTs, You are reffering to Block 60.

You do realise how silly that sounds? Both Block 50/60 have removable CFTs and if the Block 60’s CFTs were removed, the fuselage would be the same as the Block 50 underneath.

Was contemplating the same thing, i noted Sukhoi-30MKIs would also go up to 280, that’s 540 a/c from these two alone.
How many F/A can India afford to sustain ?
How many do you currently operate, including Bison/Jag’s/Mk2 etc ?

The total must be around 600 aircraft as of now

126 MiG-21 Bison
120 odd Su-30MKIs
56 Mirage-2000s
63 MiG-29s
120+ Jaguars
100+ MiG-27s
20 odd MiG-21s that will be retired by the end of this year

Even so, the IAF is well short of its authorised squadron strength of 39.5 fighter squadrons. And now the IAF has requested the MoD to permit the numbers to be increased to 45 fighter squadrons.

That would mean a total of around 900 fighters.

OK. Why would anyone contest them? Those peacetime AoA numbers were mentioned 10 years ago by the SwAF in Airpower 2001.

Interview with MjGen Mats Nilsson
Inspector General of the SAF,
Commander of the AF Command
Airpower 2001

Signatory, you mention them as being “peacetime” numbers, but Ola Ringell said that these were the limits of the aircraft although they they did test to upto 70 deg AoA during post-stall maneuvers. But the safe limits are 26 deg and operational pilots cannot exceed these limits.

The same is true for the G limits as well, according to Ola Ringell. So, as far as any operational engagement goes, the limits would be firmly 9G/-3G and the FCS would not allow the pilot to exceed these limits. Only during flight tests did they have the capability of over-riding MLL.

I’m not scoffing at those numbers, merely stating that what test pilots do during flight testing is not necessarily what combat pilots would be allowed to do.

Excellent article on Test Pilots of the NFTC, by Ajai Shukla.

link to Ajai’s blog

Group Captain George Thomas, built like a bull, has commanded a squadron of Su-30MKIs. Group Captain Ritu Raj Tyagi, the most experienced of the group and a former Jaguar combat commander, ran the last Mumbai marathon as a diversion from flight testing. Captain Jaideep Maolankar, who cut his teeth flying Sea Harrier fighters off naval aircraft carriers, commanded warship INS Ganga as it chased pirates off the Somali coast. Group Captain Venugopal, like Varma, has commanded a MiG-21 squadron on the Pakistani border.

Even Pranjal, the baby of the team, is by conventional standards a veteran pilot, having commanded a Sukhoi-30MKI squadron. Now learning the ropes at the NTFC, he will extensively test the first two Tejas fighters that Hindustan Aeronautics Limited delivers to the IAF this year.

And it turns out that those smoke generators were for wake testing, not just for AI-11’s aerobatic performance !

The LSP-3 streaks into the sky. Pranjal’s mission is to test a new smoke winder–an under-wing pod that trails smoke. The device will help the NFTC test the Tejas’ reaction when it flies into a jet wake, a deadly 250-kmph blast of air emitted by a jet engine flying ahead.