KramerVery cute little plane! Nice job. 🙂
But… what is its intended role, now that IN is getting MiG-29K? Will be a bit crowded on and bellow the flight deck with both aircraft (plus helos), or?
the N-LCA’s twin seater is undoubtedly the best looking LCA variant so far. the single seat NP-2 will look good too, but the removal of the second seat canopy and its replacement with composite panels will make it look a bit different..time will tell how good that looks as compared to NP-1.
Griffon, the originally intended role was to replace Sea Harriers one to one on the smaller carriers like the Gorshkov and IAC-1. INS Viraat was never going to get N-LCAs and they’ll retire with their complement of Shars. The larger IAC-2 type carriers with expected displacement of 50,000+ tons with CATOBAR ops hadn’t been given the go-ahead by the Govt of India at that point (when N-LCA was conceived), so the belief was that the heavier MiG-29K would be complemented by the smaller and lighter N-LCA leading to a larger air complement on board medium sized carriers that had STOBAR ops only. They could possibly embark 1.5 N-LCAs for each MiG-29K meaning they had more fighters at their disposal. And being single engined, they would likely face less maintenance issues than a twin-engined fighter.
It was the Indian Navy that approached ADA and asked them to look into the possibility of a naval LCA variant, and at that time the aim was to get a light fighter that could allow for a larger complement of mixed medium and light fighters on board a medium sized carrier. The N-LCA would offer very useful capability for protecting the carrier battle group against air and sea threats at short to medium ranges while the MiG-29K would be able to patrol at longer ranges as well as throw a heavier punch at longer distances. As a combo, they could act together, the way the Super Etendards and Rafales were working for the Aero Navale.
And for the IN, it would allow affordable land-based operations at multiple air bases. They could conceivably base N-LCAs at Karwar, Goa and the Andamans as well. They’ll be affordable to buy, and cheaper to operate than the MiG-29Ks. Possibly cheaper to maintain as well. Plus, crucially, it allows the ADA and IN to gain the requisite experience in developing a naval fighter, something they’ll likely want to use for a naval AMCA variant if things go well with the N-LCA. I’m saying that because the PAK-FA will likely be too large for a naval FGFA-K variant for the 2020s and beyond for the IN. The AMCA will be the logical indigenous development to replace MiG-29Ks in the future.
KramerIt would be nice to see the wing-shape at all!
Very careful control of what is shown, eh?
its the same wing shape as the IAF LCA except for the LEVCONs..whats there to hide ? Its no stealth fighter whose shape will need to be hidden..
KramerIAF order for 20 additional Tejas Mk1 is cleared by the CCS
7 JULY, 2010, 1:34 AM
BY: livemint
The Indian Air Force (IAF) has won the approval to buy 20 additional Tejas fighter jets, the home-grown light combat aircraft to be built by military plane maker Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL), defence minister A.K. Antony said on Tuesday.The defence acquisition council has cleared the plan, he said. So far, IAF has ordered 28 Tejas aircraft, currently under development at the Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA), the design agency for the aircraft.
The additional order would give a boost to the indigenous plane project, which has faced an uncertain future due to delays in its development and certification.
“Now, LCA (light combat aircraft) is a reality,” said Antony, who recalled that he had received suggestions when he took over as defence minister that the Tejas, the Arjun battle tank and the Akash missile programmes be scrapped. “Despite all those prophecies of doom, all (three projects) are becoming a reality.”
The Tejas was conceived in the 1980s to replace the ageing fleet of Russian MiG-21 planes.
The project got the government’s nod in 1990, a prototype was rolled out in the middle of that decade, and the first Tejas took to the skies in 2001.
Since then, 12 Tejas planes have flown 1,400 flights on test missions. The aircraft is expected to get initial operational clearance, or the certification for minimum standards set by the IAF, by December.
A two-seat naval version of the plane, which was rolled out on Tuesday by the minister, will take to the skies around October, said P.S. Subramanyam, programme director at ADA.
“The learning has been enormous. We have been able to compress time,” he said.
The two-seat naval trainer has been redesigned to take off and land on an aircraft carrier—needing about one-tenth of the 800-900m on a regular runway.
The navy is setting up a shore-based test facility, which will be similar to the deck of the INS Vikramaditya, the aircraft carrier Russia is building for India.
Kramera few more pics
pics courtesy BRF.
KramerDoes it have the new cockpit?Is there any info?
I don’t think so. Since the N-LCA will only enter service in 2013 or so, there is enough time to get new displays or a new HUD (if that is planned), so this NP-1 will likely feature the regular LCA cockpit. LSP-5 will be the IAF version that will feature the modified cockpit..and even that is mostly going to be re-arranging some minor buttons and instruments for better ergonomics..I don’t think that it’ll be a major re-working of the cockpit, but I could be wrong.
Kramerlike a mini-pak-fa. although I think the NLCA does a better job of hiding the compressor face :diablo:
the LCA has a Y-duct (when seen from the top) as well as a S-shaped duct (when seen from the side) . I have a picture from ADA that shows a LCA cutout that illustrates the Y+S shaped duct of the LCA. The compressor face will not be visible at all. BTW, this LEVCON design has been seen on the N-LCA mockups since very early on, possibly earlier than 2003. It is not inspired from the PAK-FA. Before the LEVCON, the N-LCA design had small moustache like canards that were meant to help in increasing controllability at high AoA but those canards were later deleted and LEVCONS incorporated.
KramerHotdog, the artist’s conceptions of the N-LCA were not wrong. the NP-1 prototype is a twin seater whereas most N-LCA models and drawings are of the single seater. NP-2 (may roll out by year end or early next year) is a single-seater and will closely resemble the NP-1 but without the second seat and as a result a smaller canopy although the hump will be there. In the second seat’s place will be a fuel tank and avionics bay.
Kramerone interesting view of the N-LCA from the front..the LEVCONS are clearly visible here.
Kramera couple of pics of the N-LCA during its roll-out ceremony yesterday.
KramerI think this is a classic example of how criterias can be tailor made to fit the pre-chosen contender.
As a Swede you see it that way obligatory, but Brazilians are well within their rights to set criterias that they feel suit them the most.
Kramerit is in the range of 25-28 deg AoA max.
The Mirage 2000C and 2000-5 fly traditionally: their engines do not have a thrust vectoring capability and their effective angle of attack does not exceed 25-28 degrees.
Rafale goes up to 32 degs AoA max
This Rafale variant will be slightly smaller than the A, but will retain its Mach 2 capability speed, a 32 degree maximum angle of attack, a 115 kilometer approach speed and the ability to take off and land in less than 400 meters.
but as per Peter Collins who wrote an excellent article on the flight test of the Rafale, the Rafale’s AoA is either 29 deg or 20 deg depending on the mode on which it is flying
The DFCS is a “g” demand system with +9.0g/29° angle of attack (AoA) limit in air-to-air mode and +5.5g/20° AoA limit in both of the two air-to-ground/heavy stores modes (ST1 and ST2) to cater for forward or aft centre of gravity. The aircraft continuously “recognises” the load it carries, but indicates and leaves the final DFCS mode selection to the pilot.
KramerI’m not sure I can comment on that Samsara. Ajai Shukla has access to contacts that are possibly better placed than the ones I speak to occasionally. But one thing for sure is that he’s BSing when he talks about alpha of 58 degs being achieved for Super Hornet as if it does it all the time..maybe for a test platform they may do it, but in operational use, most fighters won’t go beyond 28-30 deg AoA anyway with the FCS preventing any further AoA. Then again, the Super Hornet’s known for good slow speed performance. the Su-30MKI’s unlimited AoA is due to post-stall maneuverability and the ability of the AL-31 to operate even with severely disturbed airflow. this is a characteristic it shares with the RD-33 which explains why these aircraft fly so well even at such high AoA..plus their under slung air intakes (instead of the air channel being buried deep inside the fuselage) possibly help in keeping air starvation at bay even during very high AoA flight regimes.
KramerDeino, the HARM is strange because the IN doesn’t have any of those..India recently ordered Harpoons to replace Sea Eagles on the Jaguar IM maritime strike variants..those AGM-88s may well be just an artistic impression and may not represent reality.
KramerN-LCA roll-out tomorrow..looking forward to seeing this bird, although NP-1 is a twin-seater so it’ll look quite similar to the PV-5 twin seat prototype that flew earlier this year. NP-2 will be the single seater naval prototype.
pic from Livefist blog.
KramerBoeing predicts clean-sheet T-38 replacement and a new chance at Swiss fighter competition
I wonder why they left in the first place if they now want to get back in..
By Stephen Trimble
A top Boeing executive predicts an all-new aircraft design will replace the Northrop T-38 Talon and that the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet will re-enter a competition in Switzerland for a fighter contract.
Boeing Military Aircraft president Chris Chadwick spoke boldly of the company’s chances in both scenarios on 23 June.
The US Air Force is still evaluating requirements for the T-X contract, and options include buying three off-the-shelf platforms with the Alenia Aermacchi M-346 Master, BAE Systems Hawk and Korea Aerospace Industries/Lockheed Martin T-50 Golden Eagle.
But Chadwick predicts that the USAF will favour a clean-sheet design to replace more than 450 T-38s over the next two decades.
“My perspective is the customer would prefer that,” Chadwick says. “That may seem like an obvious statement, but in today’s constrained budget one could see that they could move in a different direction.”
In such an environment, the reverse may be true. With three viable off-the-shelf candidates to replace a trainer, spending billions to develop an all-new design may not seem the obvious path for the USAF.
But Chadwick disagrees that a natural replacement exists to fulfil the USAF’s requirements for a T-38 replacement.
Chadwick’s comments appear to further distance Boeing from teaming up with BAE’s Hawk or Alenia’s M-346 derivative for T-X. Boeing currently is producing or marketing both aircraft in different countries.
Meanwhile, Chadwick also sought to revive hopes for the Super Hornet sales campaign in Switzerland. Boeing withdrew the fighter from the Swiss competition two years ago, ceding the race to the Dassault Rafale and Saab Gripen.A public referendum now is expected to decide the future for the tender to replace Switzerland’s F/A-18C/D Hornets.
“We believe they will establish a new requirement [after the referendum],” Chadwick says, “that will allow us to re-enter the competition.”
Boeing is marketing the Super Hornet to Brazil, Canada, Denmark, Japan, India and Kuwait, and other possible customers in the Middle East.
Sign In
