In the design mainly, while engines, avionics and weapons will pretty much the same.
The cockpit design , flight controls and hydraulics are different.How can the avionics be same?
how does this helicopter differ from Dhruv?
The way Mi 24 differs from a Mi 8 ,but more than that.
salient points:
>ADA will complete a feasibility study on the MCA by the end of 2011
>The MCA will be in flight trials by end of the decade, and it will be inducted by the middle of the next decade
> It will be a 20t aircraft with a 1,000km range, fitting between the 10t, 500km range of the Hindustan Aeronautics Tejas, and the 30t, 1,500km range of the fifth generation fighter aircraft (FGFA), an Indian variant of the developmental Sukhoi PAK FA.
Therefore, Subramanyam says, the MCA “does not clash” with the FGFA. He says the MCA will be comparable to the Lockheed Martin F-35, and the FGFA comparable to the F-22 Raptor
for comparison..
APG 63v2- 1500
APG 77 – 1500
APG 81 – 1200
APG 79 – 1100
Captor aesa- 1000 – 2000
Gripen NG aesa –
elta 2052 – >1500
zhuk ae – 680Does it mean the F-22’s AESA is the most advance in the world??
Hell no!The most adavanced should be something like the Raytheon NMD XBR or the EL/M 2080 or something like that!:D
Seriously , you are correct it does not only depend on the no. of T/R modules.There are several other factors as well eg antenna architecture , array manifold design , quality of individual T/R modules (element control) , waveform generators etc.However increasing the number of modules , has several advantages.The downside is the increase in cooling requirement.
Does the elta 2052 really have more than 1500? Do you have a credible source?
I thought the Elta would fit in the LCA — that makes it hard to believe it can have more than 1500 modules, unless those are very small. Or does the tiny LCA have a larger diameter than Gripen?
Many sources say that.It has 24 bricks of T/R modules and the number of bricks are customizable according to the nose diameter.
Tejas radome size 650 mm..
Gripen ..?
Beef up the other aircraft so they can take off and land from a carrier, load them up with 3000lbs + of external stores and let’s see their airshow routines…
The F-18 is a good carrier aircraft , unfortunately the Indian air force doesnt operate from carriers…and compared to the MKI , the shornet is a brick with wings.
On demand 😉 Rafale some ~840 T/R
http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?t=106727
I know..same thread see above.I dunno how I counted 898 modules..
From Tarmak blog:http://tarmak007.blogspot.com/2011/02/mioa-mantri-when-antony-got-hit-by.html

LMAO 😀
LCH specs from a presentation in aero india..

well well!If the above report is authentic [Ajai shukla is certainly more trustworthy than any other Indian journo] then I am happy!It should have been a 4 horse race from the start.Gawd knows why they included the F-16 and the Mig 35.A few well placed clauses in the RFP could have avoided that.
After flying the MKI , the pilots will indeed find the F 18 sluggish.The only thing going for the americans now is their politics as usual.
Gripen…such a nice bird..would like to compare between its aesa and the Rafale’s…
EF’s chances look the brightest.There has been lots of times when IAF has kept on using brit birds after everyone else has retired them , seems like a similar scenario in 2030..:)
Still …its like…..meh…
for comparison..
APG 63v2- 1500
APG 77 – 1500
APG 81 – 1200
APG 79 – 1100
Captor aesa- 1000 – 2000
Gripen NG aesa –
elta 2052 – >1500
zhuk ae – 680
898?
Cute babyyyy…:D
