is it apropriate for the LCA to have speed of 2.5 and above
- Thread starter XEROX
- Start date
Have you seen how big the Phalcon nose radar is? The LCA would not be able to take off, and I suspect it would fall over onto it's nose. It's much too big for such a little plane.Deltared075 said:
Do you mean how many aircraft can it vector at once or how many can it see at any one time?PJ-10 BrahMos said:
As an example, the E3C is capable of identifying over 250 concurrent targets. It can vector as many friendlies on "visual" as targets. The Phalcon is not deemed to be as capable.
The actual number of planes it can see and vector is classified. The 250 figure is very conservative. An E2c can vector 200 platforms concurrently. (again a conservative figure)PJ-10 BrahMos said:
Just assume that if it can see 250 enemy aircraft, it can prioritise the threats concurrently.
Deltared075
New Member
I know the phalcon radar size, because some people out there want all the best for LCA, no even use their brain to think how far the LCA really can go.gf0012-aust said:Have you seen how big the Phalcon nose radar is? The LCA would not be able to take off, and I suspect it would fall over onto it's nose. It's much too big for such a little plane.Deltared075 said:
And the AESA price? then the LCA will cost USD 50 million ++
Then i wonder how the Indian going to make it cheap?
lalith prasad
Banned Member
hal chief has said that the iaf will be posting an order for 40 lcas initially for about 1 billion dollars.
Deltared075
New Member
25 millions a piece and still dream of the AESA?
Admin: Please read http://defencetalk.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=2274
Future one liners that don't contain a comment of substance or some kind of input will be deleted
Admin: Please read http://defencetalk.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=2274
Future one liners that don't contain a comment of substance or some kind of input will be deleted
darklegent
New Member
Can u plz explain why not? :?
Deltared075
New Member
The LCA will use US engine, Israel EW and so on, all this advance equipment come with high price! do you ever think why a 30 years old F16 design when upgrade with AESA will cost around 50 millions++?
The AESA radar use limited technology to produce so cannot put into mass production with cheap price.
Even if India can produce it owns AESA radar, it not going to cheap!
not the worker salary that make it expensive, but the material to produce the radar very expensive!
If you think can get reduce the AESA price? maybe in future but not now.
if you can get a LCA with AESA cost 25 millions, then you can get a phalcon radar around 50 millions USD.
The AESA radar use limited technology to produce so cannot put into mass production with cheap price.
Even if India can produce it owns AESA radar, it not going to cheap!
not the worker salary that make it expensive, but the material to produce the radar very expensive!
If you think can get reduce the AESA price? maybe in future but not now.
if you can get a LCA with AESA cost 25 millions, then you can get a phalcon radar around 50 millions USD.
lalith prasad
Banned Member
the pesent version does not have an aesa radar.the ge-f-404 engine is not as expensive as you think.ofcourse the price of lca will be further reduced when the kaveri gets ready.the problem is that india does not have single crystal blade technology (i dont think china has it too).france offered to sell it to india but i dont know if india has accepted it or not .most of the israeli avionics have been indiginised and the elbit hud has been replaced by an indian one.
Deltared075
New Member
The China do have the single crystal blade technology, they use on aircraft engine long time ago. (I read from some website, forgot the link)lalith prasad said:
LCA will come out to be a very limited technology/capability aircraft mainly due to its size. I seriously doubt it will secure any outside sales success if any. The project is being dragging on forever and there is much work to be done. the very bad mix of american,israeli and indian technology will turn off most nations. the platform suffers the same problem as with mig-29's and 21's, short range. such a small aircraft can hardly afford to be crammed with all the high tech stuff ppl on this board are talking about. LCA is a remedy for large numbers of Mig-21's and thats all its going to come out to be.
Au contraire. The best Mig 29 derivative was an Elbit modified version for the Roumanians - they just couldn't afford it. The Israelis are acknowledged as being probably the best integrators of didsparate weapons systems in the world - certainly better than the european regulars such as Sagem and Thales. Why do you think the Chinese sought out Israeli expertise for their combat aircraft and missile systems. The Israeli Mig-21 conversion done for the Roumanians is also considered one of the best in the world - and was able to match Dutch F-16's in a number of areas when wargamed recently. The plane has its limitations - but the Israeli mod is certainly a beast changer.Salman78 said:
The LCA is a far more forgiving design than the Mig-21 - which is not only beset with poor handling characteristics at take off and landing, but is also victim to the traditional enemy of unreliable Russian parts supply of critical components.
As long as the LCA is not overloaded with expectations and taskings that it's not designed for, it will be a suitable platform. It's like a cross between a small mirage and a folland gnat - so it has the potential to be an effective CAS/Strike platform.
lalith prasad
Banned Member
so if china has single crystal blade technology then they definitely must have engines like m88 and the latest pw and ge engines ,or the ej200 which power the rafale,f22 and the ef2000 typhoon,then why did they go for russian engine for the f-10 and the jf17.the unique features of developing engines with single crystal blade technology is high performance for reduced weight and high reliability and resistance to fod.all the current engines have the unidirectionally solidified blades.
Deltared075
New Member
Only with the crystal balde technology don't mean they can produce engine like m88. there are lot more complicated technology need for a modern engine. by the way, i don't think the WS-10 engine was far behind the m88.lalith prasad said:
even the kavari was in the RD33 (same with China WS-13) class but the WS-10 was in AL-31F class!