ADA MCA medium weight class (LCA Mk II)

BadBoi

Member
Mar 17, 2018
41
7
googlegoogle
Any idea if France was willing to transfer critical technology like for engine, radar, stealth in MMRCA 1? If it was, I think France will have a very good chance of winning the current one too. I dont think any other country apart from Russia will be willing to transfer such technologies. I read an article today in which a french man was saying that they are willing to transfer tech to India for Rafale for mmrca 2.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
14,983
10,992
India
Any idea if France was willing to transfer critical technology like for engine, radar, stealth in MMRCA 1? If it was, I think France will have a very good chance of winning the current one too. I dont think any other country apart from Russia will be willing to transfer such technologies. I read an article today in which a french man was saying that they are willing to transfer tech to India for Rafale for mmrca 2.

100% of engine and airframe. The rest, they met ToT requirements for almost all except the RAM coating and the painting technique.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
14,983
10,992
India
LSA became MSA long back when its MTOW went upto 16.75 tons. But any further growth was not possible for lack of a suitable engine and EJ260 wud have been the end of the line. I decided to change the approach and opted to have an engine which has more thrust than is needed and also add growth potential to the design. The 22 ton design is fit for 24 tons without the need to change either the airframe of the intakes or the engine. The proposed engines have that kind of thrust rating. The thrust of each of these engines is same as the combined thrust of two EJ-200s. I plan to use a derated dry thrust of 100Kn and derated afterburner thrust of 160Kn from these engines which will significantly enhance the hot section life of the engine and provide the much needed single engine safety margin.

Any plans of scaling down and stealing the LCA Mk2 orders also?
 

vstol Jockey

Professional
Dec 1, 2017
6,206
12,120
New Delhi
Any plans of scaling down and stealing the LCA Mk2 orders also?
What I got to know was that IAF wants SE aircraft in large numbers to do scramble duties and for the "First day, First Show". The twin engine fighters can't scramble in a very short time. At same time IAF & IN has completely moved to swing role fighters. Multi-role and role specific aircraft not an option anymore. LCA Mk1A is a dedicated fighter with limited CAS ability. LCA Mk2 is supposed to be a bit more on Mk1A but still way below what these services need. IN will go for a mix of twin and single engine fighters for the carriers. IAF has realised that it needs more and more single engine fighters. It was pretty clear to me that this new round will also go to Rafale only. But they will be more tan willing to consider any single engine design from any Indian institution provided it has majority of items as detailed in the RFI. This RFI is more of an ASQR if read correctly.
Regarding stealth design, they will be very happy with my kind of design provided I can support the design with VHF/UHF jammers. Active cancellation is not a necessity but internal bays with very good jamming from 0.1GHZ to about 40 GHZ is what they will welcome. If MSA can turn out to be such an aircraft, the numbers for TE fighters will be drastically reduced. In fact except for these additional Rafales, there may not be anymore TE orders.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
14,983
10,992
India
What I got to know was that IAF wants SE aircraft in large numbers to do scramble duties and for the "First day, First Show". The twin engine fighters can't scramble in a very short time. At same time IAF & IN has completely moved to swing role fighters. Multi-role and role specific aircraft not an option anymore. LCA Mk1A is a dedicated fighter with limited CAS ability. LCA Mk2 is supposed to be a bit more on Mk1A but still way below what these services need. IN will go for a mix of twin and single engine fighters for the carriers. IAF has realised that it needs more and more single engine fighters. It was pretty clear to me that this new round will also go to Rafale only. But they will be more tan willing to consider any single engine design from any Indian institution provided it has majority of items as detailed in the RFI. This RFI is more of an ASQR if read correctly.
Regarding stealth design, they will be very happy with my kind of design provided I can support the design with VHF/UHF jammers. Active cancellation is not a necessity but internal bays with very good jamming from 0.1GHZ to about 40 GHZ is what they will welcome. If MSA can turn out to be such an aircraft, the numbers for TE fighters will be drastically reduced. In fact except for these additional Rafales, there may not be anymore TE orders.

I agree with your assessment here.

The I30 is still some ways away before it becomes reliable enough to power a single engine aircraft. Any idea how far behind the XF9-1 is?

Any chance the US will give you the F119 or F135?
 

vstol Jockey

Professional
Dec 1, 2017
6,206
12,120
New Delhi
I agree with your assessment here.

The I30 is still some ways away before it becomes reliable enough to power a single engine aircraft. Any idea how far behind the XF9-1 is?

Any chance the US will give you the F119 or F135?
You know my views about American equipment. XF9 started testing its hot core last year and likely to be certified by end 2018 but I30 will be online by 2020 and till than I can use 117S also.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
14,983
10,992
India
You know my views about American equipment. XF9 started testing its hot core last year and likely to be certified by end 2018 but I30 will be online by 2020 and till than I can use 117S also.

Not bad. This is right in time.

Have you spoken to them already?
 

vstol Jockey

Professional
Dec 1, 2017
6,206
12,120
New Delhi
@randomradio, XF9 and I30 engine are big engines which need a big jet starter to supply very high air/power to start them. Such a Jet starter becomes the best device for me to be used for generating air for BLC for MSA to be able to go with full load from STOBAR carriers. Plus these engines have the thrust which allows use of BLC even during combat. BLC increases the Clmax by a factor of two depending upon the span it is applied to, the hinge line and flap position. It gives a kind of edge in combat not seen before. An STR of over 35*/sec is easily achievable with BLC use during combat for a lightly loaded airframe.
I30 is better suited for my design as I want to add instability in air by use of thrustline. My design has thrustline below the wingline which will give pitch up moment to the aircraft with increase in thrust while the static design remains a stable design. The design has a CG travel of just 3% keeping the stability margins within 3%-6% thruout the flight including weapon release. If you may recall, I had stated that at the end of the day, you need a stable aircraft to fly properly and for that you can have an unstable design which becomes stable in air or a stable design which becomes unstable in air. I have chosen to add instability thru the use of thrustline to my design and control it with tail plane.
I30 has its accessory gear box on top and that allows me to have a lower position of the engine within the fuselage below that of my wingline.

Not bad. This is right in time.

Have you spoken to them already?
Not yet but will do so very soon.
 
  • Like
Reactions: randomradio

TARGET

Well-Known member
Dec 2, 2017
736
599
How about adding a thrust vectoring nozzle to LCA MK2 ;) and a canard ...

 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
14,983
10,992
India
How about adding a thrust vectoring nozzle to LCA MK2 ;) and a canard ...


We still have to see if ADA has chosen a canard configuration. They may have chosen a LERX configuration also. And then, they may have chosen neither.

Multiple designs are made and one of them is chosen. Let's see.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
14,983
10,992
India
@randomradio, XF9 and I30 engine are big engines which need a big jet starter to supply very high air/power to start them. Such a Jet starter becomes the best device for me to be used for generating air for BLC for MSA to be able to go with full load from STOBAR carriers. Plus these engines have the thrust which allows use of BLC even during combat. BLC increases the Clmax by a factor of two depending upon the span it is applied to, the hinge line and flap position. It gives a kind of edge in combat not seen before. An STR of over 35*/sec is easily achievable with BLC use during combat for a lightly loaded airframe.
I30 is better suited for my design as I want to add instability in air by use of thrustline. My design has thrustline below the wingline which will give pitch up moment to the aircraft with increase in thrust while the static design remains a stable design. The design has a CG travel of just 3% keeping the stability margins within 3%-6% thruout the flight including weapon release. If you may recall, I had stated that at the end of the day, you need a stable aircraft to fly properly and for that you can have an unstable design which becomes stable in air or a stable design which becomes unstable in air. I have chosen to add instability thru the use of thrustline to my design and control it with tail plane.
I30 has its accessory gear box on top and that allows me to have a lower position of the engine within the fuselage below that of my wingline.


Not yet but will do so very soon.

What if you end up with only the 117S/117 family instead?
 

vstol Jockey

Professional
Dec 1, 2017
6,206
12,120
New Delhi
How about adding a thrust vectoring nozzle to LCA MK2 ;) and a canard ...

Please understand that you can't add a canard and say now it must behave like Rafale. French have done the most extensive research on this and they are the only masters in CCC design. Even the Russians who are far ahead of any western country in aerodynamics have not been able to match up the expertise of French in CCC design.
LCA will need a complete redesign to be able to get the benefits from canards.
What if you end up with only the 117S/117 family instead?
Less thrust, higher weight and low on RCS & IR signature reduction ability. For prototypes they can be used but not for final product.
 

TARGET

Well-Known member
Dec 2, 2017
736
599
Please understand that you can't add a canard and say now it must behave like Rafale. French have done the most extensive research on this and they are the only masters in CCC design. Even the Russians who are far ahead of any western country in aerodynamics have not been able to match up the expertise of French in CCC design.
LCA will need a complete redesign to be able to get the benefits from canards.

EDIT --
Rafale, Euro fighter and Su 30 MKI air inlets on the under the belly so they do have complete freedom to place the canard and LCA don't have that much space for canard since air inlets are under the wings and LCA don't have a bigger fuselage like Rafale .so placing the canards will be a challenge for ADA.

LCA_Good_IDN_1.jpg

primary-eurofighter.jpg

Rafale.jpg


sukhoi-30-black.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pundrick

sid4587

Active member
Jan 10, 2018
385
189
India
any news about freezing design for medium weight fighter/medium class fighter/lca mk2 (or any other name if it has), they said in May that design wl be frozen in couple of months.
 

Shajida Khan

Senior member
Dec 27, 2017
1,514
1,580
Seattle
any news about freezing design for medium weight fighter/medium class fighter/lca mk2 (or any other name if it has), they said in May that design wl be frozen in couple of months.
I think you need to wait till winters, then it will be frozen.
 

chanakya

New member
Oct 24, 2018
3
0
Mumbai, india
I am not optimistic at all, I am completely realistic.

I pointed out we will have 3 MMRCA programs in 2015, after MMRCA was cancelled, apart from the LCA program, and no one believed me then.

TE MII and SE MII, apart from Rafale GTG.

Now we have--
36+36 Rafale GTG
TE MII
201 MCA

All 3 are MMRCAs.

Before 2015, I didn't have much hopes for our indigenous programs. But after 2015, things have changed a lot. By bringing private players in, Modi and Parrikar have changed the game completely. A lot of things have changed, particularly the attitude towards indigenous programs themselves. The perform or perish directive has really struck home.

When it comes to LCA, HAL's completely embarrassed ADA with the Mk1A. I suppose their experience with Sukhoi in designing the FGFA has helped them a lot.


Hi, went thru 3 threads worth a few hundred pages and like what I see. Random radio is already a favorite

But without any malice I must say
When random radio says, amI not an optimist, I am a realist

That is the height of optimism
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
14,983
10,992
India
That is the height of optimism

I would like to correct you there. That would be called "delusion". :LOL:

But I have my reasons for why I seem like I have become optimistic, in the last 2 years or so.

You will all share my "optimism" in a few years, when everything becomes clear. :cool:

Things are going good, really good. Not like the circus before.