My Account  |  RSS  
Friday, March 19, 2010    

Search  


India readies its light combat aircraft

Font size:

Toronto, ON, Canada, — Take lightweight composite materials and build a very capable airframe. To this, add a highly advanced avionics suite from Israel, a U.S.-made high-thrust engine for Mach 2 capability, a 23-mm rapid-fire gun and an array of Indian and Russian air-to-air and air-to-ground missiles. The end product is a lightweight, fourth-generation dogfighter combat jet. This is India’s newest fighter aircraft.

The aircraft will replace the aging but highly capable MiG-21s in India’s inventory. Priced at US$20-25 million, it will appeal to third world air forces looking for value at affordable prices.

In his “Fighter Planes 1960-2002,” Lemoine Julien describes the Indian light combat aircraft: “The fighter has been designed to match the demands of modern combat scenario of speed, acceleration, maneuverability and agility. It also incorporates modern design concepts like static instability, digital fly by wire, modern avionics, multi-mode radar … etc.”

India’s project is unlike a similar one by China that is greatly disadvantaged by an Israeli-designed frame and other parts reverse engineered with Russian and U.S. technologies, making it difficult to sell outside China’s sphere of influence. Most countries prefer to buy original technologies.

In the next 20 years, 4,000 combat aircraft of all designs are due for replacement all over the world. The timing is perfect for India’s light combat aircraft, which is currently undergoing trials. It is expected to be inducted into India’s air force in 2010 and available for export five years later. Flying the Indian Air Force’s colors successfully will be a reassurance to future buyers.

The label of light combat aircraft is mainly due to materials in the airframe. Its loaded weight is expected to be 11 tons, while that of a medium combat aircraft is 15 tons. The aircraft is comparable to fighters like the F-16, F-18, Rafael, Grippen, Su-30, and Eurofighter, which have superior metal airframes. Therefore they have been around much longer and perform the dual role of a bomber as well. They are priced in the US$40 to $60 million range.

A heavy combat aircraft fully loaded and fueled weighs above 20 tons. The Russian-built Sukhoi-MK1, supplied to India, is in this category and is the world’s best. Its Israeli-supplied avionics and most advanced Russian missiles helped it beat the U.S. F-15 and F-16 fighter jets in simulated combat. This got the U.S. Air Force so concerned that it asked to speed up the development of the superior F-22 Raptor.

The project, conceived in 1985, received its first government funding only in 1993. Its maiden flight was on Jan. 4, 2001. In between, its development was grounded when former U.S. President Bill Clinton ordered sanctions on India after it conducted a nuclear test in 1998. Engine integration to the aircraft was held up and so was the software developed for its avionics suite. It was a two-year setback.

Since its maiden flight in 2001 a number of models have been built and locally developed engines have been tested. Also, integrating several technologies from different sources has been successfully undertaken. Its weapons integration and high altitude airfield usage was recently undertaken. Its weapons suite is one of the most modern and original, designed to scare enemy ranks.

Enemy missiles cannot catch the aircraft because its composite material prevents a missile lock. Also its lightweight and high-thrust engines give it better maneuverability than the J-10 or Pakistan’s version of the JF-17 Thunder.

Its design philosophy is reminiscent of the Indian-made Gnat fighter, which in 1965 played havoc with the much-touted U.S.-built F-86 Saber jet. The latter was heavy and had difficulty chasing the very light and highly maneuverable Gnat fighters. Saber’s missiles would fly off the mark, as the Gnat turned and spiraled away on the dime.

Although Pakistan claimed to have shot down a number of Gnat fighters in the 1965 war with India, this was pure marketing propaganda for the Americans, who were selling the Saber jets in the world market and needed some outlandish claims.

What the Pakistanis shot down on the first day of the war were subsonic Vampire fighters of World War II vintage. The Vampires were sent to bust Pakistan’s tank columns heading toward Jammu in India. The Pakistanis incorrectly labeled the Vampires as Gnats.

The versatility of the light combat aircraft is in its modern heads-up display and hands-on throttle and stick, which provide accurate targeting information and reduce pilot fatigue during combat. Fly by wire is an added advantage during a dogfight.

The state-of-the-art multi-mode radar, laser designator pod, forward-looking infrared and other optima electronic sensors provide the pilot very accurate targeting information. An advanced electronic warfare suite gives it a high survivability factor during deep penetration into enemy territory. A 32-bit processor provides mission control and flight management.

It also carries the world’s best R-73 missile of Russian origin. Its wings have three hard points each and one extra under the fuselage to carry a variety of bombs and missiles. Its high-performance radar gives it a beyond-visual-range missile attack capability. Its total weapons payload is 4,000 kilograms, which is high in its own class.

The Chinese J-10 is basically Israeli designed and the cancelled “Lavi” fighter. It is another lightweight fighter in the market and has all the right design characteristics except for some of its avionics. The other electronics and weapon systems are pirated copies. China watchers have classified it as a bit higher than a third-generation aircraft based on original technologies by the Israelis in its design and development. Later, China added copied technologies but failed to impress analysts.

China’s light combat aircraft are similarly priced as their Indian counterparts at US$25-30 million.

The Pakistani-Chinese designed version of the JF-17 Thunder is a cost-effective light combat aircraft with a price tag under US$20 million and a poorer cousin of the J-10.

India is not yet ready to export its light combat aircraft, as only prototypes have flown. The first combat squadron may begin service in the Indian Air Force in 2010-11. In comparison, the Chinese J-10 has been in service for the past three years. The Pakistani JF-17 Thunder is an unnecessary waste of money, for prestige only. While China’s advantage of early delivery is now over, air forces of the world will nevertheless watch both Chinese and Indian aircraft before they make a decision.

None of the planes discussed above have flown in combat, which is their true test. That may not happen for a long time, however, as the presence of a fourth-generation fighter in any nation’s inventory may act as a peacemaker.

--

(Hari Sud is a retired vice president of C-I-L Inc., a former investment strategies analyst and international relations manager. A graduate of Punjab University and the University of Missouri, he has lived in Canada for the past 34 years. ©Copyright Hari Sud.)



[ Flag ]
andrew @ June 5, 2009 06:28AM HKT
Hari Sud is an investment strategies analyst; did he changed the profession to weapon analyst?

[ Flag ]
69ok69 @ June 5, 2009 02:07AM HKT
what complete piece of crap article. he knows nothing about the j-10 systems. this article is covered with china and pakistan country bashing and indian nationalistic pride.

[ Flag ]
Eric @ June 4, 2009 12:13PM HKT
Yeah see, my point is proven. If you click "add comments" two times then you will get your comment posted twice.

(Sorry about the three extra posts, just wanted to see if it worked)

[ Flag ]
Eric @ June 4, 2009 12:12PM HKT
Well Keith, I think that telling Andrew to get his facts right about 1962 was a bit unnecassary, I mean I can tell you all have intelligence here so there's no need to focus on something as small as a typo to diss people about. =/

Andrew what ethnicity are you then?

And I think that Andrew's repeating of his messages weren't spam but the continuous clicking of "add comments" (which he said) which would in turn place more than one of the same message..

[ Flag ]
andrew @ June 3, 2009 11:58PM HKT
I'm not Chinese~ just only want to say something truth; in Asia, the east Asian is the most aggressive and smartest; in our country, we never compare ourselves with Indian, in truth we never care about that. We are just waiting, when the USA going to weak, then we will come back. Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere will come back!

[ Flag ]
andrew @ June 3, 2009 11:37PM HKT
don't worry, I just clicked too fast:);

Keith, sorry~ I made mistake about the date bet Sino-India War, so it should be "Chinese border defeated Indian best army super easily in 1962, remember it's 1962, not 1952" Thanks Keith!:>

[ Flag ]
Keith @ June 3, 2009 01:44PM HKT
So, we have another character in the form of Andrew who has such extremely low self confidence that he needs to post the same thing 7 times!! And Andrew get your facts right before you waste precious cyberspace, the Sino-India war took place in 1962 not 1952 as mentioned by you.

[ Flag ]
Eric @ June 3, 2009 11:53AM HKT
Hmm andrew, I take it you're being sarcastic? (no need to post what you said half a dozen times though..)

Hari Sud, if you can reply to my reply some time soon please. I want to hear some of your reasoning, thanks.

[ Flag ]
andrew @ June 3, 2009 02:20AM HKT

Wow, I heard USA gov give up the F-35 project and plan to purchase 1,000 LCA from Indian.

For last 26 years, Indian updated LCA with all the high-tech in the world, including the new software can be used to defeat the transformers. Some Chinese laughing at LCA because Indian weapon only can survive in the lab and never in service for many years. I want to say this is the unique competitive advantages of Indian weapons, after next 26 years, we still need to keep updating them in the lab and we sure we can defeat anyting from China in next 10000years.

[ Flag ]
andrew @ June 3, 2009 01:58AM HKT
I guess the writer is an Indian Canadian, am I right? Indian like bragging and are cowardly, but Chinese are more low-key and aggressive. That's why Chinese border defeated Indian's best army in several days in 1952.


[ Flag ]
Keith @ June 2, 2009 05:26PM HKT

Wow, this is one article that’s generated a lot of heat and dust. So a cursory search on the LCA and going through some sites giving the advantages of this plane you come away with a balanced view. Certainly a lot of pro’s but some cons’ too.

So, to put it in brief:

Hari; Good article, but clearly belies the fact that you are an Indian and understandably proud of the LCA. It is a good aircraft but you focused too much on the positives!

Asif; Understandable response but the remark on “Mullahs” was uncalled for. Especially considering that you are a muslim too

Coolhead; Remarks in line with you name.. coolheaded

Eric; Good research and we need constructive criticism like yours

And Wilson; ………. Dude you seriously need a psychological check-up. The filth that you have spouted below is shameful and I’m sorry but all accusations on you, of racism and insulting behaviour hold good!!

(PS; just for the record, i'm not an Indian or even pro-Indian but my previous responses of being anti-pakistan may have given another impression. Mea Culpa

[ Flag ]
Eric @ June 2, 2009 03:35PM HKT
Also, Hari to the reply ofyour "independent observers" from bharatrakshak (the site itself is good, but the thing is that it's owned by indians which would definetly promote their own weapons no? Sinodefence on the other hand is owned by an english group, watering down chinese achievements to the extent of being questionable) is not entirely reliable.
In the long time that the LCA has been in development there has been many nationalistic Indians raving about it and dissing J-10 and JF-17. If you can show me that those independent observers were western (or chinese or pakistani, any country but india basically, for un-bias sake) then I might give some more credibility to you.

Umm if you may allow me to lose my temper a bit, my mouth was dropping more as I was reading this article, with the claims you, Hari make about the LCA and disregarding the J-10 and it's weapon systems and JF-17. "Unnecassary waste of money" As Wilson pointed out, is the gorshkov a waste of money? is the LCA itself not a waste of money? It's been labelled "last chance aircraft" by some pakistanis for a reason and it's not just anti indianism. (if that's a word)

[ Flag ]
Eric @ June 2, 2009 03:23PM HKT
Finally, you say the LCA is "more manouverable" than the J-10 and that it "failed to impress analysts" while some china observers have described it as "above third gen". Do you have any sources you can state? I dispute the first one, J-10 has canards which generally means quite a bit of manouverability, T/W determines acceleration. Also there was quite a famous russian observation of the J-10 last year at zhuhai, google "J-10 zhuhai flightglobal" and click on the first link.
And by "above 3rd gen" do you mean chinese 3rd gen or western 3rd gen? if the latter I seriously question which analysts and observers you talk of.
Also never is a plane made just "for prestige".. Can you please tell why you say that? Just because they didn't spend nearly three decades on it doesn't mean it's just "for prestige".
Apart from all the anti china/pakistan talk and disregarding of the J-10, and some disturbingly over the top claims, it's a good promotional article for the LCA.

BTW, I'm a chinese new zealander, which I find a coincidence because Wilson is NZ as well! wilson, let's not get too... insultive to the other side and keep good general discussion.

[ Flag ]
Eric @ June 2, 2009 03:21PM HKT
Hari Sud, I have a couple of things I want to note of your article.
First of all, a good portion of it seems to be insulting JF-17 and J-10.
Second of all, since when was the J-10 built from an Israeli airframe? I would accept your hypothesis if and only if the J-9 project didn't exist (which were both planned/made by the same company and was logical to both use similar designs, but I am not saying the J-10 did not adapt certain Israeli technolgies)
Next, how is the LCA comparable to "Rafael, Grippen, Su-30, and Eurofighter" I can understand F-16 and F-18 a bit more because they're in similar classes. But those four are all heavy or medium class jets!

[ Flag ]
Rizvi @ June 2, 2009 03:08PM HKT

@Coolhead; Good observation. Point noted.


[ Flag ]
Coolhead @ June 2, 2009 12:59PM HKT
"None of the planes discussed above have flown in combat, which is their true test." Agree, but a plane has to be built first before being flown in combat. In May 2009 it was announce that a global tender for Rs 3,300 Crore ($750 million)will be floated to acquire more powerful engines for the aircraft as the current General Electric F-404 engines do not produce enough thrust to enable the aircraft to carry out combat maneuvers with optimal weapons load. As for the radar, acquisition of an "off-the-shelf" foreign radar like Elta's EL/M-2052 is an interim option being seriously considered. To me, it seems still a long way to go. If history is any guide, by the time the HAL Tejas is finally really "ready", J-10's successor is probably already ready too. China already launched new stealth fighter project years ago. Try compare that. This reminds me of talking about sending humans to moon next year before even being able to send humans into space.

[ Flag ]
Coolhead @ June 2, 2009 12:56PM HKT
"Add a highly advanced avionics suite from Israel, a U.S.-made high-thrust engine ... Russian air-to-air and air-to-ground missiles." The end product is called "original technologies"? Do I miss something here? To me, anyone who builds airplanes is copying from the Europeans and Americans because they invented the earliest airplanes.

[ Flag ]
HariSud @ June 1, 2009 07:00PM HKT

Please guys;

Stay a bit parliamentary and balanced in your comments.

No comments will be a good idea then getting racist.


Hari Sud

[ Flag ]
Rizvi @ June 1, 2009 05:11PM HKT

Wow!! Not only does my friend here seem egg headed, hes's also got a short fuse. 3 caustic responses to one retort and he says he is tolerant!! Can't seem to handle criticism..then maybe you shouldn’t be writing in public forums !!

And yes I wouldn’t remark if you replaced LCA by the Mirage or the J-17 primarily because I wouldn’t then go through the trouble of googling the facts to find out the truth. I got two sides of a story that personally affects me as an Indian, and a proud one at that, and seeing the facts (which seem closer to the article than the issues you raised) decided to write about it.. without the invective, noxious diatribe that you are resorting to.

Your intolerance and xenophobia shows and this is not too indifferent from the Taliban line of thought …. Respect the others’ point of view my friend else you too will join the list of the intolerant, whom you guys shamelessly call “mullahs”

3 responses to HAri’s article.. 3 responses to mine. Looking forward to 3 more utterly useless remarks from you again

Respectfully, Asif Ali Rizvi

[ Flag ]
Wilson @ June 1, 2009 01:15PM HKT
Egg-headedness and xenophobia only happens in India and Pakistan. Both sides hate each other, finger pointing at each other for this and that...now that is egg-headedness.

[ Flag ]
Wilson @ June 1, 2009 01:07PM HKT
Rizvi, you can't seem to tolerate a little racism yourself. Then what if I wrote an article copying the exact words from Sud except for replacing LCA with, hmmm lets say, the French Mirage 2000, and replacing the JF-17 and J-10 and China/Pakistan language with India and LCA. Then I think, from your Indian stand point, you will no longer say "this is a well balanced article" since I will be calling LCA a "prestige item" a "waste of money" "nothing but a copy of bla bla" is that balanced Rizvi?

[ Flag ]
Wilson @ June 1, 2009 01:05PM HKT
To Rizvi, hmmm you must be Indian? Yes, no? Ha, we may be xenophobic or racist down under, but you Sud seems to want war. Rizvi my friend, you do not know what "balanced" means in any article. Obviously you were reading this article with half an eye opened. I find his mis-facts about the LCA not the only troubling thing - you fail to address his uncalled for misrepresentation of facts.

[ Flag ]
Rizvi @ June 1, 2009 12:26PM HKT
I know that racism, egg-headedness and xenophobia existed blatantly in Australia but seeing Wilson’s comments here, they seem to be highly prevalent in New Zealand too…… that is if he is from NZ!!

The article seems fair and balanced. After googling for LCA, most of the news that I found was positive (the only –ve being the delay this project has faced) so I wonder why this diatribe by Wilson! If India can produce a fighter aircraft, even it uses external parts then what si the bid geal all a about?Infact some of the positives about the LCA were found on a site dedicated to the f-16 (f-16dot com)

Rgds, Asif Ali Rizvi

[ Flag ]
Wilson @ June 1, 2009 09:47AM HKT
If Hari was bent on marketing the LCA, he should say how deficient the MiG-29 and F-16 is...for the LCA is not going to compete with J-10 nor JF-17 in the export market, it will compete with JAS Grippen, F-16, MiG-29, Su-27, JSF, etc. If Hari was really wanting to promote the LCA in face of such high international competition on the export market, then write an article saying that the F-16 was copied from Russia, that JSF uses components from 9 countries, that JAS Grippen is useless etc. HAHAHA

[ Flag ]
HariSud @ June 1, 2009 09:43AM HKT

Wilson, please do read these comments: These are also from independent observers

Bharat Rakshak - LCA News & Discussion

Comment # 1
its quite important to note this.. where if India plays correct politics and wins its clouts, can establish a fantastic public-private partnership for the production engineering setup of LCA.

LCA for the future, should also enlarge its presence with local component i.e., Kaveri and MMR in subsequent model.

Hari sud's article is great for the intl. market. good job

Comment # 2

Kartik, imho, they are very much intended inaccuracies... if you go by the gist of the article, it surely does project the intention for marketing LCA to outside India. There is nothing wrong or BS in the article to say and thrash it. Lets be honest that marketing needs lot of hype, rather reflect BRite thoughts, that chase after "the truth".

If russkies can say, their pakfas can beat the hell outta F22s, then its ok for hari to say what he has said.. /jmt

Comment # 3

Thanks Hari! Great write up. Hormuz Mama would have approved of it.



[ Flag ]
Wilson @ June 1, 2009 06:06AM HKT
I am not Chinese either. I am in fact a New Zealander and a military and political enthusiast. Whether you buy Mr Sud's article or not is obviously up to the reader. But using my own right to freedom of expression, I slam Mr Sud's facts and at least Mr Sud makes one thing clear: fighters cannot be truly compared until and unless they are tested in combat conditions. That is probably the truest statement he has made in his article. I also encourage readers to do a little research into the LCA. What you will find is a project far from perfection, in fact it has met numerous delays, and uses American and Russian avionics and armaments (therefore, far short from the great "indigenous" fighter that Mr Sud seems to pride himself on).

[ Flag ]
Wilson @ June 1, 2009 06:03AM HKT
In quoting above: "India’s project is unlike a similar one by China that is greatly disadvantaged by an Israeli-designed frame and other parts reverse engineered with Russian and U.S. technologies, making it difficult to sell outside China’s sphere of influence. Most countries prefer to buy original technologies."

Disadvantaged by an Israeli-designed air frame? How is that a disadvantage? Also compare the aircraft, J-10 is inspired but obviously there are great differences in even the airframe and you cannot just say that it is an Israeli air frame to begin with.
Difficult to sell outside China? Lets take the J-7, the J-7 is a blatant copy of the MiG-21, perhaps China's worst case of "copy-right infringement" in the combat aircraft sector. Yet, how the hell did it sell hundreds of these things to 15+ foreign customers? I do not see India doing similar.
I can then say that India's Jaguar fighters are "disadvantaged because they are British-designed air frames" or the future MCA project is "disadvantaged" because it is a project using Russian components and Russian technology and therefore cannot be sold? Am I making stupid comments? No Mr Sud, I am trying to be like you.

[ Flag ]
Wilson @ June 1, 2009 05:57AM HKT
Hari Sud needs to get his facts straight. Freedom of expression is valued, however, if we see this as a Market Place for ideas, then Hari Sud should be ashamed of himself. Because the "ideas" he sells on this free market are flawed, bias, and simply riddled with incorrect facts. To address several points:
(1) Sud fails to address that the LCA uses many components from other countries as well.
(2) This is not an article about the LCA. It is a blatant racist attack on China and Pakistan.
(3) I am surprised this guy is an International Relations manager when he holds such bias views, is bent on hating China and Pakistan, and cannot get his facts straight.
(4) Ummm, LCA is not perfect either, in fact LCA met with many delays don't you agree?
(5) If JF-17 is for prestige only, then all other fighter jets purchased by India and the US is for prestige too, no? Eg, the F-22, the biggest waste of money. Also India's purchase of the INS Gorshkov, delay after delay, price has gone up 3 times, a waste of money?









Buddhism and quantum physics
Christian Thomas Kohl

Freiburg, Germany



Where There Are Asians There Are Rice Cookers: How National Went Global via Hong Kong
by Yoshiko Nakano

Reviewed by John D. Van Fleet



Copyright © 2007-2010 United Press International, Inc.