Bharat Rakshak

Not being able to attend AeroIndia seminar turned out to be an advantage.. can sit in front of computer and pause the talk whereever required to make notes & also take screenshots.. A big THANK YOU to NIC for great job on the live streaming..

Okay first to go.. talk on LCH by Prasad Sampath, HAL.. SOme things are already known - I have highlighted in bold which ever parts I felt were new or important..

LCH: (Prasad Sampath, HAL)

LUH in metal cutting
2011-1012 - start of IMRH

Post-Kargil analysis led to ASR for LCH. Sanctioned Oct2006
Initial design featured nose landing wheel.. later moved to tail landing wheel due to the crashworthiness requirements. Nose-landing wheel may effect cockpit during crash landing

TD3 is planned later to include suggested improvements from flight testing of TD1, TD2
Roles - Defense against UAV's, offensive support to ground troops, rescue, other offensive roles
High manueovaribility, high survivability, low vulnerability, higher degree of crashowrthiness, Night & day operations, high reliability built in through desing

IDAS, hingeless main rotor, bearign less tail rotor, ARIS -- common from ALH
LCH doesnt have the other active vibration control because of space requirements.. so structure built with slight weight penalty to withstand higher vibration
Shakthi engine (Shakthi lifts 200kg at 6km alt on ALH)

Survivability:
IR suppressors for Engine IR
Dual engines, Dual - hydraulics
NBC
pressurized cockpit (not in ALH)
flat panles to reduce glint


Weapons:
AA, Rockets, AG, Datalink, Turret guns

Makes a confident & sweeping statement "LCH the most agile helo in the world today"
move from Push-pull rods to push-pull cables to reduce weight, improve maintainence.
MLG, TLG tested for crashworthiness

We have had to reduce about 350kgs from initial estimates which we did fairly successfully

Modifications based on TD1 flight tests:(for drag reduction, flight performance)
Optimization of cowling scopps
MLG fairing
modified armament boom --> new design more of a wing (boom with an airfoil shape). Booms are removable.
TLG fairing
Tail end plates removed (were giving more horizontal stability than required.. so removed to reduce drag)


Completed 65flights covering 35hrs
AFCS turned on - the LCH was more stable than ALH even without AFCS. Pilots were extremely impressed with the stability. The AFCS was similar to ALH - we only needed very minor tweaks for gains during roll as LCH has lower roll inertia compared to ALH.

TD2 paining will be a huge surprise.. It is very fancy painting that I would love for you all to see. This kind of painting is not done anywhere in the world.

Also in pipeline is the indigenous development of IDAS, AFCS

Some screenshots compiled into one image

Any new info on AMCA ? I missed Subramanyam sir's presentation because of work. It was "Combat Aircraft for Tomorrow" from 3-3:30 today.

rakall did you catch it?

All the presentations can be viewed in "Video Demand Section"
Excellent work by NIC. Fast buffering and high resolution.. very impressive

Dont worry.. I will catch every talk one by one on the Net. Thanks to the great job by NIC - superb video/audio feed & superfast buffer response.

Right now on HELINA

HELINA, K.S.Varaprasad, DRDL, DRDO

NAG - For Mechanised Infanry with 4km range, LOAL – fully autonomous after launch
Helina – Use existing technogy on Nag with some additional LRU’s (radio link or fiber optic link)and increase range to reduce development cycle time and achieve immediate time compatibility with LCH. Parallel effort develop an indigenous high-rez seeker with 7+km stand-off range.

Making Nag compatible for 7.5Km range:
Improve propulsion – either sustainer or booster
Guidance aid – with current seeker not possible to see beyond 3km, so we need a guidance aid. So decided on a two-way, secure,jam-proof RF datalink. Command & guidance upwards, video & health monitoring downwards,

LOAL scheme using RF link:
1.WSO acquires target through EOp
2. Align Helo to the required Azimuth & put the TAS in auto-tracker mode; LRF fired to get target ranging, seeker slaved to TAS
3. Based on range determined from LRF, the onboard computer decides the trajectory – top-attack or flat trajectory (WSO has the authority to override if required)
4. WSO places a target-gate and fires the missile
5. Missile maintains a course +/-1deg in azimuth while the seeker maintains a FOV of 3deg (to be later reduced to 2deg). As the missile closes in the pilot gets a clear video of the target through downlink.
6. Based on the video feed he gets, WSO can adjust the target-gate to give mid-course guidance.
7. The WSO can guide the missile all the way through OR choose to put it in “LOCK” mode and let the auto-guidance take over

The auto-jam features of the RF-link and the resolution of the video play a major role. Only these two are developed for HELINA, everything else is same as in NAG.

FCS provides interface with the Helicopter through launcher interface unit (LIU). 4 launchers with 4 launcher interface units each capable of controlling 2missiles = 8 HELINA max possible for each LCH. Each launcher is autonomous by itself. There is one RF-data transmission system on each side of the helicopter. Each LIU has its own cooling system with a time of 2hrs for 2missiles (as per the sortie time specified by the user)

Launcher has to be isolated from the vibration of the Helicopter frame. Within the required weight limits the launcher has been developed and captive flight tested – no worries on this part.

After the sortie only the two missiles (within their tubes) per launcher have to be changed. The launcher need not be changed. It will take only 2mins to change the two missiles housed in the tubes.

Has multi-carrier CDMA & multi-code CDMA to make sure the command guidance of two Helo’s flying together (300m apart and so on) doesn’t get mixed up (this was in response to a question).

Tandem warhead able to defeat 800mm thick (ERA) armour - great success with NAG.

Future growth potential:
Non-LOS targets
Weaponization of UAV’s for BVR targets

Screenshots from HELINA the presentation for BR records: Many screenshots compiled into a single panorama image.

Crossposting from AWACS thread:

Just went through "Airborne Surveillance" seminar at Aero-India NIC website (awesome show by NIC...quick buffer and good resolution videos. Great job guys!)

AVM PP Katarki CABS,DRDO
“Indian AEW&C System: Development through Networking Knowledge Sources”

Role of Indian AEWC is to detect, track, command & control system...act as an compliment to Phalcon system .

Salient features of the system:
• AEW&C has AESA
• Self protection suite from DARE consists of RWR, MAWS, CMDS
• Platform has 2 APU, additional cooling packs (I think in total 3)
• In-flight refueling probe
• 59 different antennas mounted on the airframe.

Differences b/w Indian systems and comparable systems mounted on Embraer platform
• Has elevation scan to overcome aircraft banking problems - limited to 7-10 deg
• Has IFF Mk.12 with S-mode capability (S-band is indigenous while high capacity L-band is imported)
• 360 deg coverage ESM
• COM Support Measure (CSM) and recording ability for offline analysis
• High capacity C-band datalink for Line of Sight air-ground & ground-air transmission
• Beyond LOS SatCOM of similar capacity
• 7 VHF sets...provides data & voice.
• Up to 5 operator Work Stations
• In-flight refueling probe...has seats for refueling crew as well

Whole system will be in compliance with FAR 25 and Embraer is responsible for getting the certification. First platform with dummy AAAU is expected to roll out from Embraer facility on Feb 21 2010. Flight campaigns to certify the system will be undertaken at Brazil. CEMILAC is responsible for functional certification of the system. As the first platform arrives in India, dummy AAAU will be replaced by actual one. Further flight tests will be undertaken to validate the system. IAF has been involved in the project at grass roots level. Apparently, IAF helped a lot to establish algorithms for detection, interception & pursuit protocols. A lot of ground systems to simulate, fabricate & validate these avionics have been established.

I am just posting highlights. Hopefully Rakall will provide a much more professional & comprehensive report on the same

I captured one screenshot which I thought was unseen.



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

This presentation was followed by a dude from Elta. He was presenting their latest solutions for Special Mission Aircrafts. Interestingly, they have integrated a X-Band radar underneath the fuselage towards the aft for SAR/GMTI identification (sort of JSTARS thingy...may not be that capable though) and an EO/IR suite underneath the fuselage towards the middle of the aircraft. He said with these integration, the aircraft can be used for Ground recon, limited Maritime Patrol and Anti-piracy operations as well.

The presentation of PS Subramanyan was more on the technical side. He focused on mission and technological requirements of next gen manned aircraft (AMCA) and UAV (Aura). He spoke of the mission requirements of strike aircraft and stressed on importance of super-cruise and super maneuverability, challenge in wings design and intake design (flow control in serpentine intakes).

Combat Aircraft for Tomorrow. PS

Not much of a peek or insight into the AMCA/NGFA as we might want to call it.. More of a talk on the technology required for those – serpentine intakes, conformal weapons bay etc.

- Studies initiated for understanding unsteady flow patterns during store release from conformal weapons bay.. Especially during supersonic flight.
- Flow control in serpentine intakes with bleed, without bleed and airjet injection to ensure high pressure recovery. Lot of research going on the academic institutions..

Talks of TVC achieved without nozzles – by having deflectable vanes/fluidic actuators that can manipulate the flow to provide required attitude control without TVC nozzles.. this might be more effective in UAV/UCAV’s (at least in near future) rather than fighter a/c where you need very quick control response... I thought this was extremely positive – we are trying to think away from the established solutions such as TVC nozzles which are prone to fatigue... willing to try new things.. However the question is how extra effective& different are these things when compared to the flaps, and other aerodynamic control devices in providing control.. (although they can provide separation control to an extent and in that way improve the effectiveness of aerodynamic control surfaces by preventing flow separation on them at high AoA)

Indian AEW&C System, AVM PP Katarki, CABS,DRDO

Many points Zynda seems to have already captured in his post.. Also refer to his post for completeness .

Role specified by IAF – detect, track and act as a command & control function complementing the bigger IL-76based system.

-Primary radar with added elevation scan to overcome banking problems (7-10deg)
-IFFmk12 with S-mode capability (mode4, modes, level2 interrogator developed inhoise except for the high-power L-Band amplifier which is imported)
-360deg ESM
-CSM & CSM recording for offline analysis
-C-band highcapacity datalink for LOS A-G & G-A; Ku-Band Satcom for non-LOS
-7 V/UHF sets with data & voice – 5for operators & 2 for flight crew
-5OWS (additional flight seats for additional set of crew), IFR

There is a comparison slide of how the systems on CABS AEW&C against what is there and what is missing on similar systems around the world.. As you can see the indigenous AEW&C system has all of it, where as other systems around the world is missing some systems in their architecture. (refer to the picture poster of the slides). (This to me signifies two things – while the others have made some design compromises, the IAF wanted all the systems on it – a clearcut case of IAF brochiritis, and also why there is no space/weight left to accommodate antennas for fore/aft coverage.. thankfully IAF made that compromise & did not ask for 360deg coverage)

Certification responsibility lies with Embraer (platform along with dorsal unit).. Close co-operation between Embraer & CABS team for all the real estate management, CG management etc stressed. IAF, CEMILAC etc are always in loop at every stage while affecting any changes/modifications. First AAAU (mass & CG equivalent dummy) handed over to Embraer, rollout in 21 Feb2011. The electronic AAAU will be ready by the time Embaraer finishes flight tests of the airframe.

-Aerodynamic & Inertial loads at different points in the operating envelop estimated from windtunnel and passed on to Embarer.
-8.24m long dorsal unit tested for lighting protection (high voltage & high current modes)
-T/R module technology is prone to denial. It not only has to be designed & mass produced but has to be flight qualified, airworthiness certified, air cooled etc – we have been able to do it all in-house (with help of Astra Microwave, Hyd)

AAAU unit already tested for transmission & reception from rooftop against opportune & assigned targets – which means they tested it against normal Bangalore flight traffic, as well as some specific experiments where they flew certain a/c with a view to test the system performance. Tested in target crossover mode, multiple targets, highly manoeuvring targets already.
-All individual systems tested in standalone mode on AVRO platform. IFF tests on AVRO proved the Range, azimuth accuracy, scan time & coverage.
-ESM & SPS under integration.
-IAF is still evolving its concepts of battle management, command & control (I think they will evolve as the experience with operating the Phalcon build-up).. the IAF team embedded at CABS acts as a continuous conduit for two way transfer of information... the algorithms for intercept based on collision, pursuit and offset are being developed and under validation.. the IAF team along with fighter controllers evaluate and clear these.. the software is being developed in 3-4builds with added functionality along the way.. Look into the picture poster that I wil post. One of the simulation scenarios where a AEW&C detects a F16 and about to vector a Mig29 on to that.

In the concluding remarks after the talk, Dr.K.Thamilzmani, CEMILAC remarks that the program is on schedule.

For completeness & records, adding up a post from AeroIndia2007

this aesa tech development is good but could they deliver operational mechanically scanned antenna AEW 10 years ago?

They did. The S Band on the ill fated Airavat program could routinely detect and track fighter sized targets at ranges exceeding any IAF aircraft radar, against ground clutter, it also had a secondary radar (IFF) and India's first own hybrid navigation system (if I recall using GPS input or some other correction factor) versus routine INS. Next step was to develop a full control portion with mission control system etc.

http://iaf00.tripod.com/awacs.html



Unfortunately the crash took away the key persons & MOD developed cold feet and cancelled the program.

i know this that airawat crashed but even when they reopened the aew program were they able to deliver without delay MSA if not aesa.

LCA Navy - “Flight Testing for Naval Requirements” Captain Jaideep Avinash Maolankar,Indian Navy

I Love this Mao.

(I absolutely love this guy. I have been postponing a post from AeroIndia2009 – where I witnessed how he courageously stepped forward to take questions at ADA pavilion and gave excellent answers to a Congress MP who just had a sortie on F18. He basically explained, or rather educated the idiotic congress MP on the sanctity, necessity of continuing with the LCA program instead of just buying what the Americans can offer us. The answer basically encompassed not only the technological aspects, but operational & maintenance aspects.. and the socio-economic aspects as well.

So for all those who have time – I RECOMMEND watching his talk under the “Flight Testing” theme on NIC website)


-NP2 will come by the end of the year
-LEVCON leads to a lower approach speed; As well as a flatter trajectory on the Weight to Approach speed curve. Mao feels it is a surprising curve and eager to see if it is really the same in testing
- LG is over-designed.. too strong as it is now. The over-design of the undercarriage from the fact that the decision was taken to only strengthen the centre fuselage section when arrester hook, Naval LG were added to AF-trainer to make it Naval-trainer. So it had to be attached to the same points on the fuselage – that led to a compromise leading to a LandingGear design with “heavy” biceps.. effective in the short term but not good for weight.. So ADA has accepted the NAVY recommendations to re-design the LandingGear in Mk2.
-Mao says “we look at it as a TD feeding less into operations, but a lot more into Mk2 design which will have all issues fixed” (Superb Positive Attitude).. He goes on to say “I think that is the right way to go, bcoz we have to accept we have been too ambitious”
-Not all changes planned have been incorporated into NP1. Some will come in NP2. And the rest will come in Mk2. Calls the LG design a “first cut Navy undercarriage”.

-The Airforce standard intake optimized for buzzfree flow upto M1.8 but it is starving the engine at sealevel, lowspeed flight corresponding to SkiJump launch. Able to get a little bit more thrust from the engine for NP1.
-NP2 will have redesigned intake for increased thrust at SL takeoff. (Says it will do better displays than the current AF fighter). Full Navy specific avionics suite will be in NP2.
-Will have more fuel than the NP1 as well as AF-single seater (Doesnt say how. Can somebody ask at ADA stall?)

Okay.. this is interesting – He says ship motion tests are going to be very interesting. We have to approach this with a lot of caution.. We don’t have experience with this.. I think we will either end up with a compromise aircraft or a BROKEN AIRCRAFT.. I expect atleast one of the test aircraft is going to break.. and that is something we have to accept and move forward”.

-We will go to sea with a auto-throttle, auto-pilot as the expertise we have developed with FCS allows us to do some interesting things (That kind of confidence from a TP is good news for the LCA FCS). Looks good on the simulator, I hope it works that way in the actual aircraft.

Images from LCA-Navy talk by Capt.Maolankar

Capt.Moulankar also showed a Ukraine based SBTF. Regarding the weight/approach speed using LEVCON he said he was skeptical but would love to be corrected. He also said he would not like to be there when the on-ship testing is being done since it is one of the most challenging ones. Interesting thing about the stuff from harriers take off(theta ) that they are going to use for lca to do hands free take off( ) The SBTF has ski board/arrestor system/parallel runway and Arrestor gear/telemetry workshop at Goa. He also said it is a wonderful place because there is a 150ft cliff right after the ski jump so it is useful. He said something like Naval full suite avionics is a must,
any idea how they differ from the AF avionics suite ?
Apparently he is available at the EXPO so all you enthusiasts going there can ask him questions about NP-1
Looks like a long way to go for the NP reaching IOC but once it is there it is going to sit on iac2/3
I guess ADA/Navy were wiser after the experience with IAF and test pilots were giving their inputs right from the time the aircraft was being designed.

He also said something about telemetry complexity towards the end, didnt quite get it

25 mins was too short he should have been given an hour

Today topic of interest are

Mr. VS Chandrashekar Group Director, ADE, DRDO
Overview of MAV research and development at ADE

Shri P R Baghel Regional Director(A/C), CEMILAC
Airworthiness Certification of Light Combat Aircraft Tejas

Mr. Edmar Thomaz da Silva Embraer, Brazil
AEW&C India Flight Test programme for basic platform certification under FAR-25 rules

Dr. VC Padaki Director, DEBEL, DRDO
Challenges in fighter aircrew life support technologies

Dr. UK Revankar Director, DARE, DRDO
Advances in Airborne Multi Sensor Warner EW Systems

Dr Abhay Pashilkar Scientist, NAL, Bangalore
“Augmented Engineering Environment for Next Generation Regional Transport Aircraft”

Mr. ML Sidana NAL, CSIR
“Roadmap for Technology and product development of high altitude airship in India”

Mr. Anuj Kumar Garg IIT, Kanpur
Design Analysis and Optimization of Geostationary Stratospheric airship hull and fins

Mr Senthil Kumar S IIT, Kanpur, India
Aerodynamic Characterization and trajectory estimation of guided projectile configurations

Mr. Ashish Pallapottu IIT, Kanpur, India
Radio Controlled Variable stability aircraft

X-post

Very interesting Q&A
He did not want to talk about seeker tech for Land Attack Version.
when asked he said Long Range >5000KM possible for both supersonic and Hypersonic version
Su-30 MKI to carry only one Brahmon in Central pylone..

^^^^ 5000km or 500km Boss?

Is it only live videos or are they cached somewhere ? Going to the http://aeroindialive.nic.in/ following only says "page cannot be displayed" error message.

same thing for me too, may be some upgrade

The site seems to be down. It was working a while back. And yes, the videos are cached. The streaming speed is surprisingly good.

rakall sir thanks for the summary..may i add few points.

Flat trajectory of the curve in the Weight Vs Approach speed graph gives indication that there will be no restriction on payload that it can bring back to the Carrier while landing.
LG is designed as per guideline- not purposely over-designed. But it came heavier. To reduce the weight they have to adopt less conservative approach in doing that. In establishing such design cut there is a risk of breaking the aircraft. He quotes his Sea Harrier experience.

Becoz of the drooped nose with enhanced spine, it can hold more fuel compared to AF-single seater.

5000. Five thousand. thats what he said

One more thing Capt.Moulankar said that NAvy allows their NAvy test team to request changes autonomously which helps in faster decision making. Sri Baghel says they have worked every Saturday from August 2010 until IOC

Guided R-73 firing not done yet
CMDS integrated with RWR not done yet
and some things missed the slide

Can a link to the live feed site be added to the first post as well?

Pata nahi kis ki kaali nazar lagi site is down

http://aeroindialive.nic.in/# is back up now.

Link for viewing:

http://aeroindialive.nic.in/ondemand.asp

To the posters - thank you so very much for sharing. You have already done superb job and a greatly appreciated service.

Thanks for the confirmation prasadji That would be the worlds longest range cruise missile

Reference presentation by Navy Test Pilot on LCA:

-----------------
Dynamic individual with a great sense of humor & a very dynamic way of expressing things.

On intakes - he says:

LCA (AF) ie LCA MK1 has an intake designed for buzz free operations till 1.8Mach. We'll probably use a different intake for LCA Navy on Mark 2, for carrier specific launch conditions, at low speeds at high alpha as these are the conditions experienced for Ski Jump Launch!

He also notes elsewhere, that these test requirements dont exist for the AF version & the Navy is trying to have them done first for their aircraft in the MK2 version, which is contrary to the IAF plan which builds such requirements (normally) towards at the end via envelope expansion.

Begins the presentation with a statement the Navy is last to present today, and has to make up for other peoples mistakes as usual, looking at the panel with an AF officer in it & everyone smiling. What a sense of humor.

So in other words, the LCA AF intakes dont have issues (buzz free) for AF & the Navy may change them for naval conditions ie ski jump.

Also says MK1 will be nothing to scoff at (exact words) but MK2 will meet what Navy expects for 20 years.

Basically everything AWST's Neelam Mathews wrote was junk.

Makes a wry comment with a smile that the US Navy has not done the work for India, ie they dont use ski jumps and conventional recovery with deltas, that too FBW ones. Full of wisecracks, but an insight every second, with a level of detail that is incredible.

Points out at every level that the Naval program is extremely challenging, extremely ambitious & the Navy has kept things simple. First, demo the aircraft can actually take off from a carrier, clean, build loads & then move to the next stage.

Humorously refers to the undercarriage, as "we did everything by the book and now we have an overengineered undercarriage" and then amidst smiles, says (something like) we will try things, even if we either end up with at least one compromised aircraft or broken undercarriage but thats fine, we can (paraphrasing) live with it...and then realizes ex CEMILAC or DGAQA (?) guy is in the panel, laughing, and looks at him and says "i know you expect me to slip up here but i wont"...LOL!!

Brilliant presentation! I wish he had dwelt more on the LCA performance itself but he is very upbeat about the aircraft itself from the early part & is dwelling more on the challenges expected. From the presentation, its clear huge challenges have been overcome at the AF/LCA end as well, mores the pity, there is no NFTC guy presenting on it, like they did circa 2005 or thereabouts.

The most significant from the AeroIndia2011 so far was th elast bit that Pillai spoke during question answer session..

Question: Is Su30MKI going to carry only one Brahmos between the engines or there is some talk of a special batch of Su30MKI's being configured for 2misssiles.. is it true?

Pillai: The airlaunched version will be fitted on Su30MKI's manufactured in India.. they will be produced at HAL, Nasik.. a batch of Su30MKI's that will be produced in a special configuration... this batch will be able to carry one Brahmos..

Any guesses.. what that means? There is a lot of depth in that statement...

He is saying the Brahmos carry SU-30MKIs will be produced in Nasik. And they will carry only one Brahmos.


In other words no need to send the Su-30MKIs to Russia for the adaptation.

Do you see something else?

I see something deep -- I repeated the answer 4-5times to assess if he meant "they will be specially configured to carry Brahmos"... But his answer seemed slightly different..

They will be wired as special delivery platforms !!! Ofcourse, Brahmos will be one parcel of the special delivery.. I believe there will be other Valentine gifts slated for special speedpost delivery from this special batch...

If we can take things one step forward - imagine a 300km+ range standoff distance delivery of a strategic payload with a cruise missile that is least vulnerable to interception. (think dirty thoughts!!!)