Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
HAL is a publicly listed company, not sure if it can be called a "GoI arm". And as pointed out in the article it will soon be the MSME suppliers that will suffer. I expect the congies to ask if there were any delays in making payments for Rafale, and by extension to Mr. Ambani - it will nicely tie in with the ongoing 1Lac crore HAL Non-Order-Order controversy.
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
Don't give them ideas..abhik wrote:HAL is a publicly listed company, not sure if it can be called a "GoI arm". And as pointed out in the article it will soon be the MSME suppliers that will suffer. I expect the congies to ask if there were any delays in making payments for Rafale, and by extension to Mr. Ambani - it will nicely tie in with the ongoing 1Lac crore HAL Non-Order-Order controversy.
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
Dileep wrote:You millennials!!!
We inherited a lot of British legacy, and just kept them because those were for the advantage for those in power. Denying free and open communication to the masses was definitely a concern.
Use of radio receivers was one of those, and they were regulated by a license. You need to go to the big post office in town to buy stamps and stick them on the license book. The radio could be confiscated and you put in jail if you operate the radio without a license. They were de regulated in the seventies. First two band radios were deregulated and later all receivers.
The same security argument was used when telephones were deregulated. I am not talking about cell phones. The simply STD (Subscriber Trunk Dialing. The facility to directly dial a phone number in another town) was seriously opposed.
I am frankly embarrassed that this is the first time I've heard of this.
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 6141
- Joined: 16 Oct 2005 05:51
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
To be fair radio licences were only phased out in 1971 in Britain. They were ostensibly to fund radio programming unlike advertisements in the US
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
I agree. But, frankly the C295 has gone NOWHERE!!!Philip wrote:Get both.C-295 new-gen birds and upgrade as many airworthy AVROs.The IAF's logistic capability increases proportionate to the threat from the Sino- Pak axis.
" All hands to the pump", is an old saying.In a crisis even civil birds are utilised for troop movements. Old crocks still have their potential, but this should not be a devious move to scuttle the Tata- Airbus JV in the pvt. sector.DPSUs are scared sh*tless of being exposed by more competitive and productive pvt. sector majors.
Under the current situation, modernizing the 748s make perfect sense. With modern engines, avionics and cockpit, the Avros can serve us well. They have rough field and STOL capability from Day 1 which could be great for the advanced landing strips. Although it looks nice to land IL-78s and C-17s at these ALGs, their operations cannot be sustained from these strips. The strip itself takes a beating after very few landings of these heavies. The logistics to handle such large aircraft is not present. Lighter aircrafts with rough field capabilities like the 748s are ideal. The only problem is Avro's cargo doors which don't allow access from ground. IAF has flagged this one of the prime reasons for non-utilization of these assets. The intial Andover prototypes were modified from existing 748s. Can HAL do the same for all the 748s in our inventory (with or without BAe consultancy). IMHO, these are the incremental projects that ideal for HAL's budding designers. It will have immense practical use.
Also these are perfect for the Indian Navy/Coast guard medium maritime patrol aircraft. Between HAL (maritime Do-228s) and CABS (Netra's sensor placement experience), they have the ability to come up with this aircraft in 5 years.
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
do you mean our hs748 lacks the cargo door?
how much of paylaod/people can it take into a ALG? more than AN32 which has advantage of oversized engine to our high alt need?
how much of paylaod/people can it take into a ALG? more than AN32 which has advantage of oversized engine to our high alt need?
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
lol as expected the clown prince has tweeted out the same, this was full toss ball waiting to be smashed out of the park for a six. ToI has almost half a page dedicated to this story - apparently HAL did a stock buyback of 6k a couple years back apart from paying huge dividends every year. Conspicuously there is no explanation from the government. At this rate Tejas Mk1A deal may not get signed, or alteast no payment made before the elections.JayS wrote:Don't give them ideas..abhik wrote:HAL is a publicly listed company, not sure if it can be called a "GoI arm". And as pointed out in the article it will soon be the MSME suppliers that will suffer. I expect the congies to ask if there were any delays in making payments for Rafale, and by extension to Mr. Ambani - it will nicely tie in with the ongoing 1Lac crore HAL Non-Order-Order controversy.
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
The Andovers have a cargo ramp. The 748s (in IAF) have oversized cargo doors at the rear. To load through this door efficiently, one has to use pallet handlers which may not be present at ALGs.
The new engines that HAL is seeking would give the 748s similar payload capability as the 32s. The ALGs are actually not at very high altitudes.
The new engines that HAL is seeking would give the 748s similar payload capability as the 32s. The ALGs are actually not at very high altitudes.
-
- BRFite
- Posts: 446
- Joined: 28 Aug 2016 19:26
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
I suspect IAF is feeling the pinch. As I'd stated before, spending too much on a few aircraft will impact everything. Will INR being weak and everything else, this is to be expected.
Philip wrote:Unbeilevable situ! What on earth is happening in the MOD? Has the defence budget gone south od what? How can the IAF not pay HAL?
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
Yes.AVROs without rear ramps will be more difficult to handle large cargo than our AN-32s and other aircraft with rear ramps capable of carrying light vehicles.AVROs wod be best as troop transports, para- dropping,, etc.
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
Low set tail plane makes it very risky for paradropping.Philip wrote:Yes.AVROs without rear ramps will be more difficult to handle large cargo than our AN-32s and other aircraft with rear ramps capable of carrying light vehicles.AVROs wod be best as troop transports, para- dropping,, etc.
Otoh, I believe it's a presurrized cabin.
Also I think tail ramp is structurally possible. Albeit fuselage is too high (that is the reason it's tail conic is not chopped slant, as at max AOA tail is too high to risk touching runway. Very unlike AN12, 32, IL76, C17, Caribou )
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
HAridasji, you are right. You are actually describing the differences between the 748 and the Andover. Hence, my suggestion.
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
Sir, from what I know, the HS 748, the cg is too far forward to encourage rare ramp ops. From memory, cabin tube seemed narrower than "anna battis" and is considerably slower. My flight from Guwahati to Kolkata on an AVRO (long back) was 03 hrs plus. Anna battis (AN 32) has a great short field performance. I don't know about that viz. AVRO.Haridas wrote:Low set tail plane makes it very risky for paradropping.Philip wrote:Yes.AVROs without rear ramps will be more difficult to handle large cargo than our AN-32s and other aircraft with rear ramps capable of carrying light vehicles.AVROs wod be best as troop transports, para- dropping,, etc.
Otoh, I believe it's a presurrized cabin.
Also I think tail ramp is structurally possible. Albeit fuselage is too high (that is the reason it's tail conic is not chopped slant, as at max AOA tail is too high to risk touching runway. Very unlike AN12, 32, IL76, C17, Caribou )
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
Our Avros, An-32s, IL-76 have huge amount of service life left and C-17 are underutilized. We need to concentrate on buying spares & setting up hangers and maintenance facilities rather than new acquisitions
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
Hi Deejay,deejay wrote:Sir, from what I know, the HS 748, the cg is too far forward to encourage rare ramp ops. From memory, cabin tube seemed narrower than "anna battis" and is considerably slower. My flight from Guwahati to Kolkata on an AVRO (long back) was 03 hrs plus. Anna battis (AN 32) has a great short field performance. I don't know about that viz. AVRO.Haridas wrote: Low set tail plane makes it very risky for paradropping.
Otoh, I believe it's a presurrized cabin.
Also I think tail ramp is structurally possible. Albeit fuselage is too high (that is the reason it's tail conic is not chopped slant, as at max AOA tail is too high to risk touching runway. Very unlike AN12, 32, IL76, C17, Caribou )
Always a pleasure to discuss things with the knowledgeable.
1. I have not heard about the CG problem. There may be truth to it. But that is easily fixable if the empennage is going to be remodeled. Anyways, adding the ramp and its mechanism is going to add weight to the back.
2. The HS748 was designed for rough field and STOL performance from day one. That was the selling point of the Avro. The very first deliveries to South American and African countries. In fact, the the STOL features of the 748 and the 32 are very similar. Long wing, single long slotted flap, engine exhaust over the wing, etc.
3. The speed will not be a problem after the new engine-propeller fix. If they go for a 5 blade propeller, which I highly suspect will be the case, then won't need to move the engine mount. The later was the case with the Andover, which gave rise to a lot of changes.
4. I think the second source of major changes between the Andover and the HS748 was the kneeling LGs. I don't think that is needed either. When the fuselage ramp is open, it need not reach the ground. The difference of a few feet can be made up with a small ground based ramp.
5. A total of 9 HS748s were modified to the Andover variant, so it is certainly possible.
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
NSS Avro at Begumpet were most accesible to get near and into. Not to mention hours & days watching the beauty from my home window just 200 m away. From my reading the IAF Avero manuals back in 1976, it was perpaps the only IAF transport A/C with a a radar (weather radar), the turbo prop's jet component of thrust was iirc 440 kg each, constant RPM turbine engine.deejay wrote:Sir, from what I know, the HS 748, the cg is too far forward to encourage rare ramp ops. From memory, cabin tube seemed narrower than "anna battis" and is considerably slower. My flight from Guwahati to Kolkata on an AVRO (long back) was 03 hrs plus. Anna battis (AN 32) has a great short field performance. I don't know about that viz. AVRO.
I was quite impressed with its takeoff acceleration flying from Chandigarh to Dilli on an Indian Airlines flight back around 1989. Yes fuselage is narrow. Unlike Superconnie or the fatty IL76.
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
Any backward movement of CG will also have to be accompanied by commensurate shift in Center of Lift CL. Wings are not moving anywhere. So all that change will have to come from tail. Its doable theoretically, but in practice it may get into the spiral of "too big tail needed to move the CL but all that weight moves CG further downstream".Indranil wrote:Hi Deejay,deejay wrote:
Sir, from what I know, the HS 748, the cg is too far forward to encourage rare ramp ops. From memory, cabin tube seemed narrower than "anna battis" and is considerably slower. My flight from Guwahati to Kolkata on an AVRO (long back) was 03 hrs plus. Anna battis (AN 32) has a great short field performance. I don't know about that viz. AVRO.
Always a pleasure to discuss things with the knowledgeable.
1. I have not heard about the CG problem. There may be truth to it. But that is easily fixable if the empennage is going to be remodeled. Anyways, adding the ramp and its mechanism is going to add weight to the back.
PS: Question - Is HS 748 designed for airdrop..? Someone mentioned its pressurized. If its not designed to open doors at altitude mid air, then making it do so would need further structural modifications.
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
Jay,
We know that this conversion can be done and works quite well. So, I don't think that they need to change the CG too much. The Andover was used for paradrops. No less than Price Charles jumped off it.
The following link has a good video of STOL operations
https://46squadron.org/1966/09/andover-era-abingdon/
We know that this conversion can be done and works quite well. So, I don't think that they need to change the CG too much. The Andover was used for paradrops. No less than Price Charles jumped off it.
The following link has a good video of STOL operations
https://46squadron.org/1966/09/andover-era-abingdon/
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
Can't argue with that article. IAF asking for additional Pilatus at this stage is sheer stupidity.Indranil wrote:HAL fights for indigenous HTT-40 trainer, over Swiss Pilatus
If at all they need the planes so urgently, they ought to give the go ahead to HAL to setup the production facility and start issueing orders for some of the parts, so that the production can be expedited, once the certification for the HTT-40 is received.
With an order of 108 nos, HAL can setup a production facility for 12 planes per year from the 2nd year onwards.
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
https://twitter.com/proshillong/status/ ... 4500725760 - c130,an32,do228,hs748 did a combined sortie to Tezu ALG AP
https://twitter.com/proshillong/status/ ... 2117794816 - an32 did first op from pakyong airfield sikkim, earlier only do228 did.
https://twitter.com/proshillong/status/ ... 2117794816 - an32 did first op from pakyong airfield sikkim, earlier only do228 did.
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
Hello Indranil,Indranil wrote:Hi Deejay,deejay wrote:
Sir, from what I know, the HS 748, the cg is too far forward to encourage rare ramp ops. From memory, cabin tube seemed narrower than "anna battis" and is considerably slower. My flight from Guwahati to Kolkata on an AVRO (long back) was 03 hrs plus. Anna battis (AN 32) has a great short field performance. I don't know about that viz. AVRO.
Always a pleasure to discuss things with the knowledgeable.
1. I have not heard about the CG problem. There may be truth to it. But that is easily fixable if the empennage is going to be remodeled. Anyways, adding the ramp and its mechanism is going to add weight to the back.
2. The HS748 was designed for rough field and STOL performance from day one. That was the selling point of the Avro. The very first deliveries to South American and African countries. In fact, the the STOL features of the 748 and the 32 are very similar. Long wing, single long slotted flap, engine exhaust over the wing, etc.
3. The speed will not be a problem after the new engine-propeller fix. If they go for a 5 blade propeller, which I highly suspect will be the case, then won't need to move the engine mount. The later was the case with the Andover, which gave rise to a lot of changes.
4. I think the second source of major changes between the Andover and the HS748 was the kneeling LGs. I don't think that is needed either. When the fuselage ramp is open, it need not reach the ground. The difference of a few feet can be made up with a small ground based ramp.
5. A total of 9 HS748s were modified to the Andover variant, so it is certainly possible.
sorry for this on now off again phase. Present work schedule is not amenable to any disciplined forum participation.
Coming to the point on the AVRO, thank you for detailing the possibilities. One question that comes to mind is what will be the cost of these upgrades and mods and what will be the timeline? Is it worth investing on this airframe or is it better to move ahead with a new airframe?
Interestingly and off the main point, the military strategic lift and transport support to forward bases achieved through C 17s and H 130s has been so revolutionary that more and more within the military these 02 aircraft are changing the rules of the game for us. The thought and planning is evolving and I see this impacting our procurement / selection of transport options.
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
https://www.nal.res.in/en/footerdetails?ar_id=6
CSIR NAL is to get into next phase of Regional Transport Aircraft development.
"We will also be taking forward PDP of development of Regional Transport Aircraft." - Jitendra J Jadhav, Director, CSIR - NAL, 04th Jan 2019
CSIR NAL is to get into next phase of Regional Transport Aircraft development.
"We will also be taking forward PDP of development of Regional Transport Aircraft." - Jitendra J Jadhav, Director, CSIR - NAL, 04th Jan 2019
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
All AN-132 discussions moved to the International Aerospace Thread. Please read title of post before posting.
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
HAL production has a huge Q mark above its nameboard regarding reliability.Look at the excruciatingly slow prod. and delayed delivery of the LCA.Therefore the best way forward to meet the BT shortage and critical need is to buy more Pilatus aircraft, but in reduced number , with extra options, while placing a simultaneous letter of intent for HAL's bird in sufficient qty. to dnsure cost-effrctive production.HAL's bird in any case has to undergo trials with the IAFwill not enter production immediately.It will take some time to do so.Assuming a min. of 2 to 3 years for production to begin, a date must be fixed for such prod. delivefies to commence and for the interim period anc IAF need, buy PC-7s.The IAF can't
be left in the lurch especially as the IJT has been a massive flop! Training of pilots is the very foundation of the IAF. The demand of BTs will only increase as the needs of the 3 services will keep increasing as their own air air arms ( IN and IA) are expanding.
be left in the lurch especially as the IJT has been a massive flop! Training of pilots is the very foundation of the IAF. The demand of BTs will only increase as the needs of the 3 services will keep increasing as their own air air arms ( IN and IA) are expanding.
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
Classic tactics by the import lobby, they have at it since the 70's we have no other choice but to ramp up nos of LCA Tejas. But I think the present strength is 34 squadrons with IAF which could with already ordered Tejas, Rafael and last 25 odd Su 30MKi becomes 33 if no further orders are placed.
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
I use to go to post office in 1980s to get stamps for our radio annually.nachiket wrote:Dileep wrote:You millennials!!!
We inherited a lot of British legacy, and just kept them because those were for the advantage for those in power. Denying free and open communication to the masses was definitely a concern.
Use of radio receivers was one of those, and they were regulated by a license. You need to go to the big post office in town to buy stamps and stick them on the license book. The radio could be confiscated and you put in jail if you operate the radio without a license. They were de regulated in the seventies. First two band radios were deregulated and later all receivers.
The same security argument was used when telephones were deregulated. I am not talking about cell phones. The simply STD (Subscriber Trunk Dialing. The facility to directly dial a phone number in another town) was seriously opposed.
I am frankly embarrassed that this is the first time I've heard of this.
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
<OT RANT ON>
Sorry if OT. Just couldn't find a thread for Republic Day -2019. No thread or comments, across the board, this year! Or did I miss something? If there is one please move it there.
Anyways watched the "lifestream", in the western US and was waiting for the flypast. Couldn't have been a more beautiful day over the New Delhi skies!
The flypast was good but was very disappointed NO Tejas, despite having a squadron!
No SKAT'S either! Would have been awsome with some "tiranga" smoke trails, . Same gripe about the Rambhas, all of them dispensed white smoke!
I guess the "make in India" is reserved for the cardboard "tabloos" ...there was a tejas there though!
<OT RANT OFF>
Sorry if OT. Just couldn't find a thread for Republic Day -2019. No thread or comments, across the board, this year! Or did I miss something? If there is one please move it there.
Anyways watched the "lifestream", in the western US and was waiting for the flypast. Couldn't have been a more beautiful day over the New Delhi skies!
The flypast was good but was very disappointed NO Tejas, despite having a squadron!
No SKAT'S either! Would have been awsome with some "tiranga" smoke trails, . Same gripe about the Rambhas, all of them dispensed white smoke!
I guess the "make in India" is reserved for the cardboard "tabloos" ...there was a tejas there though!
<OT RANT OFF>
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
IMO, it has more to do with not having any single engined aircraft flying over the Rajpath. Even the Mirages have not made an appearance for a very long timesamsher wrote:<OT RANT ON>
Sorry if OT. Just couldn't find a thread for Republic Day -2019. No thread or comments, across the board, this year! Or did I miss something? If there is one please move it there.
Anyways watched the "lifestream", in the western US and was waiting for the flypast. Couldn't have been a more beautiful day over the New Delhi skies!
The flypast was good but was very disappointed NO Tejas, despite having a squadron!
No SKAT'S either! Would have been awsome with some "tiranga" smoke trails, . Same gripe about the Rambhas, all of them dispensed white smoke!
I guess the "make in India" is reserved for the cardboard "tabloos" ...there was a tejas there though!
<OT RANT OFF>
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
Delhi Defence Review @delhidefence
We are Twenty Five Days away from #AeroIndia2019
Here's the Ultra Light Helicopter of @HALHQBLR sitting in the Bengaluru sun, looking to enter operational service in months to come.
-
- BRFite
- Posts: 348
- Joined: 13 Sep 2008 22:04
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
Only one question can we weaponise and optimise ULH for plain of western border, may carry equal load as Rudra or lCH
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
Luh is meant to replace Cheetahs and Cheetals and needs to be inducted fast. LCH is a dedicated weaponised platform. Weaponised variants can wait, better to induct the transport ones with flares and infra red decoy systems to have defense against manpads in numbers first.
-
- BRFite
- Posts: 872
- Joined: 17 Oct 2016 14:18
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
IAF tells MoD HTT-40 certification unlikely before 2021. @HALHQBLR displayed model of the trainer at AI-2011 & mock-up at AI-2013. Certification promised by 2015. Spin trial was last known cert. hurdle. First trial in Nov 2018. Perhaps all didn't go well?
https://twitter.com/vkthakur/status/108 ... 80544?s=19
https://twitter.com/vkthakur/status/108 ... 80544?s=19
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
Ulh is not meant for attack role
Thing is keep it cheap and produce 100s fast to replace alouette3 and llama
Thing is keep it cheap and produce 100s fast to replace alouette3 and llama
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
Whats with this 2021 date..? Isn't HTT-40 supposed to get FOC this year..? They have cleared spin tests, its performance is higher than almost all ASQR parameters. Whats the problem then..??ashishvikas wrote:IAF tells MoD HTT-40 certification unlikely before 2021. @HALHQBLR displayed model of the trainer at AI-2011 & mock-up at AI-2013. Certification promised by 2015. Spin trial was last known cert. hurdle. First trial in Nov 2018. Perhaps all didn't go well?
https://twitter.com/vkthakur/status/108 ... 80544?s=19
-
- BRFite
- Posts: 348
- Joined: 13 Sep 2008 22:04
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
But we can have own cobras, LCH is optimised for highest ceilings dedicated to east and siachin so the load compromise, but ULH imho carry same weight as LCH if optimised for sea surface fightingAditya_V wrote:Weaponised variants can wait,
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
Lack of confidence and support.JayS wrote:Whats with this 2021 date..? Isn't HTT-40 supposed to get FOC this year..? They have cleared spin tests, its performance is higher than almost all ASQR parameters. Whats the problem then..??ashishvikas wrote:IAF tells MoD HTT-40 certification unlikely before 2021. @HALHQBLR displayed model of the trainer at AI-2011 & mock-up at AI-2013. Certification promised by 2015. Spin trial was last known cert. hurdle. First trial in Nov 2018. Perhaps all didn't go well?
https://twitter.com/vkthakur/status/108 ... 80544?s=19
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
Yes. This year's parade was touch disappointing - No Tejas, LCH, LUH, Arjun, ATAGS, Dhanush, etc.kancha wrote:IMO, it has more to do with not having any single engined aircraft flying over the Rajpath. Even the Mirages have not made an appearance for a very long timesamsher wrote:<OT RANT ON>
Sorry if OT. Just couldn't find a thread for Republic Day -2019. No thread or comments, across the board, this year! Or did I miss something? If there is one please move it there.
Anyways watched the "lifestream", in the western US and was waiting for the flypast. Couldn't have been a more beautiful day over the New Delhi skies!
The flypast was good but was very disappointed NO Tejas, despite having a squadron!
No SKAT'S either! Would have been awsome with some "tiranga" smoke trails, . Same gripe about the Rambhas, all of them dispensed white smoke!
I guess the "make in India" is reserved for the cardboard "tabloos" ...there was a tejas there though!
<OT RANT OFF>
But Sh Nambi Narayanan received recognition through Padma Bhushan http://www.ecoti.in/iBb7bb That puts all the disappointments away.
-
- BRFite
- Posts: 872
- Joined: 17 Oct 2016 14:18
Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015
Why Sir, Why Why ?Indranil wrote:Lack of confidence and support.JayS wrote:
Whats with this 2021 date..? Isn't HTT-40 supposed to get FOC this year..? They have cleared spin tests, its performance is higher than almost all ASQR parameters. Whats the problem then..??