LCA news and discussion

abhiti · Post by **abhiti** » 21 Aug 2009 17:29

Sanku wrote:Oiii I really want to read the posts, but it is impossible to read it with all the Pinglish. Please please please talk in normal forum language.

Sanku sahib Yindoo language is too funny. Don't be lazy try to read it a little more closely. It is like a free ticket to a comedy show. I have been laughing reading this since yesterday.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 21 Aug 2009 17:34

abhiti wrote:
Sanku wrote:Oiii I really want to read the posts, but it is impossible to read it with all the Pinglish. Please please please talk in normal forum language.
It is like a free ticket to a comedy show. I have been laughing reading this since yesterday.

There is already a thread for that already

I cant make out a technical argument in Allah's own language.

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 21 Aug 2009 17:40

This is all very unkind to gentle mullahs like me hu are only on temporary exile from the Ell-Em-Yoo. Actually came hiyar because I thought the "ELL" in Ell See Yay was for "Lalmullah"

dinesha · Post by **dinesha** » 21 Aug 2009 18:57

Here is one such chance to bisect the engine..

Russia to deliver engines for Indian MiG fighters

16:0821/08/2009
ZHUKOVSKY, August 21 (RIA Novosti) - Rosoboronexport and Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL) have signed a contract at the MAKS-2009 air show on the delivery of 26 RD-33 series 3 engines to India, Russia's state arms exporter said on Friday.

The RD-33 series 3 is an upgraded version of the RD-33 powerful RD-33 turbofan engine with thrust vectoring for MiG family fighters. The engine provides superior maneuverability and enhances the fighter's performance in close air engagements.

In 2005, Russia signed a $250 million deal with India to modernize engines for the MiG-29 fighters of the Indian Air Force. According to the terms of the deal, HAL will make 120 RD-33 series 3 jet engines at its Koraput plant for the upgrade of MiG-29 fighters.

The current contract will help HAL master the assembly of the RD-33 jet engines and use the experience in the assembly of next generation jet engines.

"These engines are installed on MiG aircraft, including the MiG-35 fighters, which are participating in the announced tender on the delivery of 126 fighters to the Indian air force," a Rosoboronexport official said.

Six major aircraft makers - Lockheed and Boeing from the United States, Russia's MiG, which is part of the UAC, France's Dassault, Sweden's Saab and the EADS consortium of British, German, Spanish and Italian companies - are in contention to win the $10 billion contract.

Russia has said that the first two MiG-35 aircraft will be delivered to India in August for test flights prior to the results of the tender. In late 2009, Russia will conduct a series of flight tests with live firing for an Indian air force delegation at a testing ground in Russia.

Moscow has also said it is ready to transfer all key technology to India's Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. and provide assistance for the production of the aircraft in the country if MiG-35 wins the tender

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 21 Aug 2009 19:37

That is surely a welcome development, but without some major surgery at HAL, there is no reason for optimism that HAL will learn anything except to ASSEMBLE the engines. IOW, to decode the instructions on which part goes where and in what order. This is in fact the historical practice at HAL since the 1970s - zero curiosity or learning evident despite having manufacturing blueprints for engines, test facilities (including "Test cells"), blade profile measurement and inspection instruments, and everything else that money can buy - except the organizational culture or motivation of learning to advance the state of technology in India.

AmitR · Post by **AmitR** » 21 Aug 2009 20:36

narayanan wrote:That is surely a welcome development, but without some major surgery at HAL, there is no reason for optimism that HAL will learn anything except to ASSEMBLE the engines. IOW, to decode the instructions on which part goes where and in what order. This is in fact the historical practice at HAL since the 1970s - zero curiosity or learning evident despite having manufacturing blueprints for engines, test facilities (including "Test cells"), blade profile measurement and inspection instruments, and everything else that money can buy - except the organizational culture or motivation of learning to advance the state of technology in India.

...

Rather depressing commentary of our engine development technology. I can't help but compare the Chinese work ethics against our own. We cannot produce engines even when the technology is being offered on a platter.

prabir · Post by **prabir** » 21 Aug 2009 21:03

Why can't GTRE and ADA emulate positive points from ISRO ?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 21 Aug 2009 21:16

Allright enough Pinglish here.
Please, use normal language here thanks, ramana

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 21 Aug 2009 22:06

ADA has enough of a record of doing very difficult things - they developed the LCA, hey? But I wouldn't be complacent about that. I think many of the LCA development team who stayed with the project since the beginning, have now left/ retired. Don't know enough about the present generation.

For the rest, it is a sheer failure of the Top Ppl that engine technology has been so horribly neglected all these years. This is what needs to be very clearly and bluntly articulated.

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 22 Aug 2009 02:43

dinesha:

The current contract will help HAL master the assembly of the RD-33 jet engines and use the experience in the assembly of next generation jet engines.

Way back circa 1970s, the Soviets sent (donated?) several RD-9 jet engines to India as an option to power the HF-24. At that time, Axial Compressor engines were rare, and India had none. The centrifugal compressor engines available through United Queendom were real pigs - very large frontal area and low thrust/weight for the job.

India was unable to use the RD-9s. Why?

Reasons given were:
1. Engine mounts were on the bottom for the RD-9 and on top per the HF-24 design (or vice versa).
2. There were no tools available to take the RD-9 apart/ work on them - all the spanners, wrenches etc. were for British engines (not metric, I assume).

So the brand-new RD-9s were sawed open and used as cutaway display items. There was one sitting in the lobby of the Aero dept. at IITM.

Think about the reasons given, and you see why I say it has nothing to do with money - it has everything to do with willingness. Can you imagine a country that built state-of-the-art bullock carts, not to mention diesel locomotives - being unable to make spanners and screwdrivers to fit the nuts and screws on an engine? Can you imagine the designers being so backward that they couldn't adapt an airframe design to fit the mounts on an engine?

So the HF-24 went from using one RD-9 to using TWO British engines - the weight went way up, and the fine coke-bottle-shaped airframe got fatter and heavier and was unable to go anywhere near the speed of sound except in terminal dive. Instead of an air superiority fighter as Kurt Tank's design team intended, (what did the "F" denote, I wonder) it became a MultiPurpose Combat Aircraft - meaning a second-line bomber.

On the first test flight (all stories from eye-eye-tea faculty, I was just a gullible undergraduate and am not responsible for them

) they cranked it up and went all out, and the plane ran and ran and ran - the pilot refused to bail out - and it eventually lifted, and the undercarriage struck a sand dune off the end of the runway and the plane cartwheeled and the pilot died.

I don't know how exact the stories are, but I do know that the old Design Prof was very obviously and deeply feeling guilty about that accident. And I do know that engine was sitting there - very clean and not a sign of ever having been used, with all its shiny blades, and the plexiglass-covered cutaway section.

Meanwhile, students who toured the HAL Engine Factory were proudly shown all the neat facilities for blade contour measurements, this measurement, that measurement, and the roars came from the Engine Test Cells visible a hundred meters away pretty regularly as production engines (all big centrifugal compressor turboprop engines, maybe for the HS-748 ) were tested. I remember asking them why they couldn't use this knowledge to design indigenous engines.

No no no no no yaaar! It is not so simble! Everything is built under licence onlee! We are only allowed to build straight from the blueprints, not to modify them in any way! All proprietary technology onlee!

Meanwhile, down the road, GTRE, with the Kaveri Advanced Ten Stage Axial Compressor Engine Cutaway Model sitting inside a glass cage like a dinosaur skeleton, promised great things to come. Variable Inlet Guide Vanes, maybe all sorts of other buzzwords, I can't remember. Other than that there was no evidence of any work going on at GTRE - the offices were empty and we could peer in and see the neat drawing tables with nothing on them, the staff were apparently busy keeping the coffee shops in business. The garden outside looked well-tended.

And Sankuji bemoans the non-existence of Engine Test Cells, even as he wails about the sheer mental strain of reading Pingreji - though he has nothing to contribute to the discussion except a grand declaration of the wonderful work ethic of GTRE. Wonder if the GTRE folks ever took a detour on the coffee shop - 2- office path to wonder where the roaring sound was coming from.

If the transfer of advanced machines and manuals could ensure technological advancement, Pakistan today would be ruling Japan, hain?

Read the Michael Crichton book "CONGO" - and wonder why the inhabitants and inheritors of a great civilization, a technological marvel, were unable to advance the technologies handed to them, even though they were strong, powerful and "willing to work hard".

Unless there is structural "reconstruction" (in the Donald Rumsfeld sense) of the whole setup, no amount of infusion of RD-33s or RD-154s or F-135s is going to turn GTRE into a RESEARCH establishment, or advance the technology of jet engines in India.

Sorry about the very harsh examples that I cite, but the problems are very very deep-rooted, and cannot be solved without drastic action. 40 years is long enough to wait, for pigs to start soloing in supercruise.

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 22 Aug 2009 09:44

N Guru you forgot to mention much touted and films division mandatory screening of HJE2500 engine.
Hindustan Jet engine 2500........

Past several days I was wondering after looking at every public sector units like CLW, DLW, BHEL, BHPV,HEC, HVF, OFPs
man we have everything, everybody says in their web pages they can do turnkey projects, design ground up all kinds of things.

Then I see thatKilo class power packs (comparable are already made in DLW, including the 20cyl engines Locomotive which are exactly the same kind needed in Deisel subs, everybody says the have special welding departments R&D to anything yet nothing is done with out yet again a collobration....

I think few people who can design the product and then sub contract the components and thempackage them can sell at huge profit...

yes I read the book Congo about ten years ago and how the chimps quickly learn, heck even virsus learn.

http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/ ... 01201.html

No picture though... of HJE

but a treasure trove

Raj Malhotra · Post by **Raj Malhotra** » 22 Aug 2009 11:03

I think that GTRE was set up in 1953 just ten years after the Russians got their hands on the first Jet engine donated by UK during WWWII. Compare!

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 22 Aug 2009 11:16

Raja Bose · Post by **Raja Bose** » 22 Aug 2009 13:34

Raj Malhotra wrote:I think that GTRE was set up in 1953 just ten years after the Russians got their hands on the first Jet engine donated by UK during WWWII. Compare!

How's the leg?

Raj Malhotra · Post by **Raj Malhotra** » 22 Aug 2009 18:10

Well GTRE is better than my knee, if that answers it

Note:-Kaveri is made from 80% foreign components, so how did the question of the limitation of metallurgy technology holding back development of Kaveri, even arise. IF the design was ok, it would have worked on foreign components. The very fact that engines assembled from foreign components are failing shows some limitations in design.

Does it mean that GTRE has failed in both design and metallurgy?

Also apart from LCA how come GTRE not able to make any engines for IJT, helos, Saras, cruise missiles etc, I don't think these engines require single crystal tech ????

What is contribution of HAL in Dhruv engine and how far it has been indigenised?

Drevin · Post by **Drevin** » 22 Aug 2009 18:17

When is shub mahurat for lca trainer first flight .. ?
Looks like it will be the final production version. Ground tests are going good ?
Any news from well informed folks ?

Raja Bose · Post by **Raja Bose** » 23 Aug 2009 00:01

Raj Malhotra wrote:Well GTRE is better than my knee, if that answers it

Hope you make a 400% complete recovery.

Jagan · Post by **Jagan** » 23 Aug 2009 01:49

actually all the engines that powered the Canberra, Hunter, Gnat etc were axial flow. so we had them since 1957 in some form

plus is this the famed RD-9?

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/IAF/Image ... 7.jpg.html

tejas · Post by **tejas** » 23 Aug 2009 02:09

Does it mean that GTRE has failed in both design and metallurgy?

Mr. Malhotra I am beginning to question your dedication to socialism. While I agree most private companies would probably come up with a product after over fifty years of existence, these companies would exploit their labor like paying their high ranking engineers $100,000 a year. Plus they would not be cognizant of their responsibilities to weaker sections and minority sensibilities.

It is because of sentiments like these that the govt. of India no longer makes VCRs and that the pioneer of high technology, ITI is struggling. It should be obvious to all serious observers that if not for diversion of resources to labor exploiting SEZs GTRE would have had a working engine many 5 yr. plans ago.

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 23 Aug 2009 03:34

Diyar LCA:

It should be obvious to all serious observers that if not for diversion of resources to labor exploiting SEZs GTRE would have had a working engine many 5 yr. plans ago.

I being stupid, that is not at all obvious to me, sorry.

In fact GTRE DOES have a working engine - of many 5 years plans ago. It "meets specs" written by GTRE 50 years ago.

The VCR and ITI are not the only examples of outrageous capitalistic destruction of the People's Working Paradises. Keltron used to make silicon wafers, and was capable of even 10mm circuit technology. Very generous. But the imperialist capitalists started cutting corners and denying resources to the Working Classes and went to 1 mm and then 100micron and then 10 micron and even 1 micron and much lower, and artificially slashed prices. This is the problem with the Kaveri engine too. It is like the Hema Malini of engines. But today people want only a skinny Ash type engine.

vina · Post by **vina** » 23 Aug 2009 08:28

All mullahs talking about VCRs,arthritic knees etc, pliss to refer to Kaveri thread.. I think the discussion is more appropriate there.

pralay · Post by **pralay** » 24 Aug 2009 12:17

Do GTRE have their own website?

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 24 Aug 2009 12:42

narayanan wrote: And Sankuji bemoans the non-existence of Engine Test Cells, even as he wails about the sheer mental strain of reading Pingreji - though he has nothing to contribute to the discussion except a grand declaration of the wonderful work ethic of GTRE.

Sometimes just reading is contribution enough right.

I have no personal/vested interest in GTRE (and because they graciously fed me chai biskoot on some occasions as a part of a guided tour to a gawkers group does not mean that I am under the debt of their "namak")

What I said was -- no doubt a lot of what you say is correct -- however the "blame" does not stop at GTRE (or start there) -- it is there in HAL etc etc..

In fact any thing that happens in ADA is nearly a miracle the program has enough structural problems (not the aircraft -- the program) including the issues you have listed here, motivation etc etc...

In fact the question is not why GTRE failed, the question is how others succeed despite the problems -- and my answer is simple -- every program that has succeeded to any extent in India owes its origin to a single dynamic leader who then seeds a core of other leaders in the organization who keep things going despite all the problems and create success when by all possibilities they should have actually failed.

In my understanding GTRE did not have those leaders (or they left early) -- now the role of putting right leaders on top is not of GTRE.

The failure of Kaveri is to put a passionate leader on top by its parent organization and that should have been also demanded by its peers at ADA etc -- however that said -- in my opinion even getting them is a miracle.

------

My solution -- always been the same -- a different cadre for identified high tech research companies with GoI, with a different pay scale etc.. different rules with more risk-reward binding. Allowance for lateral intake etc.

Sort of like Navratna++; owned by GoI operated like Private.

No short cuts to fundamental problems -- there should be a working institution, counting on miracles to happen is not planning. (and getting people motivated to slog their life for peanuts in the name of the country is not a sustainable organizational building approach either)

-------

(I am not in favor of moving out the complete product development to private companies, we will instead of Natasha's then talk about Ayesha's and Gulabo's, just like in US of A, of crony capitalism and media tripartite battles like Ambani brothers -- given what such moves do the the politicization of armed forces procurement as well as the efficiency of procurement -- as well the corrupting impact of a war economy based society -- as well as the ease of making that move by GoI)

AmitR · Post by **AmitR** » 24 Aug 2009 12:54

sameer_shelavale wrote:Do GTRE have their own website?

Now thats what I call a million $ question. I couldn't find any by Googling.

rajsunder · Post by **rajsunder** » 24 Aug 2009 21:55

tejas wrote:
Does it mean that GTRE has failed in both design and metallurgy?
Mr. Malhotra I am beginning to question your dedication to socialism. While I agree most private companies would probably come up with a product after over fifty years of existence, these companies would exploit their labor like paying their high ranking engineers $100,000 a year. Plus they would not be cognizant of their responsibilities to weaker sections and minority sensibilities.

It is because of sentiments like these that the govt. of India no longer makes VCRs and that the pioneer of high technology, ITI is struggling. It should be obvious to all serious observers that if not for diversion of resources to labor exploiting SEZs GTRE would have had a working engine many 5 yr. plans ago.

bulls eye. I think the sole reason as to why the Scientists came up with brilliant designs in Soviet Russia was because of the fear of the gun over ones head unlike our state run companies such as GTRE. And i don't want to single out just GTRE its the same throughout the Public sector as well as central govt run defense labs/ companies.
Just read of Livefist blog that the Govt is planning to cancel the MCA program. Now with people like these in control of defense labs, one just cannot look into the future.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 24 Aug 2009 22:57

rajsunder wrote: Just read of Livefist blog that the Govt is planning to cancel the MCA program. Now with people like these in control of defense labs, one just cannot look into the future.

It would be nice to provide a link (tried googling, could not find it).

However, there has been some speculation that the MCA would be rolled into the FGFA. Perhaps that is what is happening. And, that, might be too bad an idea for the time being.

IF true, it should spell the end of the Kaveri. No use for that machine any more (outside of naval, UAV, etc).

___________________________________________________

Please check PAK-FA thread for more on MCA and livefist talk.

pralay · Post by **pralay** » 25 Aug 2009 00:11

MCA will be wastage as its much like the MRCA planes except stealth.

But even if they are canceling MCA then they should at least start Fully Indigenous Fifth Generation Fighter and not to mention development of 3-4 prototypes of jet engines with 3d thrust vectoring for it.

We should not repeat the history, or else in future we will have to face same problem to leap from 4.5 gen fighter to 6 generation fighter.
Rather we should also have brains employed to figure out the technologies that will make difference in warfare after 20 years.
Right now even with FGFA we are just trying to get what USA have today. We can have an edge only if we can think beyond their reach.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 25 Aug 2009 00:17

MCA will be wastage as its much like the MRCA planes except stealth.

But even if they are canceling MCA then they should at least start Fully Indigenous Fifth Generation Fighter and not to mention development of 3-4 prototypes of jet engines with 3d thrust vectoring for it.

that "Fully Indigenous Fifth Generation Fighter" project is known as MCA.

pralay · Post by **pralay** » 25 Aug 2009 00:35

Rahul M wrote:
MCA will be wastage as its much like the MRCA planes except stealth.

But even if they are canceling MCA then they should at least start Fully Indigenous Fifth Generation Fighter and not to mention development of 3-4 prototypes of jet engines with 3d thrust vectoring for it.
that "Fully Indigenous Fifth Generation Fighter" project is known as MCA.

Ahh sorry for my mistake.
I just mean to say that we should not give up indigenous projects even if the FGFA JV is going on. We will not get core technologies such as engine cores with the FGFA joint venture.

Nihat · Post by **Nihat** » 25 Aug 2009 01:02

true , any indigenous R & D should be pursued to the fullest and it bears fruit just like Arihant has come off. I'm all for programmes like LCA , MCA , Akash et all which provide us the knowledge which no other phoren maal can.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 25 Aug 2009 02:11

They had a RD-9 in RECW in the Engine lab. It was from a crashed plane that the Principal of those days a former IAF officer managed to finagle.

rajsunder · Post by **rajsunder** » 25 Aug 2009 02:13

NRao wrote:
It would be nice to provide a link (tried googling, could not find it).

However, there has been some speculation that the MCA would be rolled into the FGFA. Perhaps that is what is happening. And, that, might be too bad an idea for the time being.

IF true, it should spell the end of the Kaveri. No use for that machine any more (outside of naval, UAV, etc).

___________________________________________________

Please check PAK-FA thread for more on MCA and livefist talk.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_o_no4M2xEPY/S ... h/1111.jpg

http://livefist.blogspot.com/2009/08/re ... of-my.html

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 25 Aug 2009 03:02

rajsunder wrote: http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_o_no4M2xEPY/S ... h/1111.jpg

http://livefist.blogspot.com/2009/08/re ... of-my.html

I found those. Thx. the discussion continued in the PAK-FA thread.

vina · Post by **vina** » 26 Aug 2009 12:47

The issue of Vayu Magazine came in yesterday and there was an issue of the Naval LCA and the Indigenous Aircraft Carrier in it , in an article written by a retired Admiral.

Nothing much in detail that a hardcore jingo who has been following the BRF threads wouldn't know. But what struck me most was the absolutely professional way the Navy went about the entire thing and the deep reservoir of technical talent and deep program management skills the Navy has. Such things dont come about by accident, but only by sustained commitment and the experience of having been there and done that.

Now, it seems that the Navy when drawing up the plans for the ADS was looking to see what kind of aircraft could be suitable and when the LCA program was announced and had seen some progress , they approached the ADA director Dr Kota Harinarayana to see if it could be suitably adopted for carrier borne ops and he responded enthusiastically.

Then the Navy took the pains, to do a pre project definition study at a cost of 4 crores or so, by going to TsAgi and found out exactly what will be needed ( more control at just after take off from skil, until it gains enough air speed after 6 to 8 seconds, fuel dump, stronger landing gear etc), finding out that the safety margins werent adequate and hence 15 meter extension in ship length and then when the Gorshkov and Mig 29K came about, go back to the 35,000 ton ship design so that both Mig 29K and the LCA could be operated and hence totally de risking operational capability away from possible LCA failure.

And then this is where the difference is fund Rs 400 crore out of the Navy Budget for the NLCA and get it's engieers and pilots involved right from the design to the flight test!.

No wonder Navy projects succeed, while the Army and Airforce projects are sitting squat on their arses.. The air force simply would not have the technical manpower and skills to do any of this , why they cant even define what the weapon load out shopuld be until after the damn plane flies ! Well, no one expects the army to have any brains anyways, old saying of army all brawns and no brains , but still, the difference between the Navy and the other two branches is just stunning. No wonder the Army ,even if given an Arjun wants more Natashas and the Air Force has every shifting goal posts. The Air Force and Army is like Freud's comment on women " After all these years, I have not been able to find out what is it they want!"

karan_mc · Post by **karan_mc** » 26 Aug 2009 14:44

LCA’s induction into IAF in 2012: M M Palam Raju

BY :PTI

The Light Combat Aircraft will be inducted into the Indian Air Force in 2012 after operational clearance in 2010-11, Minister of State for Defence M M Pallam Raju said here today.

An agreement with Russia for next generation aircraft and transport aircraft was being worked out. Raju, however, did not give any timeframe and details. Asked about the Arunachal issue with China,Raju said”We will not underplay any perception of threat as a nation we are ready to meet any eventuality.”He also said in the perspective of increasing border trade, the problem with China has become the second largest trade partner of India.

http://idrw.org/?p=621#more-621

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 26 Aug 2009 16:15

We had some doubts about LCA test flights.

LCA-Tejas completed the 1165 Test Flights. (22-Aug-09)
LCA-Tejas completed the 1163 Test Flights. (21-Aug-09)
LCA-Tejas completed the 1162 Test Flights. (20-Aug-09)
LCA-Tejas completed the 1160 Test Flights. (19-Aug-09)
LCA-Tejas completed the 1159 Test Flights. (14-Aug-09)
LCA-Tejas completed the 1158 Test Flights. (12-Aug-09)
LCA-Tejas completed the 1156 Test Flights. (08-Aug-09)
LCA-Tejas completed the 1155 Test Flights. (07-Aug-09)
LCA-Tejas completed the 1154 Test Flights. (06-Aug-09)
LCA-Tejas completed the 1153 Test Flights. (05-Aug-09)

Almost a flight test a day. So did any people from bangalore see them flying?

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 26 Aug 2009 17:04

The Poojya Mantri does not disappoint:

we are ready to meet any eventuality

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 26 Aug 2009 21:20

^^^
To me that question is answered adequately. India is NOT ready to meet any eventuality.

While our government was sleeping with eyes wide open, the chinese have done a Kargil in the north east and are well equipped and well entrenched, and the problem is that this is no pakistan we are dealing with.

If there is a border war, with a 1000 mile border to defend, we are going into it with 350 + 155mm howitzers and <60 MRLS, a few pinaka batteries, about 100 odd Grads, and 1 AWACS. The MRCA is not yet ordered, the LCA is still in testing, the LCH hasn't flown yet.

Deploying 2 squardons of MKIs and Bisons there, reads like the scenario that vivek ahuja penned not too long ago, except that in his scenarios, India somehow by stroke of luck were able to convert overwhelming odds into a stalemate or victory. This however is real life.

I hope wimmen in india don't have to go on a sweaters and sock stitching spree this time around.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 26 Aug 2009 21:31

krishnan wrote:
Almost a flight test a day. So did any people from bangalore see them flying?

Mostly no. I saw one in the last week. The sight is so rare that I feel like making a post on BR about it.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 26 Aug 2009 21:34

Couldn't it have taken off from the other end? Is there something about wind direction that decides the direction of take off?