Aero India 2013

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 10 Feb 2013 23:30

I'm sure you are right Spinsaar.

If it is still going on, some pix of the Garuds will be nice. So far not many of those...

srai · Post by **srai** » 11 Feb 2013 02:51

shiv wrote:
vic wrote: OMG! At last indigenisation gang has captured and converted you! Anyway if BEL had an ingenious product then IAF would not have issued tenders for LDPs. It is just an attempt by some foreign vendor to push products through DPSU by fake JV no tender lot of bribe route
No there is a point I want to make here.

When HAL MiG 27 is called "Bahadur" no one is fooled. Everyone knows that it is Bahadurski But when BEL puts a fantastic looking LDP out of the blue that wasn't even in conceptual stage last time then one must ask if anything is being hidden by removing the OEM's label.

The question that comes to my mind is whether BEL supplies this to the IAF as a BEL product. Would any Vayusena end user ask idiotic questions like me: "Who made the lenses/servo" etc? The IAF will use it and if it fails they will ask BEL and expect BEL to sort it out. Then BEL will ask Israelis who will say we are shutting down the line. So BEL will ask IAF "Please tell us the next 20 years requirement of spares for this LDP, we have to order now onlee" and IAF guy's jaw will drop and his eyes will pop out justifiably just like the Air Commodore's speech.

It would be better if BEL was open and said "This is an Israeli pod in BEL stall." After all th private company Alpha systems does not manufacture the corner shot weapon. They were displaying it in their stall and were acting as sales people for Israelis If BEL is doing the same they might as well let Indians know the truth rather than this nudge nudge bluff.

As Apple products say, BEL should fine print "Designed by Rafael in Israel Assembled by BEL in India".

Suresh S · Post by **Suresh S** » 11 Feb 2013 03:20

thank you James , great pictures

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 11 Feb 2013 06:08

JE Menon wrote:holy shit... James B great stuff.

I don't know what happened to BRF boys - everybody has gone and got some serious photo gear and taken lessons or what!!! Buggers are cutting loose all over the place!!!

Yeah this year the young'uns with cameras have really come into their own. It's only going to increase as time passes looking at the long lenses everyone seems to carry around.

member_20067 · Post by **member_20067** » 11 Feb 2013 07:07

Abhishek Singh.. is a great photography talent...!! .. his videos are incredible.. too...

SagarAg · Post by **SagarAg** » 11 Feb 2013 08:31

AERO India 2013 Special report.
http://www.ndtv.com/video/player/bigger ... 013/264617

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 11 Feb 2013 08:39

Guys,two decades ago I was flying to Delhi along with a sr.naval officer from B'lore whose brother became a well-known general too.I asked about the desi dev./production of naval/other radars,etc."Indigenous?",said he,"it's all imported and passed off as locally developed,don't believe the propaganda".That statement was long before the exposes we have today,where one allegation is that something worthwhile we developed,was passed on to a friang co. and imported as our desi dev. hadn't produced results! This doesn't mean that in certain areas we haven't made huge strides,and our missile capability is a fantastic effort where we are almost capable of designing and producing any kind of tactical,strategic and cruise missile (to come).There are also smaller indigenous successes,but overall,he DRDO's effort has been patchy.The DRDO should establish prioity projects with the end-user and focus on them.Remember how the IJT team was also asked to handle the FGFA because of a manpower shortage!! past time to wrap up the IJT and use the scarce manpower on the FGFA project which is the most important for the IAF.

This is why both AKA and ACM Browne expressed their frustration at certain PSU's and certain projects like the LCA way behind time and cost.The MOD too should stop funding for pet projects of certain PSUs where the end-user is simply not interested,like the IJT,where the Pilatus trainer is capable of leading a rookie pilot upto the Hawk AJT.I also don't understand why we are still throwing good money into the drain with respect to Kaveri,which from reports seems to have a basic design deficiency and the engine keeps on failing when tested on Russian aircraft.The lack of engine tech is felt all across the board.If one recollects,the ALH had problems initially with an underpowered engine.The IJT had to find a Russian engine which appears to have some problems,strange,as the same engine powers the successful Yakovlev trainer,which is also being exported.The LCA is of course the classic case,repeating the mistakes of the HF-24 .When one hears about the extra length of the MK-2 design,the requirement for another full round of aerodynamic testing,et al,when will it ever bear fruit? I honestly think that the FGFA will enter or beat the LCA MK-2 into production.

Without being able to design and produce a credible basic trainer (HTT-32),an IJT,an LCA on time,what chances are there that we will be able to design successfully and build an AMCA? This project too will remain hostage to the choice of an adequate engine,and future generations (I doubt I'll be around) of BR-itons,will visit air shows and see the usual technology demonstrators flying! Unless Indian pvt. industry is given a fair chance of a chew of the aerospace cake,where local companies which "hire and fire" as they have to perform and survive,the parasitical PSUs will continue to drain the nation of vast sums of money and keep on peddling their propaganda and producing piddling little.

Why is there no pic of the hypersonic BMos model? Guys,when this arrives,our mortal enemies and some potential ones too,will be shitting bricks! Just imagine our aircraft and subs armed with 500KM+ hypersonic BMs.

James B · Post by **James B** » 11 Feb 2013 09:08

SagarAg · Post by **SagarAg** » 11 Feb 2013 09:19

^Spellbound. That pikture of Dhruv is sheer class!

sum · Post by **sum** » 11 Feb 2013 09:47

^^ And the scene outside was like another Kumbh mela:
Marvels in the skies, nightmare on the roads

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 11 Feb 2013 10:13

I liked the angle and technique.. low ground shot at an angle with great resolution.
Tejas feels more radiance!

Bala Vignesh · Post by **Bala Vignesh** » 11 Feb 2013 11:22

This is a slightly different shot than the ones generally posted here..
Here is the Tejas caught in all her glory with her namesake..

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 11 Feb 2013 11:35

SagarAg wrote:^Spellbound. That pikture of Dhruv is sheer class!

My God!
Can you edit th picture of Tejas and remove the bckground plane. It will be stunning

Hiten · Post by **Hiten** » 11 Feb 2013 11:44

talks from the Airborne surveillance session

Hardware & Software challenges experianced in the Indian AEW&CS programme
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uK0u0BHCF3s
Great seeing an Indian lady giving a talk at a technical session. Next milestone, speaking at the plenary session, chairing the session. Very interesting talk

Embraer's experience mounting the AAU of India's AEW&CS on the ERJ 145
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bvIx1gFVzRw
A great platform they've made the Super Tucano. If HAL does not pursue HTT-40 after the IAF rejectiion, it'd be a great loss on possible export of the armed variant to small AFs, possibly even the Coast Guard/BSF/SSB too.

CASSIDIAN pursuining both civilian & military certification fo their aircrafts
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MF3C_JdZc6A

SAAB's experience developing low frequency radars
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zuQHZX4XnX0

MN Kumar · Post by **MN Kumar** » 11 Feb 2013 14:50

Few from me:

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 11 Feb 2013 15:55

Attended my first Aero India this Saturday. I won’t describe the difficulties in getting into the show, but once I did, it was quite alright. The highlight for me was the conversations I had with Cmde Jaydeep Maolankar, Test Pilot of the Tejas program and Cmdr Sukesh Nagaraj (Deputy Project Director, NLCA). I was lucky to spot Mao sir alone and walked up to him, introduced myself and spoke of my association with BRF and then we had a conversation on the Tejas program for half an hour..he was incredibly frank, friendly, didn’t hold back any facts and only left when he got a call from someone..here are the salient points of our conversation, some of which we already know but am listing it anyway.

- Tejas LSP6 is the platform on which the spin chute will be integrated but it’s not here as yet. Will get done before FOC.
- Tejas Mk1 has achieved the IOC AoA limit of 22 deg and they will go a couple of degrees further in tests, when the spin chutes are integrated on LSP6. This is to ensure that they know that the airplane is safe even at higher alpha although the FBW will restrict it to the AoA limit for FOC for service pilots (which is higher than 22 deg, but he didn’t say how much)
- Mao Sir scoffed at the suggestion that the engine was choking at higher alpha. He said there is no such thing, but rather because it was designed initially for the Kaveri’s airflow and had to redesign it for the F-404. They have already tried various intakes on the LCA, with/without spring mounted doors on the intakes.
- Tejas MK2 will get an approx 10mm increase in diameter for the increased air flow requirement of the F-414 (Cmdr Sukesh Nagaraj confirmed this as well). Too small a difference to be visible to the naked eye for us jingos. The spring mounted doors may also be bigger if needed
- When asked about the STR and ITR rates of the Tejas, he simply smiled and said “it’s enough, let me put it that way”. When I queried him further, asking about the ASR that the IAF had set based on the Mirage-2000 and MiG-29’s STR and ITR, his smile vanished and he got serious. He said that when people look at 10 different brochures and come up with requirements, without looking at whether meeting all those requirements is even possible for ANY one fighter, they set themselves and the program up for failure. He was very frank about this, stating that even those brochure specs were just that- brochure specs that even those famed fighters sometimes don’t meet. But they were taken as benchmarks anyway and then, without even bothering to look at the technological base in India, the ASR was prepared.
- He was full of praise for the handling of the Tejas. It’s a true delight to fly and both he and Grp Cpt Suneet Krishna have tremendous confidence in the aircraft itself. He said that they both push the aircraft to its current limits without any worry since the FCS is very good. He did mention that they didn’t push the Tejas Mk1 to its limits at the airshow but just wanted to display that it is maneuverable enough.
- When I asked him whether the Navy fully backs the NLCA program, he laughed and said “I’m here, aren’t I?”. So all in all, it appears that the IN is backing the program fully
- NP1 hasn’t flown more than 4 flights because they’re re-designing some of the structures on board. This is the additional strengthening required for handling the thumping that is a carrier landing. The landing gear is being re-designed since its overweight and NP2 is going to fly soon.
- I brought up the point he made at AI-2011 about how the Tejas should’ve started as a carrier variant and then gone on to the IAF variant. He seemed genuinely happy that someone had remembered that point of his and described the main issue with the NLCA NP1. The issue as he described it was that the LCA didn’t have a central keel to pass the structural loads to, something he said that the AMCA won’t face since it’s a twin engine fighter. This meant that they had to put new attachment points which aren’t the ideal solution and result in the bulky appearance of the current landing gear.
- I was going to ask him about the AMCA naval variant and he said that currently there is no plan for it.

At this point he had to leave and I was disappointed since I hadn’t gotten to discussing anything about the Elta 2032/MMR, Litening LDP and the weapons on the Mk1 such as the Derby/Python V/R-77/Astra and Sudarshan..

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 11 Feb 2013 15:56

Next, I went to the ADA stall and just asked aloud if anyone could talk to me about the Mk2. A gentleman in a suit stepped up and said “Yes, what do you want to know about it? Which one, the IAF Mk2 or the Navy Mk2?” and I said “IAF Mk2” and he laughed and said “oh, you disappointed me, I was hoping you’d say Navy Mk2”..

Turned out, it was Cmdr Sukesh Nagaraj, Deputy Project Director of the N-LCA program..I was blown away by this gentleman. Here was one of the top decision makers of the Tejas program and he was warm, friendly, forthcoming and genuinely interested in talking about the program without even asking me what my background was (till much later in my conversation). He was an engineer on the Sea Harrier, having served on the Viraat. Said he was rookie when Cmde Maolankar commanded the squadron. The salient points of the conversation with him were:

- The Tejas Mk2 is being lengthened by 0.5m only and not 1m as that big gasbag Prasun Sengupta was fibbing about. We really ought to never take him seriously at all. The reason cited were CG change primarily.
- F-414 was primarily an IN requirement. It turns out that the IAF was fine with the F-404IN20 engine on the Mk1. They jumped on the IN’s requirement for a higher thrust engine and requested the IAF Mk2 variant.
- The fuselage on the Mk2 will be slightly wider as well due to the larger diameter of the F-414 engine. This will be used to put onboard additional fuel
- The widening of the fuselage will push out the wings a bit, thus increasing wing span. Otherwise no increase in wing span as such. It doesn’t need it, since the wing area is massive already
- Additional fuel will be required primarily to offset the additional weight (he said approx. 200 kg additional) and higher SFC of the F-414 engine. So, it appears that the Tejas Mk2’s range may not go up significantly over that of the Mk1.
- He confirmed that the intake size will go up by approx. 10 mm for the Mk2.
- There is a LOT of work that is required to be done due to engine change. This is something jingos must keep in mind since jingos keep asking if this or that engine can be used or not on a platform..pumps, motors, fuel supply lines, nearly everything associated with the engine requires re-design due to an engine change due to higher fuel flow rates for a larger engine and the different specs of the power generation on board. Plus, the higher weight means localized structural strengthening as well, all of which takes time
- N-LCA will be an out and out 9G fighter. He was categorical about this.
- NP1 trainer doesn’t have a radar- the radome is used for carrying avionics. He said he was more interested in the NP2 since it was the first fighter and was going to carry the same radar as that on the Sea Harrier. I tried to quiz him on this because the Elta 2032 on the Sea Harrier is not the same as the Elta 2032/MMR on the Tejas Mk1, but he didn’t stop what he was saying.
- NP2 is basically similar to the NP1, but with the rear seater’s canopy painted over (he said that! I asked if it was faired over and he said no, just painted over). The rear seater’s space will carry avionics (that were put into the radome on the NP1) and additional fuel tank.
- NP1’s LEVCONS will be initially having 3 positions- 10 deg, 20 deg and 30 deg, just like flap settings. I tried to ask him if the LEVCONS would be just lift generating surfaces or that they could be used as additional control surfaces by the FBW FCS to increase turn rates but he said that they were primarily required for higher lift when landing and taking off
- They’re working on the hands-free take-off for the N-LCA. He said that it was no big deal and they’ll do it for sure
- Mk2 is to get bigger MFD displays, but he said that even the ones on the Mk1 are actually good and possibly adequate
- One piece of news that will get some jingos happy- he said that he has asked CSIO Chandigarh to develop a frameless HUD instead of the current one. It’ll feature higher FoV and its easier to view through since there is no frame obstructing the pilot’s view.
- DASH HMDS from Elbit for the N-LCA as well. I had initially thought they’d go with the Thales Top Owl-F as on the MiG-29K
- Just as I suspected, I asked him if the current drop tank is transonic- he confirmed that it is. A supersonic tank is being developed to carry about 200 gal. (~750 ltrs)
- Also confirmed that there is nothing wrong with the centerline fuel tank – since we almost never see Tejas Mk1 carry a centerline fuel tank in place of the innermost wing pylon drop tanks. If required, Mk1s can carry drop tank on the centerline station also
- Regarding IFR, it is Cobham that is going to work on it. Asked if it’s a fixed probe, retractable or semi-retractable, it was confirmed to be semi-retractable, like that on the MiG-29UPG. I asked about the lack of internal volume on such a small fighter for even a semi-retractable probe and he said that its going to be a small probe, and they’ll manage to find the space for it
- No OBOGS on Tejas Mk1 or NP1. It’ll be there from Mk2 onwards. Designed by DEBEL and certified by CEMILAC
- Regarding the landing gear, he said it was 1600 kgs over the Tejas Mk1’s landing gear weight initially!! They designed it per MilSpec which was too conservative. Also, in addition to the general Factor of Safety that is needed for Ultimate Loads, they added another Factor of Safety of 1, for a total of 2.5 because it was being done for the first time in India and they were concerned about the design..and used maraging steel which was heavy.
- He clearly said that before the NP1 first flight, none of the OEMs even believed that this program had any future and no one cooperated with them when asked for help. Then, when NP1 flew, they were interested in helping out.
- US Navy is now consulting with them on where to reduce weight, what other materials to use. All the leg work is done here itself though, and no work is being done by foreign OEMs. They are confident of shaving off 1000 kgs and bringing it to 600 kgs over the LCA AF version’s landing gear weight for the N-LCA
- On the N-LCA Mk2 they will change the position of the landing gear and bring it more towards the wing/fuselage joint. The landing gear will then retract into a fairing for that. That will also free up space in the fuselage for additional fuel
- Regarding radar, he said that they are pretty confident about it. The reason is that they’re using the same Elta 2032 as on the Sea Harrier! Since they’ve already qualified that radar for the Derby, he was pretty confident about the Derby on the N-LCA. Asked about the Python-V he said that it’s the R-73 that’ll be the WVR weapon..when I asked him how come the Python V was shown on the mockup outside, he said it’s just a mockup. Wasn’t very clear about this
- Shockingly about the radar, when I asked about what increased range one might get with the Elta 2032 since the diameter of the antenna on the N-LCA will be bigger than that on the LUSH SHar, he replied that there is no increase in range, its more than sufficient..I asked him specifically again that “really same detection range?” and he said yes. Again not very clear about this
- When quizzed about AESA for the N-LCA Mk2, he said that for now it’s the same Elta 2032 and Cmde Mao had recently even gone to Israel to test the radar that will be used on the N-LCA Mk2. Here, he mentioned that “if you get anything from Israel, just take it. Their equipment is very good”. Then went on to mention how the Barak was tested on the Viraat and was successful on its very first trial with 2 missiles fired. The first hit the target and the second hit its debris!
- He confirmed that the anti-ship missile for the N-LCA is going to be the Kh-35E, similar to the MiG-29K. Laughed when recollecting how poor the Sea Eagle was as an AShM.
- Primary role envisaged for the N-LCA is that of CAP and Fleet Defence, replacing the Sea Harrier. He was quite dismissive about the P-3C Orion threat (jokingly saying that to shoot that down, a gun is enough!:P), but was primarily concerned about the cruise missile and anti-ship missile threat to the Carrier. But he mentioned that a Carrier Battle Group consists of several rings of protection for the carrier, and that the carrier will get warned about any possible airborne threat several hundred kms before it even approached it. With that much warning, a N-LCA could dash to the edge of the fleet and take on the threat.
- When I asked him if shooting down sub-sonic anti-ship missiles with on-board missiles was a possible scenario for the N-LCA, he replied in the affirmative
- When he mentioned this, I asked him how good the Elta 2032 was with regards to dealing with sea clutter and he said that its very good.
- NP2 is currently already going through integration tests. Will likely fly in June or July if no issues are found.
- NP1 has given them a lot of data for how the platform behaves in 4 flights itself
- Said how the LCA is designed as per the Test Pilot’s recommendations- whatever they want, ADA/HAL give it to them. He said let the IAF get the Rafale and then ask for these small changes and then they’ll figure out just how hard it is to get anything they want. On the N-LCA, we can integrate whatever we want, and for the entire lifetime of the fighter. Easier upgrades will be available since everything is known about the aircraft to the designers

I had to leave at this point since my friend who I’d met after 6 years was in a hurry to leave so we could escape the impending traffic snarl. Thanked the Cmdr profusely and got his card as well. I asked for some other brochures on the Mk2 and he said that he could give me a soft copy of it. To date, I’ve never had so much come from a single conversation at any airshow or business show. Very competent fellows are working on these programs. They need our support and encouragement. Those who are constantly piling it on them, with negative reports are basically doing this nation a great dis-service. Criticize the organization perhaps for its failings, but those who are working on these programs are to be commended and encouraged.

rohankumaon · Post by **rohankumaon** » 11 Feb 2013 16:19

@Kartik: You made my day! Wonderful piece of news from the tiger's mouth, so as to speak! Thanks a lot for the post!

srai · Post by **srai** » 11 Feb 2013 16:36

Abhibhushan wrote:For all Rakshaks planning a trip to the airshow on saturday 9 feb 13.

I did my first solo flight on a Tigermoth on 09 Feb 1952. Now, 61 years later, on 09 Feb 2013, I shall once again be near a yellow Tigermoth in Air Force Colours. May I have the pleasure of a group photo in front of this aircraft with as many Rakshaks as possible?

TKS

Abhibhushan wrote:OK. The Tigermoth got pushed into the flight line by about midday and I managed to get near it. I also managed to get photographed near it kind curtesy of the IAF and some media photographers. Alas, no Rakshaks managed to catch up with me.

A very nice morning for me. The IAF was generous to me with love and affection.

SEN-sational: At 78, a solo down memory lane, onboard Tiger Moth

k prasad · Post by **k prasad** » 11 Feb 2013 17:22

Said how the LCA is designed as per the Test Pilot’s recommendations- whatever they want, ADA/HAL give it to them. He said let the IAF get the Rafale and then ask for these small changes and then they’ll figure out just how hard it is to get anything they want. On the N-LCA, we can integrate whatever we want, and for the entire lifetime of the fighter. Easier upgrades will be available since everything is known about the aircraft to the designers

Incredible posts Kartik... you made my day!!!

The point that you mentioned above explains why we see the Navy pushing so hard and supporting the LCA program more than the IAF. Kudos to them. They really need to give lessons to the other two forces on how to support indigenous programs and why.

Glad we have enthusiastic and farsighted people like Mao and Sukesh at the helm of these programs.

Any info on the payload capabilities of N-LCAs in actual Carrier deployment? I'm guessing it'll definitely not be close to the 4000 kg number, given STOBAR operations. Also, I wonder if the Naval Mk2 will have a slightly strengthened inner pylons allowing for a heavier payload there - increasing a pylon capacity to say 1500-1600 kg opens up to a lot of new and more lethal missiles and weapons that can be carried.

Also, any opportunity to ask them about how ADA, Users and HAL were planning the serviceability and maintenance aspects of the aircraft, to prevent the kind of nonsense that another good Air Cmde mentioned in the Aeroseminar?

rakall · Post by **rakall** » 11 Feb 2013 17:24

k prasad wrote:
Said how the LCA is designed as per the Test Pilot’s recommendations- whatever they want, ADA/HAL give it to them. He said let the IAF get the Rafale and then ask for these small changes and then they’ll figure out just how hard it is to get anything they want. On the N-LCA, we can integrate whatever we want, and for the entire lifetime of the fighter. Easier upgrades will be available since everything is known about the aircraft to the designers
Incredible posts Kartik... you made my day!!!

The point that you mentioned above explains why we see the Navy pushing so hard and supporting the LCA program more than the IAF. Kudos to them. They really need to give lessons to the other two forces on how to support indigenous programs and why.

Glad we have enthusiastic and farsighted people like Mao and Sukesh at the helm of these programs.

Any info on the payload capabilities of N-LCAs in actual Carrier deployment? I'm guessing it'll definitely not be close to the 4000 kg number, given STOBAR operations. Also, I wonder if the Naval Mk2 will have a slightly strengthened inner pylons allowing for a heavier payload there - increasing a pylon capacity to say 1500-1600 kg opens up to a lot of new and more lethal missiles and weapons that can be carried.

Also, any opportunity to ask them about how ADA, Users and HAL were planning the serviceability and maintenance aspects of the aircraft, to prevent the kind of nonsense that another good Air Cmde mentioned in the Aeroseminar?

Thanks a lot KArthik for the very informative post!!!!

srai · Post by **srai** » 11 Feb 2013 17:28

SagarAg wrote:AERO India 2013 Special report.
http://www.ndtv.com/video/player/bigger ... 013/264617

Good but felt a bit short. Probably needed to be a two (or three) part series to cover more ground. Ideally, one part should have covered progress on wide range of indigenous products (especially those not very well known) and things to come.

viktor · Post by **viktor** » 11 Feb 2013 17:42

Wonderful post Kartik. Great job.

srai · Post by **srai** » 11 Feb 2013 17:54

k prasad wrote:..

Any info on the payload capabilities of N-LCAs in actual Carrier deployment? I'm guessing it'll definitely not be close to the 4000 kg number, given STOBAR operations. Also, I wonder if the Naval Mk2 will have a slightly strengthened inner pylons allowing for a heavier payload there - increasing a pylon capacity to say 1500-1600 kg opens up to a lot of new and more lethal missiles and weapons that can be carried.

...

Found this old diagram of the LCA load out capacity per pylon:

The innermost and centreline pylons are rated at 1,200kgs each. Most fighter sized air launched munitions weigh less than 1,000kgs. IMO, probably sufficient at 1,200kgs. Maybe the mid-wing pylon load weight could be increased which would allow multi-rack option. But based on the extensive rework that was required in increasing the outermost pylon load, it may not a be worthwhile effort.

member_20453 · Post by **member_20453** » 11 Feb 2013 18:05

Good Post Kartik.

Lots of good news. By the way guys, wasn't there some news about HAL displaying the new LCA updated cockpit at the air show, any pics of the cockpit?

member_22539 · Post by **member_22539** » 11 Feb 2013 18:38

Philip wrote:Guys,two decades ago I ................with 500KM+ hypersonic BMs.

The usual suspects at their usual games. Screw anything indigenous (missiles excluded of course, now that they are successful beyond any doubt). I really wonder, do you get money for this kind of propaganda or are you just a dyed in the wool, frothing at the mouth rabid fanboy?

Zynda · Post by **Zynda** » 11 Feb 2013 18:50

Great post Karthik. So, I was misled about OBOGS present on LCA Mk.1 by DRDO folks. Sigh

I guess we must have spoken to the same person at ADA stall. The gentleman I spoke with had recently joined ADA and was a technical officer in IN. I remember him mentioning about Barak and extolling Israeli capability. When I asked him about Derby, he said Israeli radar is good and BVR firing should happen without any issues. Very nice person

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 11 Feb 2013 18:53

Kartik Danke

now this shuld be highlighted

-

When asked about the STR and ITR rates of the Tejas, he simply smiled and said “it’s enough, let me put it that way”. When I queried him further, asking about the ASR that the IAF had set based on the Mirage-2000 and MiG-29’s STR and ITR, his smile vanished and he got serious. He said that when people look at 10 different brochures and come up with requirements, without looking at whether meeting all those requirements is even possible for ANY one fighter, they set themselves and the program up for failure. He was very frank about this, stating that even those brochure specs were just that- brochure specs that even those famed fighters sometimes don’t meet. But they were taken as benchmarks anyway and then, without even bothering to look at the technological base in India, the ASR was prepared.

and this too (the same was said of Arjun0

- Said how the LCA is designed as per the Test Pilot’s recommendations- whatever they want, ADA/HAL give it to them. He said let the IAF get the Rafale and then ask for these small changes and then they’ll figure out just how hard it is to get anything they want. On the N-LCA, we can integrate whatever we want, and for the entire lifetime of the fighter. Easier upgrades will be available since everything is known about the aircraft to the designers

member_22539 · Post by **member_22539** » 11 Feb 2013 18:56

You have left me absolutely speechless Mr. Kartik. Your report is more exhaustive and informative than any I have read before, particularly compared to those "professional journalists." I would like to point out the difference between Mr. Kartik and some other BRF members, who seems to have taken the trouble to go to such events only to wail on any indigenous programs they can (without being laughed off this forum) or drooling over foreign stuff (read Russian). Again, heartfelt thanks to you Mr. Kartik, you really made my day.

merlin · Post by **merlin** » 11 Feb 2013 19:22

Zynda wrote:Great post Karthik. So, I was misled about OBOGS present on LCA Mk.1 by DRDO folks. Sigh

I guess we must have spoken to the same person at ADA stall. The gentleman I spoke with had recently joined ADA and was a technical officer in IN. I remember him mentioning about Barak and extolling Israeli capability. When I asked him about Derby, he said Israeli radar is good and BVR firing should happen without any issues. Very nice person

I'm sure DRDO folks would not have misled you. A DEBEL person told me that OBOGS would be only on the Mk II and he was open about it. I specifically asked him if it was on Mk I and he said no. Also it is NOT yet certified by CEMILAC but under certification. Interestingly it is manufactured by L&T. In fact all the items one would see in that section of DEBEL (OBOGS, oxygen cylinder, personal oxygen cylinder) are under certification and not currently present in the Tejas.

Lilo · Post by **Lilo** » 11 Feb 2013 19:26

Arun Menon wrote:
Philip wrote:Guys,two decades ago I ................with 500KM+ hypersonic BMs.
The usual suspects at their usual games. Screw anything indigenous (missiles excluded of course, now that they are successful beyond any doubt). I really wonder, do you get money for this kind of propaganda or are you just a dyed in the wool, frothing at the mouth rabid fanboy?

Saar why such words for a fellow BRF jingo ?
Just accept that Philip ji has the pulse of a different set of guys of a different generation in our services , consider their message and move on .. Why resort to such low blows ?
and he is hardly a boy ... ill be damned if he is

on another note, Kartik ji, kudos to you !!

Suresh S · Post by **Suresh S** » 11 Feb 2013 19:48

good post kartik

à¤µà¤°à¥à¤£ · Post by **à¤µà¤°à¥à¤£** » 11 Feb 2013 20:03

Acharya wrote:
SagarAg wrote:^Spellbound. That pikture of Dhruv is sheer class!
My God!
Can you edit th picture of Tejas and remove the bckground plane. It will be stunning

I gave it a go:

The sky needed to be changed though.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 11 Feb 2013 20:04

Good job Varun

SagarAg · Post by **SagarAg** » 11 Feb 2013 20:21

Thanks वरुण.

dinesha · Post by **dinesha** » 11 Feb 2013 20:24

Light Utility Helicopter (LUH) glass cockpit on display at Aero India 2013. Photo Credit: Vijainder K Thakkur
Seen above is a spectacular HDR photograph of the LUH Glass Cockpit

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 11 Feb 2013 21:07

arun a word of caution

before the admins do their job on you

follow Lilos advice

member_24612 · Post by **member_24612** » 11 Feb 2013 21:10

Brilliant photos posted by James B!

Outstanding clarity and perspective....

Cheers,
Vivek

Picklu · Post by **Picklu** » 11 Feb 2013 21:13

Guys, were I being made a fool or Rs 1500 per person lunch buffet was the only food option other than the roving kati-roll hawkers on 9th feb for general visitors without any insider biradar/chaiwala/paanwala/bidiwala?

Hiten · Post by **Hiten** » 11 Feb 2013 21:28

talks from the 'Indian Aviation Industry Capabilities' session

Developing Indian Capability In Aerospace Technology - Honeywell's Contribution
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P7YuOiYYcQc

Partnership For Growth Of An Aerospace Industrial Complex
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L9GCyOoIXjo

Future Trends In Design Methodology For Fighter Aircraft - Dr. PS Subramanyam
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6PRJVoORsKg
an interesting admission he makes on not having to consider certain aspects, having got IAF as a captive customer [his words]

Networking Aspects Of Airborne Communications
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vz81T-SVuKw

in an earlier talk HAL chairman mentioned offset benefits going to refrigerator & hosiery makers. Was it reported in the media? In which contract did this happen?