Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8227
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby Indranil » 08 Jun 2016 21:50

shiv wrote: There will be one stage immediately after ignition when the turbine is spooling up but the propeller is not engaged when prop backwash is absent. I am guessing that that will be when the gases are hottest. I wonder if there are any restrictions about how long the turbine can be kept spinning on "idle" without engaging the propeller. That is some stuff that I can go searching for..


This does not happen for a fixed shaft turboprop engine such as the TPE331 where all the rotating components are mechanically linked together. Therefore, the propeller spins as soon as the engine starts. But they are 0 (or close to 0) pitch at this point, and hence there is no air being pushed back.

JTull
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2780
Joined: 18 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby JTull » 08 Jun 2016 22:37

shiv wrote:
Zynda wrote:As expected, HAL has selected design from a phoren OEM for its regional aircraft under Make in India category. I some how, am unhappy with this Make in India project. Like it was pointed out, it seems similar or at best a notch above the previous ToT/Screwdriver giri arrangement.

Ukraine’s Antonov is the frontrunner for HAL’s military aircraft programme



I can understand your feeling but in my view we will never get a passenger plane off the ground unless we do "risk sharing" with someone else. In this case Antonov is sharing the risk with us. They gain a market in an area where they can be squashed by bigger players and we get screwdriver.


I agree. Pragmatism! Think about the acute submarine shortage we have. Just the presence of screwdriver Scorpene assembly line allows to go beyond the original 6. Where is the second line? It is better than waiting for a product to be delivered from foreign shores. I am all for the world to come and manufacture their products in India to sell in India and to export. That's how China has reached where it is today.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4553
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby JayS » 08 Jun 2016 22:44

indranilroy wrote:
shiv wrote: There will be one stage immediately after ignition when the turbine is spooling up but the propeller is not engaged when prop backwash is absent. I am guessing that that will be when the gases are hottest. I wonder if there are any restrictions about how long the turbine can be kept spinning on "idle" without engaging the propeller. That is some stuff that I can go searching for..


This does not happen for a fixed shaft turboprop engine such as the TPE331 where all the rotating components are mechanically linked together. Therefore, the propeller spins as soon as the engine starts. But they are 0 (or close to 0) pitch at this point, and hence there is no air being pushed back.


May be you know this already. There is an interesting difference in TPE-331 and PT6A (or a single spool and a double spool engine). For TPE-331, since propeller is on the same shaft, the propeller is set in zero pitch position so as to offer minimum resistance at the startup. OTOH the two spool engine where propeller is on separate shaft, the propeller is set in max pitch condition so as to offer max resistance and avoid over speeding (rotational).


shiv wrote:
nileshjr wrote:Now I am thinking why the turboprop designers don't go a step further and extract all the energy possible in the turbine itself, similar to Turbo-shaft where the exhaust has no meaningful thrust. Why in case of turboprop a usable residual component is left to be used as jet thrust??

My guess is that "maximum extraction of energy in the turbine" is dependent on maximum difference in pressure between turbine and outlet. Having a narrow outlet would raise outlet pressure and lower the pressure differential.


If you meant the outlet pressure as the turbine outlet pressure i.e. immediately after the turbine and not the one at the exhaust pipe end, then its correct but only partially. Unless the flow is choked it will not increase the pressure upstream. The fixed geometry nozzles are generally designed to be just choked only at the max mass flow condition. So you would never have a situation that the exhaust passage increases the pressure near the turbine. It will be a free flowing passage. Nozzle is only used to gain max thrust component it will essentially have no effect on turbine operation. But the diffuser would. And of coarse all this is valid only for subsonic flow.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5347
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby Kartik » 08 Jun 2016 22:57

shiv wrote:
Kartik wrote:What I do find a little amusing is how some people on this forum assume that THEY can eye-ball something and tell that it surely won't be an issue..or when if someone does point out something that may be valid, they jump at it from a "oh we're SDRE onlee, so others don't trust us onlee" or call them idiots or whatever..


I believe I owe you an explanation of my comments on the issue. Your only role has been to mention that someone on some other forum said that overheating of tyres from the HTT 40 exhaust was a possibility, given the exhaust configuration.

The issues I have with the comment made by that unknown (to me) person are as follows:

I have been unable to find any reference to tyre heating from exhaust gases as a cause of tyre burst among a number of reasons normally discovered for tyre bursting from overheating. That does not mean that it cannot occur or will not occur. It may be a known issue in closed specialist circles. It may be an ancillary cause.

However this raises two problems specifically related to the comment made by the unknown anonymous person about the HTT 40 on some other forum
1. If the problem is well known in specialist circles, is there any reason to believe that it is unknown to or ignored by the HTT 40 design team?
2. If, on the other hand, the problem has never occurred in the past, how was a prediction made that it might occur in the HTT 40 as opposed to all the other well documented things that can go wrong?

Either way the comment is redundant, and probably unnecessary. I believe that the person who made that comment has painted himself into a corner, and if it was in my power I would ask that person to explain why he made the comment.


Having seen how the original LCA team seemed to have somehow made mistakes on its area-ruling (ref. that ADA document floating somewhere which mentioned a plug to reduce drag), something that is very fundamental to a design, and how that went through all design reviews and wind tunnel testing, only to be found and pin-pointed at a much later phase, I wouldn’t put it past designers (of any nationality) to overlook something that may appear obvious to someone looking in from the outside.

Plus, it reminded me of a somewhat similar design issue that led to a lot of re-work and re-design on a totally separate program that I worked on. That issue surfaced much later in the development and caused considerable heart-ache and schedule slippage..it was something that experienced designers might have spotted much earlier and avoided..So, IMHO, it wasn’t a dubious remark that deserved to be just waived off..certainly not an affront to designers thanks to their nationality unlike what some other posters would want it to appear as.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5347
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby Kartik » 08 Jun 2016 23:04

nileshjr wrote:Shiv,

I expect HAL designers must have done CFD simulations with the exhaust gases to study its mixing and whether the exhaust disrupts the flow in a bad way or not. Even without specifically thinking about the heating issue they would be knowing how far the danger zone of the exhaust gases extend, if at all.Frankly speaking, I don't think its a big deal. Even if HAL realises they made a boo boo it can be fixed just like that. Even in that case one shouldn't make a big deal of it that how can HAL be so stupid and all.


precisely. As we've seen on the LCH, the landing gear configuration has changed from one TD to another..obviously for other reasons, but still its quite clear that testing revealed something that their initial design did not quite cater for.

So its nothing new to see design go through iterations as some drawbacks with initial designs are found..now, whether this exhaust positioning is going to be an issue or not is something HAL will find out..for now it was purely an academic exercise on our part to examine whether it might be so.

I can hardly see anything wrong with that kind of discussion, but becoming so defensive and whining that people are questioning someone's competence in some way because of them being "SDRE" is, IMHO, silly.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8227
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby Indranil » 09 Jun 2016 00:08

I agree with you Kartik. And I must say the discussion here has not been bad. I learnt a thing or two.

By the way, you guys might like this.

nirav
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2020
Joined: 31 Aug 2004 00:22
Location: Mumbai

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby nirav » 09 Jun 2016 03:44

#randomthought.

Had a baki on a phoren phorum commented on the exhaust leading to a tyre burst, I'm certain all hell would have broken loose..

Since a lot of discussion was on tyres I wonder why lca navy's solitary front wheel wasn't "discussed".. all other 4th gen naval fighters have opted for twin tyres upfront..

fanne
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3544
Joined: 11 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby fanne » 09 Jun 2016 03:47

if this is a problem guys, I am sure HAL has a website where they can take this feedback

nirav
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2020
Joined: 31 Aug 2004 00:22
Location: Mumbai

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby nirav » 09 Jun 2016 03:49

^ :rotfl:

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby shiv » 09 Jun 2016 05:13

Kartik wrote:
Having seen how the original LCA team seemed to have somehow made mistakes on its area-ruling (ref. that ADA document floating somewhere which mentioned a plug to reduce drag), something that is very fundamental to a design, and how that went through all design reviews and wind tunnel testing, only to be found and pin-pointed at a much later phase, I wouldn’t put it past designers (of any nationality) to overlook something that may appear obvious to someone looking in from the outside.
.

No doubt, but isn't the person who passed that comment guilty of exactly what you pointed out earlier - making an engineering judgement from one glance at a photo/video of the first flight? Articles by Prodyut Das are full of such engineering judgements based on images (he admits it) and you know the general disdain in which his views are held on this forum. Whether those judgements are right or wrong, the difference between me passing such judgement and a learned person would be the credentials.

I did say earlier that the person who made that comment must either be a greatly experienced aircraft designer or a nobody. Let us hear his name if he is such a great designer who is able to take one look at one image or video and predict an undercarriage heating problem. That forum must be truly blessed to have such a person. We will respect him more for it and I will make a public apology for my comments. Such a learned person should have, at his fingertips, answers for questions that we have sought - such as expected temperatures at different distances from the exhaust pipe and what would be his recommended orientation of the HTT 40 pipes. A loose comment about a fault and no further information with only a statement that "Design faults are possible" is, to my mind something that any random person might do for timepass. I have myself made such comments about Chinese designs like J-20.

The point about blind criticism of the SDRE is a different issue - but not irrelevant. I will, in due course point out the attitude shown by making design judgements of non Indian aircraft after looking at one image. I have done that in the past and have been both upset and amused at the way in which people wake up and fight to prove that the American/European design team must be right and that my comment is misplaced. No one supports the negative comment with the excuse that "design faults are possible". Here we are fighting to prove that a negative comment about the HTT40 may be right. Funny innit? Just sayin..

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4699
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby srai » 09 Jun 2016 06:00

As the saying goes, you can't design for the unknowns ;) Some of the unknowns could be due to lack of experience or knowledge; some may be due to lax standards or not thorough procedures/processes; others may be due to lack of appropriate facilities which doesn't allow for further refinements at the design stage itself; while some may be truly unknowns unknowns. These could be remedied to a certain point through auditing/review by experienced consultants and/or making use of additional facilities wherever they may be. Any potential issues (or once flagged as one) that couldn't be refined during design phase would need to be targeted for validation on a priority basis during real prototype testing. Yet, others may prop up much later during real testing that were truly unknowns even with proper design practices using all the latest tools available and reviews by experienced consultants. Fix at this late stage will be quite costly and quite frustrating. In a nutshell, best design practices will provide pretty accurate understanding of the system and its expected behavior, which means being able to tackle most of the flaws ... but not all. However in hindsight (more acute as years pass), some of it would seem like pretty obvious things that the designers of that era completely missed.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby shiv » 09 Jun 2016 06:44

Design decisions are often compromises because there may be no such thing as a configuration that is "the best" in every way. Every design decision will have a logical thought process behind it which may turn out to be less than optimal, or acceptable or very good depending on other circumstances. They may require modification or correction later. All this is perfectly well known.

But unless one knows the actual decision making chain and the design compromises or configuration choices that were considered any comment is likely to be pure timepass. If you look at the exhaust pipes of the HTT 40 from the front - they are cut obliquely and angled away from the fuselage and seem to be pointing in the general direction of the undercarriage when viewed from the front in a 2-D image. To me this angulation and oblique cut look like deliberate design choices and not some random, on the spot decision made on the factory floor by a mechanic/fitter/welder. That exhaust flow appears to be deliberately directed in some pre-determined direction.

If you look at that and tell me that the choice is wrong, I am going to ask you "Tell me why it is wrong" and I am not going to accept general answers like "Problems are possible with any design. We must learn to anticipate problems". I know that, and I would like to know what you know over and above that so that I can learn. I am not looking for a general answer to a specific problem. I am looking for a specific answer to a specific problem that has been mentioned.

When I get a general, non specific answer to a specific question I feel that the original critic (in this case some unknown person on some other forum) is unable to give a good reason for his criticism, and then I wonder why anyone would want to criticise without a valid reason. I can speculate on that no?

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby Viv S » 09 Jun 2016 08:22

India Asks US for Predator C Drones


Image

Washington. India has formally asked the United States for Predator C Unmanned Combat Aerial Vehicles (UCAVs).

Reliable sources told India Strategic that the Predator C requirement has been mentioned at a very high level during the current visit of the Indian Prime Minister. Now that India is getting into the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR), President Barack Obama will ask the State and Defense Departments to consider the Indian request.

Predator C is made by General Atomics Aeronautical System Inc. (GA-ASI), which has already offered an unarmed version, Predator XP, to the Indian Air Force (IAF) and Navy for reconnaissance purposes.

The number of drones required by India is not known but the UCAV, also known as Avenger, will be operated by the Indian Air Force which in any case is also short of manned combat jets. In the troubled terror-infested environment around India, a combination of manned and unmanned precision strike aircraft and systems are an immediate necessity.

IAF had in fact asked the Indian Ministry of Defence for strike drones – or UCAVs – at least six or seven years ago.

Avenger is a further development of MQ 9 Reaper, which is extensively used by the US CIA to neutralise terrorists with precision strikes and minimum possible collateral damage.

Avenger has a turboprop engine, some stealth features, a highly sophisticated Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) for reconnaissance and targeting, and can carry air to ground missiles like the Hellfire. It can be controlled from anywhere in the world through satellite connectivity.

Notably, although a strike drone like the Predator C has no onboard pilot, its operation requires a couple of people at the control station to monitor the target area, and then to command the machine to shoot after due verifications.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby shiv » 09 Jun 2016 20:33

After a great deal of searching I finally found a pdf that has graphs of exhaust gas temperatures from a DC 9 engine at varying distances from the exhaust at idle, breakaway thrust and takeoff thrust. The DC 9 has an PW JT8 engine whose max thrust is greater than the dry thrust of the F404

Looking at the graphs and extrapolating to a nozzle the side of the TPE 331 engine - I think the undercarriage/tyre overheating business from the exhaust pipe under the fuselage is a complete non issue. It just won't happen to anything that is more than 5 feet away and to the side. No wonder there is no reference to such an issue at all.

For anyone who is interested please look at the pdf and decide for yourself
http://www.chemtrailplanet.com/PDF/JETEXHAUST.pdf
Last edited by shiv on 09 Jun 2016 20:47, edited 1 time in total.

Supratik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6435
Joined: 09 Nov 2005 10:21
Location: USA

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby Supratik » 09 Jun 2016 20:47

Can India strike at terrorists inside Pak using Predators?

Karthik S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5380
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 12:12

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby Karthik S » 09 Jun 2016 22:13

Not sure how US will react. Better to develop our own tech.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4553
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby JayS » 10 Jun 2016 11:39

shiv wrote:After a great deal of searching I finally found a pdf that has graphs of exhaust gas temperatures from a DC 9 engine at varying distances from the exhaust at idle, breakaway thrust and takeoff thrust. The DC 9 has an PW JT8 engine whose max thrust is greater than the dry thrust of the F404

Looking at the graphs and extrapolating to a nozzle the side of the TPE 331 engine - I think the undercarriage/tyre overheating business from the exhaust pipe under the fuselage is a complete non issue. It just won't happen to anything that is more than 5 feet away and to the side. No wonder there is no reference to such an issue at all.

For anyone who is interested please look at the pdf and decide for yourself
http://www.chemtrailplanet.com/PDF/JETEXHAUST.pdf


Seen the doc already. IR posted the same doc just 4-5 posts above.
The pilot booklet of TPE-331 says the EGT can be as high as 770degC when on ground and its also mentioned in that book that the EGT probe can be seen from outside. So its not really embedded much inside. So the exhaust gases are still quite hot at the exhaust gas pipe outlet (Tail fire is common in many turboprops - fire coming out of exhaust at too rich mixture of due to residual fuel lying in the exhaust casing from previous run, or from oil leakage). Also from my estimates the thrust component is about 500N (5% of 1000hp = 50hp = 100lb = 500N) with about 4kg/s mass flow rate giving about 120m/s (430kmph) average velocity. Of coarse these are ideal numbers and in reality there would be losses in the exhaust system reducing these numbers. But still say a 300kmph jet with say 700degC temp is a potent jet. I don't believe the numbers they look too big, but that's what the calculations are showing up. Putting this thing in mind I had to consider the thing mentioned by Kartik with some seriousness. There is a definite knowledge and information gap on my end, but I would like to know what are the real numbers.

But may be you are right that all this is a non-issue and so nobody really mentions it anywhere. There is not a lot of difference in the exhaust temperature out of various types of engines, of the order of 700-900degC. Of coarse there reduction in the temperature in the exhaust system before it comes out in atmosphere, due to either turbochargers, catcons, silencers, long pipes etc in case of IC engines or due to nozzles in case of Jet engines. A typical commercial Jet engine has exhaust temperature of around 350-400deg. For military its much more. for IC engines its much less. I noticed in DC-7 pics where the exhaust from the engine is dumped directly on the wind root which is barely few feet away. I have also been thinking that the exhaust from trucks/buses is barely hot. My bikes' exhaust is almost at ambient temperature. Given all these things it really looks like the exhaust gets cooled quite rapidly.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby shiv » 10 Jun 2016 13:44

nileshjr wrote:
But may be you are right that all this is a non-issue and so nobody really mentions it anywhere. There is not a lot of difference in the exhaust temperature out of various types of engines, of the order of 700-900degC. Of coarse there reduction in the temperature in the exhaust system before it comes out in atmosphere, due to either turbochargers, catcons, silencers, long pipes etc in case of IC engines or due to nozzles in case of Jet engines. A typical commercial Jet engine has exhaust temperature of around 350-400deg. For military its much more. for IC engines its much less. I noticed in DC-7 pics where the exhaust from the engine is dumped directly on the wind root which is barely few feet away. I have also been thinking that the exhaust from trucks/buses is barely hot. My bikes' exhaust is almost at ambient temperature. Given all these things it really looks like the exhaust gets cooled quite rapidly.

Of course it is hot - but it is a hot jet and as the graphics in the paper shows the temperature curve shows a flame shaped distribution where the central stream of hot air coming out at 590 deg (F) rapidly cools to a central stream of 350 and then 250 deg F just 10 meters behind the tail end - and this is at take-off (max) thrust. But the gases get cooler and cooler in concentric rings around the central stream. The expansion of hot air itself at the exhaust will lead to a sudden drop in temperature and looking at those graphics it is clear that a distance of just 2 meters to one side of the exhaust stream and 5 meters behind shows up temperatures as "cool" as 200 deg F and this is at take off thrust from the engine of a DC 9. At idling and "breakaway" thrust things are much cooler - and this is with no propeller dispersing the gases - just the jet exhaust+bypass gases if any. The high exhaust temperatures are not only from flame - they are from high pressures. Adiabatic cooling and cooling from mixing are remarkably rapid.

I am no expert but I guessed that this must be a non issue but was looking for more information. Having determined to my satisfaction that it is a non issue - I still wonder why anyone might mention it as an issue while looking at the first pictures of the first flight of the HTT 40. What on earth might make someone pass a comment like that?

nirav
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2020
Joined: 31 Aug 2004 00:22
Location: Mumbai

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby nirav » 10 Jun 2016 15:34

^ive observed this weird desire to find faults in design and claim intellectual superiority.

@ the LCAs area rule "mistake", one could say that the proposal for a plug in the next variant is to optimise drag.
The current design with the higher supersonic drag isn't necessarily a "mistake" but a choice/trade-off..

member_23694
BRFite
Posts: 732
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby member_23694 » 10 Jun 2016 21:43

this is fun.[Though does not seem related to any selection]

After LCA flight, IAF chief flies Gripen D

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/new ... 692277.cms

IAF chief Arup Raha on Sweden visit, flies Gripen fighter aircraft

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby Austin » 10 Jun 2016 21:48

It is not uncommon for air chief who visit countries on offcial visit to fly some of the host country aircraft if there is interest and opportunity to do so

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby Austin » 10 Jun 2016 22:04

BAE Systems Working on ‘Combat’ Hawk Jet for India
BAE Systems is proceeding with design and wind-tunnel testing of a new wing for the evergreen Hawk jet trainer. The work, which is being done in the UK, was prompted by Indian interest in producing a “combat” version of the aircraft, as a follow-on to the current licensed production of the Mk132 advanced jet trainer (AJT) version by Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL). BAE and HAL signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) in May 2015 to explore future cooperation, and discussions continue.

Steve Timms, BAE’s managing director of defense information and training services, said that a slatted wing would produce an “interesting” increase in the Hawk’s performance, including shorter takeoffs and landings, and agility. New sensors and weapons would be added, as well as a helmet-mounted display for the pilot, and possibly also a single large-screen display in the front cockpit. Indian media last year reported an MBDA official suggesting the ASRAAM and Brimstone missiles as armaments. “The Hawk can already drop 500-pound bombs,” Timms noted.

HAL is currently producing the last of the 123 Hawk Mk132s that India ordered in various batches through 2010. The Indian air force is flying up to 100 sorties per day, and the aircraft is demonstrating good availability, said Timms. The MoU also includes a possible long-term joint venture for the support of these aircraft, and for India’s BAE Jaguars, which are likely to remain in service for decades to come, according to Timms. If a firm agreement to develop the combat Hawk can be reached, BAE would first modify its UK-based Hawk AJT demonstrator, he added.

Meanwhile, production of Hawk AJTs in the UK is assured until 2018, thanks to recent orders by Saudi Arabia (44) and Oman (8). These aircraft have the latest cockpit and training system modifications to help pilots from those countries transition to the Eurofighter Typhoon combat jet. “The current Hawk is still very relevant, and we can create a rich training environment, both in the air on the ground,” Timms said.

vishvak
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5836
Joined: 12 Aug 2011 21:19

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby vishvak » 10 Jun 2016 23:31

The Combat Hawk will prolly be using the same assembly line after orders of Mk132 Advanced Hawk are completed.

Very quick planning by BAE, considering that a few years back there was a shortage of trainers.

member_23370
BRFite
Posts: 1103
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby member_23370 » 11 Jun 2016 00:05

Its time IAF was asked to commit to LCA-10 squadrons minimum. Gripen is desperate as no one is going to order the gripen in numbers.

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13262
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby Lalmohan » 12 Jun 2016 01:48

grippen maybe a waste of time, but swedish partnership/collaboration on amca maybe an interesting idea...

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9247
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby brar_w » 12 Jun 2016 04:30

grippen maybe a waste of time, but swedish partnership/collaboration on amca maybe an interesting idea...


Partnership implies a joint need. Sweden gets FOC Gripen E/F in 2026. They are already partnered on the Neuron, and will most likely pursue a two pronged strategy of upgrading the Gripen E/F to keep it up to date in the 2030's and 2040's and then partnering on an unmanned aircraft and investing in manned-unmanned teaming to enhance their national defense. They are unlikely to require a completely clean sheet design for at least 15 years after their field the Gripen E/F and in that time-frame their 5th generation design may well be rather obsolete. India needs the AMCA in the 2020-2030 time-frame so there is really no aligning of operational requirements. If SAAB comes in it will likely be as a consultant as opposed to a partner.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21053
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby Philip » 12 Jun 2016 19:54

The IAF needs approx 300 light fighters to replace the hundreds of MIG-21s,27 and 21-Bisons,another 120.LCA production simply cannot achieve 30 aircraft/yr.We need these sircraft inducted at the rate of 2 sqds per yr.to keep numbers steady . Don't also forget that the Jags are to be upgraded and that upgrade will again take aeons IST.Hence the need/talk for anothrr type to be built in India. The most obvious solution is LCAs and upgraded MIG-29s with AESA radars and TVC engines,but the IAF want another option especially if the FGFA is also on the cards.

The Gripen will be the most cost effective Western aircraft.The CoAS will return and wax elequent about the Gripen....and it is a v.good bird.Just watch this space. If the Sanjay Bhandari expose is accurate the "teens" have no chance.The HAL boss has also given it the thumbs down signal.

Suresh S
BRFite
Posts: 790
Joined: 25 Dec 2008 22:19

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby Suresh S » 12 Jun 2016 20:15

Funny innit? Just sayin.
Ahhaiii boss . just like the guys in marseille. Could not help that one shiv. :D

RKumar
BRFite
Posts: 1289
Joined: 26 Jul 2009 12:29
Location: Evolution is invention, explosion is destruction.

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby RKumar » 12 Jun 2016 20:27

Why it is easy put a new production for newer type then extending LCA manufacturing capacity? Why would we like to a have an air force owning a zoo of different fighters? I think it is the right time to bite the bullet and order LCA in large numbers.

I hope enough funds and resources are allocated for AMCA.

Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2482
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby Vivek K » 12 Jun 2016 20:32

Familiar - because we are corrupt onlee!

Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4701
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby Manish_Sharma » 13 Jun 2016 02:03

Lalmohan wrote:grippen maybe a waste of time, but swedish partnership/collaboration on amca maybe an interesting idea...


swedes aren't having a big base themselves, engines they can't make themselves, also they have a very rigid barfeela attitude it will be a quick falling out like french from ef2k project plus they'll have good peek in our vision for AMCA, there geography and needs are very different then us.

Yes it seems like seeker tech, fpa tech, night vision tech the GaN tech is very much wanted by our people, even Bharat Karnad had said how french for mmrca were ready to give tech to mfr. GaN but we wanted the tech which creats tech to mnfr GaN and french refused.

So some way needs to be created and absorb this tech.

Suresh S
BRFite
Posts: 790
Joined: 25 Dec 2008 22:19

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby Suresh S » 13 Jun 2016 04:25

provided it is not a trojan horse I would welcome swedish help if it will speed up the Tejas mark-2 with 414 engine. I could be persuaded to buy a few squadrons of latest Gripen if that were to happen. khayali pulao only saar.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9247
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby brar_w » 13 Jun 2016 04:48

Sweden and SAAB, marketers of a single engine, GE 404/414 spotting, light to light_medium class fighter (Gripen C/D and E/F) will work with another Light Fighter manufacturer, to develop a cutting edge version of the LCA with advanced avionics, more powerful engine and higher performance and in doing so, create a competitor in a market segment where they hold a virtual monopoly (single engine advanced light fighter - only other competitors are attack versions of trainers such as F/A-50). Something wrong with that picture? SAABs only long term intention is to sell a lot of Gripen's to the IAF, and look to do the absolute minimum when it comes to assisting in the LCA and AMCA. If selected, they'll do their bit, but their negotiating position would naturally be to not prop up another competitor in a tough market. This by the way is what practically all OEM's will look to do, therefore the best course of action would be to acquire what technology you need, and look at the best fighter if you absolutely need another western line for some reason (I don't completely understand the need for another over and above the Rafale). A Gripen purchase however will severely threaten the LCA in a way the Rafale, F-18, F-16 or even Mig-35 won't.

Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2482
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby Vivek K » 13 Jun 2016 05:14

Snahata your khayali pulao are like cutting the branch you are sitting on! Decades of screw driver turning has not taught Indian industry a thing! And 2-3 squadrons of gripes plus raffles ......

Also if you could perhaps provide an example of a company creating its competitor out of the sheer generosity of your heart then we may perhaps consider your pulao!

Suresh S
BRFite
Posts: 790
Joined: 25 Dec 2008 22:19

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby Suresh S » 13 Jun 2016 05:46

Either raffi or gripen not both. we are trying to compensate the swedes with the latest gripen purchase. If they do not want to play ball than we will create our own tejas mark -2 and they will have a competitor anyway even if it takes us a bit longer. That is how I would talk to them . It is not a threat but realty. Tejas is already flying and is being inducted. Sweden can see that we are capable but little help is welcome though if available .

deejay
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4008
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby deejay » 14 Jun 2016 14:51

Saw HTT 40 flying for what seems to a preparation for a display. Low level high speed parallel to the runway etc. was practiced today.

If the grapevine is correct then 17th is when Shri Parriker will be here for watching the display.

BTW, no tail chase today. Quick on the feet for the HTT 40 guys. Well done and keep it up.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby shiv » 14 Jun 2016 16:26

^^Hope the weather gods are kind

Was the undercarriage retracted?

deejay
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4008
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby deejay » 14 Jun 2016 17:39

shiv wrote:^^Hope the weather gods are kind

Was the undercarriage retracted?


Very much. It really zipped past.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby shiv » 14 Jun 2016 17:57

8) ^^Aha!!



Return to “Military Issues Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests