'Make in India' Single engined fighter

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 17 Jul 2017 01:44

Errrrr.......

Has anyone looked into the cons for UAVs?

The one issue looming in the USAF face is the impact (-ve, of course) it has on the pilots.

Each *armed* UAV, in flight, needs at least two pilots, if not more. That is just to keep them flying.

Then sensorS, sensorS, sensorS. Does India have darn great sensors? I do not know.

Secured comms.

I am sure there are more topics for discussion, beyond these.

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 17 Jul 2017 02:24

NRaoji: And these are showstoppers? "Pilots" for UAVs are the best video-game players. You train and hire them at video arcades. Initially. After that the detailed maneuvering is left to the autonomous system. Only the Fire authorization requires a human (for now).

If you think through, you see that UCAVs are the way to break the injun dev and aircraft production vicious circles. The first "UCAV"is a tiny 3-D printed rubber-band plane that can drop an ink drop on someone's white kurta. Surely a middle-school competition will bring out tremendous designs and demonstrations there. The GNC and targeting aspects can be learned quickly from that. Then you graduate to small gas turbines, where the cold sections at least can be 3D printed today. The fuselage etc production is learned slowly.

Even if it carries ONE missile, it is a deadly threat if deployed. Crash a few into the Himalayan canyons for practice. Maybe in disputed territory.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 17 Jul 2017 02:39

No, they are not show stoppers.

But when not considered they do make one giddy, people have gigantic expectations, only to bring people to earth once reality strikes.

I would, in fact, turn the tables and ask what components of a UAV is India great (really) in (I have not performed thsi exercise, so I do not know). And, then build expectations. Where are the imported black box, you know, the usual stuff.

I have no problem even importing core components, as long as the expectations are properly set. IF we import this, THEN these are the limitations and THEREFORE this is all we can or cannot do.

A simple dependency chart should do. Will make sure everyone following the item of interest can set their expectations OR better still Indians know which techs to chase for a true made in india product.

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 17 Jul 2017 02:47

Just in the past few weeks my Evil 6th coujin must have used his Amex card to acquire an entire UAV air force (in parts). Mostly on Hobby King, Alex NLD, ASIA2WORLD, CHICO... every single one of them being Chinese. Some parts came direct from Hong Kong. Tiny pieces of plastic with some metal. These craft can fly themselves, they have g-sensors to automatically compensate the thrust of 4 rotors to get them right side up if you invert them (we tried very hard and eventually had to snip the control wires). Their slightly more expensive coujins can fly around and avoid colliding with walls and desks.

WTF do Indians do, that comes anywhere close, hain? These Chinese people are just hungrier. Fire in the belly. Why do we think we even DESERVE to survive, as lazy as we are? (OK, **THAT** should bring out the Holy Defenders of BharatVarsha etc). Start thinking a bit, guys.

In 1962 our predecessors died in the cold of NEFA and Nathu La, frostbitten in their Kerala Police leather slippers in the ice, aiming their .303s as well as their shivering hands could aim, at the hordes of Chinese with machine guns racing at them. Even in Kargil, the war was won by young people climbing the cliffs in the middle of the night at 14,000 feet, into the machine guns of the terrorists.

Maybe India needs a draft. With the only exemptions being for engineers who volunteer to flight-test the vehicles that they build with their own hands.

BTW, the engineers who hunted down and specified all those pieces individually, saving every penny, are all Indians. Its not our Aryan muttDNA that stops us, just plain old laziness. ***YAWN! typing a post is soooo much work!!****

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 17 Jul 2017 02:49

BTW, addressing the "Pilot"s topic. It is taking a mental toll on them. Tracking a human, no matter how bad the guy is, for some time and then having to kill that person/s, is not trivial task, since it is repeated rather often.

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 17 Jul 2017 02:52

The US polis seem to do it, no problem, and that to unarmed fellow citizens. Tracking and killing murderin' Paki terrorists gives them such pangs of conscience? Well... send them on R&R to the LOC. Seeing the mutilated remains of a fellow citizen should be curative enough.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 17 Jul 2017 03:06

True.

!!!!! Poof !!!!

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 17 Jul 2017 04:40

^Of course this has absolutely nothing to do with the notion of getting out of the "zero-engined fighter" problem in this thread, NRaoji.

Big problem is that when someone suggests a solution that might involve a teeeeeeeny weeeeany bit of departure outside of copying from Xerox manuals and getting Training, everyone gather around like the old Nursery Rhyme of my misspent childhood:

"Lets to bed! Said Sleepy Head
"Tarry a While!" said Slow
"Put on the Pan!" said Greedy Nan
"Let's sup b4 v "go". "

Meanwhile in Red China,

chote-chote bacche bhi UCAV se khelte hain!

That's the other thing: E6C had a ******* student who spent the entire summer in ******* - BUILDING A HOVERCRAFT TANK. May be ridiculous by all the "Has the Bhesht Made that onlee yaar and eej it availabal phor Technology Transfer and License Production yaar?" but the kid actually made it. It runs. It has a feedback control system. A bigger version might come across the frozen wastes of Aksai Chin or Siachen glacier any day now. Except for the soldiers on the front and police hunting terrorists, ppl in India have absolutely no clue or care how precarious India's freedom and security are.

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 17 Jul 2017 04:42

And so, back on line: WHAT sensors are needed pls? You are probably 400% right, but I don't know what types of sensors would be needed that are anything special. That might be a question that I get any moment now from Ppl On High

Most probably not, though.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 17 Jul 2017 05:10

Sensors? Sorry, dunno. Can only cut-paste Western info, if you want (but anyone can do that).

However, in the Indian context, beyond WHAT sensors, I would be equally interested in HOW MATURE are these Indian sensors.

Need data points for where India is and how far she needs to go.

Perhaps a topic for the Design a Fighter thread?

Have some time to do some donkey work - dig things out, if need be.

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 17 Jul 2017 06:19

deleted

srai · Post by **srai** » 17 Jul 2017 07:00

UlanBatori wrote:...

So S and R, my buddies, reached H'bad clutching PeeEchDees, presumed to know only Theory. They were, as one my later PAGS remarked when we went to visit him in his cave, "One step above Janitor, One step below President". (He is actually now one step from President..). Did everything. Skills learned in PIGS-dom included sweeping the floor, so they did that. Operating drills and saws and screwdrivers so they did those. Specified computers, sensors, test stands, designed them, built them, refined them. Built the Akash from concept to flight, then solved some nightmarish problems. Solid rocket instability, rocket-ramjet transition, ramjet flameholding, AA game theory, energy budgeting, probably a lot about the radar.
S is the one who told me years later:
We have solved all problems with the Akash that we know. But we cannot go beyond, unless they field a large number, and we get back deployment data.
This, in a nutshell, is India's problem. Not willing to go the distance and support its engineers and scientists. Ready to jump ship to shiny phoren maal the moment those are de-sanctioned. S and his friends were always under the Damocles sword of "Sanction relief" which would send the baboon and mantris scampering to cancel their programs.

...

That's what some of us have been preaching here all along

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 17 Jul 2017 07:11

Does Ulan Bator have a TED chapter? Looks like plenty of fodder for such 20 min talks!!!

But, interesting stuff - your post. The problem is that that is how it is all over the universe. And I assume Ulan is in the same Universe. ???? That is what my poof-ed post was about. There has got to be a parallel, no-cost "DRDO".

Bharat Forge or someone hired a bunch of ex-GTRE and they have fielded an engine (or are in the process of doing so). Great. But I just hope that BF absorbs the entire cost of that engine - give it free to the forces. OK, not all, say 200 *certified* engines free. See what happens.

India can ill afford to wait for the winds from teh right direction. Some Indians need to generate the winds to push themselves. Else be left behind - techs are progressing too fast to stay idle.

BTW, just found out that SpaceX paid around a mil USD for their 3-D printer. Just US$ 1 Mil. That is it. They are churning out SuperDraco engines.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 17 Jul 2017 07:14

Problem is iaf will put out a ucav rfp that local resources cannot create and only khan can after 10 years

In meantime while people are waiting for import of 50 israeli ucav the dlagon will field 400

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 17 Jul 2017 07:41

UCAV force may be fielded by chaddis

(not entirely in jest..). If I were running the show I would ask IAF to either nurture and take it forward, or watch it being taken away from them. Find a bloody-minded Army Brigadier-General to own and run the UCAV force - of course offering humble cooperation to IAF, but not control. No phoren entities need apply for the UCAV contract, it must be given to 100% desi types like OMRON Bus Repair and Electronic Calculator Pvt. Ltd. of Coimbatore in the 1970s or Senkottai Senthil & Sons Fireworks and Rocket Propulsion Pvt. Ltd. I am certainly not anti-IAF, it's just that as posted b4, ppl join IAF to fly planes, not to operate joysticks in video game parlors. So there is a fundamental, innate antipathy to UAVs among true bird-blooded Air Force people. Imagine flying along in your supersonic fighter, and this THING with no human comes up beside you and blinks at you. Yech! But that is the future. You want that thing on ur side, not shooting at u.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 17 Jul 2017 07:46

GD,

We all breath the same air.

Lockheed went under at least once, got bought out once, what you now is the third version (with Martin). If it were not for the 747 Boeing would have gone under. SpaceX survived by one launch. Where is Moto?

Got to punch through that wall. Making a dime is not important. Sleep on that cot.

negi · Post by **negi** » 17 Jul 2017 22:34

NRao wrote: Then sensorS, sensorS, sensorS. Does India have darn great sensors? I do not know.

Two things.

1. What type of sensors ? We are in process of setting up our own navigation system with NAVIC . As for on board sensors we need nothing special aside from what are there on Tejas actually not all of them . We already have a very mature terrain following capability with Brahmos (SCAN ) and now with Nirbhay in development .

2. Always remember if it is software we have a much higher probability of making it here as against hardware . Be it jet engines or active elements of Radar that is where we got stuck the FADEC and DSP part are not show stoppers for us .

That is why I said UCAV should be much easier for us ; I am not talking about UCAV like Eddie in the movie 'Stealth' I am talking about a semi-autonomous vehicle where for a start "Landing" can be manual however everything else be it take off , flying to destination via pre-set way points at pre-programmed altitude profile should be autonomous . It is the propulsion where we are not great but hey if we are talking about a medium weight UCAV we can even start with Jaguar's ardour engines and then swap them out with a non after-burning Kaveri with lower stages minus SCB and such exotic stuff after all we need UCAV to fly low so a subsonic regime should be perfectly respectable. It need not have any gun for we do not expect it to engage enemy in dogfights , 2-4 AAMs and 2 guided munitions like 250/500 pound LGBs should be fine.

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 18 Jul 2017 01:44

Thanks, negi. IOW, trapped inside the LCA-GE404 / BrahmosOneWay is already a UCAV waiting to be liberated. I am saying that they should perhaps set up a small-engine production line with the existing state of technology (BTW, where does desh get engines for the Chetaks?), and crank them out, fit them in relatively small UCAVs (one SAM or runway-buster each?) and learn the production issues of both. As tech improves (single-crystal blades, better bearings, whatever, fit them into this improving production line.

IMO a well-planned robotic production line should be able to able to handle a factor of 2 diameter change and factor of 10 weight change of the ultimate machine. So grow the UCAV line. At the same time, test a pilotless LCA with existing Kaveris, and start putting improved Kaveris in. May crash a few times, so start cranking out these pilotless LCAs. Improve the composites, get better sources for the inner gizmos. Let the first 100 from this line be all pilotless.

Once engine reliability (not necessarily performance) of Kaveri is established, fit #101 onwards with those, limit the LCA performance for now. Somewhere down the line, those separate manufacturing lines should converge, with a huge improvement in reliability, performance, production rate and cost.

The old Kaveris can then be shifted to large UCAVs, and the manned LCAs continuously upgraded with the best engines.

I know, sounds EZ. But one has to break out of the "not enough experience - not enough quality - too dangerous to experiment" vicious circle while usefully contributing to defence. There will come a point where the UCAV LCA is able to beat the manned LCA in practice combat.

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 18 Jul 2017 01:58

Also IMO, for pure UCAVs, there is no reason not to go with, say, multiple engines of the class of a helicopter engine (minus the gearbox of course). Build enough to get the quality up.

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 18 Jul 2017 02:03

From HAL site:

The helicopter is powered by Artouste - III B turbo shaft engine.

Ah! 100% india-jeenius with only 70% frogistani content. So there is a strong need there as well.

Length: 1,440 mm (56.7 in) Diameter: 545 mm (21.5 in) - height, 390 mm (15.4 in) - width. Dry weight: 115 kg (253.5 lb). Compressor: Single-stage centrifugal. Combustors: Annular combustion chamber. Turbine: Three-stage axial. Fuel type: Aviation kerosene to AIR 3405. Oil system: Oil grade AIR 3512, pressure lubrication. Maximum power output: 500 hp (372.85 kW) at 34,000 rpm for take-off. Fuel consumption: 153 kg (337.3 lb)/hour at maximum continuous power. Power-to-weight ratio: 3.24 kW/kg (1.972 hp/lb).

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 18 Jul 2017 02:05

negi ji,

Not an expert - educated via google.

1. What type of sensors ? We are in process of setting up our own navigation system with NAVIC . As for on board sensors we need nothing special aside from what are there on Tejas actually not all of them . We already have a very mature terrain following capability with Brahmos (SCAN ) and now with Nirbhay in development .

ISR sensors, from at least 50,000 feet up there. Here is a cut-paste (this BTW, is what the USAF is looking at to improve, for their next gen Reaper and Global Hawk):

Signals intelligence sensors and geospatial intelligence sensors—which include electro/optical, infrared, multispectral/hyperspectral imaging, ground surveillance radar, full motion video, light detection and ranging and on-board processing/exploitation/fusion of sensor data—will be the primary focus for sensor modalities of the study.

My understanding is that the sensors, themselves, are becoming more "sensitive" (same performance at a longer range? Or better performance at the same range?)

Two big things: ""on-board processing" (much like IOT, where they push a lot of the back-end computational work to the source) and AI (many entities are coming out with AI-on-a-chip)

When networked I woudl expect such an asset to be part of a beyond-visual range detection.

2. Always remember if it is software we have a much higher probability of making it here as against hardware

Ah. When I refer to "sensors", in teh Indian context, it is always hardware. Experience wise, trying to compensate for teh hardware is possible, but as time goes by, very expensive. Much better to develop both in parallel and replace the software with teh hardware when possible.

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 18 Jul 2017 02:14

50K feet flight is for recon UAVs. UCAVs will operate at mostly low altitudes (element of surprise with terrain-following). Autopilot system must be pretty good with a fast computer on board.

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 18 Jul 2017 06:55

Here's a scenario for non-technical people like me:

We have 90 Kaveri powered Ghatak UCAVs, all equipped with:

1. Litening pod for targeting (IRST on this will not only be for ground targets but air-targets too.)

2. Uttam AESA radar

3. Jammer in built.

4. Radio link antenna s.

5. Computer which connects them all to each other assigning targets.

In weapons they are all carrying 2 Spice 250 bombs and 1 SFDR (Desi Meteor) + 1 Astra Mk2.

Here's how it works:

They are all flying towards Lhasa, the moment they cross into enemy border, the ground pilot punches in code opening the lock that was preventing them from releasing / firing weapons So that they don't attack our own.

From now onwards they're all on auto firing mode the moment any target appears truck jeep artillery tank building etc. For air to air also same principle anything flying helicopter, Jumbo or fighters all are game.

They come across a convoy of trucks and BMPs so computer selects 24 of Ghataks to release their Spice 250s.

As the convoy gets destroyed these 24 Ghataks now fly a bit higher and further ahead of other 66 Ghataks that are still carrying a to g bombs.

By now fighters have been scrambled towards them, as the first 24 Ghataks face cheeni fighters they all fire their both SFDR and Astra Missiles and keep the enemy fighters locked on Uttam. Now we have 48 Missiles approaching cheeni fighters, who in return have also fired their missiles towards Ghataks. While panic stricken cheeni pilots break engagement and dive the Ghataks keep them in there radar lock killing them all. While 10 Ghataks also get shot down.

And this way it continues....

The moment a Ghatak runs out of weapon, he turns back and heads home.

_______________________

VivS says what if radio link is jammed? But that applies to F35 net centricity too no? What if Link 16 gets jammed, wouldn't that render jsf ineffective too, no?

NRao ji Ground pilots burning out from killings thing also applies to A10, jsf and other strike pilots too, wouldn't they burn out too. Aren't the sky pilots more difficult to replace than ground video game pilots?

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 18 Jul 2017 07:00

UB/negi,

Why all these convulsive moves? As many have suggested in the past, convert ALL the MiG-21 and whichever other MiGs into UCAVs. Put on some RAM and off you go. Get a few retired MiG pilots out of retirement.

Will address the other UCAV issue l8r. But, looks like the cousin visited the gold plated Mar-a-Lago.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 18 Jul 2017 07:06

Too many thoughts on UCAV in this "single engined fighter" discussions. Do we know what roles we want these fighters to be in?

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 18 Jul 2017 07:08

^^ Ek panth 2 kaaj

Testing Kaveri and closing the turbofan engine gap. Testing fearlessly as no human pilots. So we can crash prototypes.

This will close gap with US very fast. So they will try their level best to sabotage.

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 18 Jul 2017 07:17

Nothing wrong with converting MiG21s into pilotless terrain-following Brahmos types either, for pilgrimage to IslamaGood, return optional. But that does nothing for the manufacturing problem. Any HF-24s, Mysteres, Gnats, Canberras can also be converted. HS-748s full of fertilizer + fuel oil. (+ sackloads of Kashmiri stone-throwers as passengers). Objective here is to improve the fighter production line, and the engine quality and quantities. Hence relevance to single-injin fighter.

I don't know how many remember that the entire LCA program was carried out with a total of 8 GE F404 engines. Or was it 4 engines? Amazing.

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 18 Jul 2017 07:20

P.S What is a Ghatak pls? Which thread?

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 18 Jul 2017 07:23

Related question. What is the estimate of the expert jingos here, on the NUMBER of single-engined fighters needed to, say, win a war against Cheen, while keeping Pak at bay? Assume number of twin-engine strike aircraft capped at present number and planned purchases. Maybe this number will help guide discussions.
Again, not number being planned for purchase, or on order by IAF. Actual number to make you feel comfortable about winning against Cheen while keeping Pak deterred.

Chinese numbers:
Chengdu J-7 fighter/trainer: 728
J-10 Multirole 400+ ??
J-20 stealth 32+
J-8 300+
J-11 253+
J-16 24
Su-27 75
Su-30 73
Su-35 24
+ bomber fleets

+ J20 expected in numbers by 2018.

UCAVs expected to be around 50+ alreadyLijian "Sharp Sword".

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 18 Jul 2017 07:46

UlanBatori wrote:P.S What is a Ghatak pls? Which thread?

https://www.livefistdefence.com/2017/02 ... rward.html

Over the last three-four years, the Aeronautical Development Agency has been made aware by several foreign airframers, including stealth pioneer Lockheed-Martin, Dassault, Boeing, BAE Systems,and even MiG Corp that they’d be willing to assist the Ghatak programme in a possible variety of ways — either as offsets, or a commercial consultancy arrangement. Livefist can however confirm that the Narendra Modi government has decided that the stealth component of the Ghatak programme will be entirely in-house, and will be limited to academic institutions and private industry in country. Decisions of this kind have changed in the past (notably with the LCA Tejas programme), but the highest levels in government are clear at this time that programme ought to develop its own core technologies without external help.

Things won’t be strictly in-house on the engine though. We do know that the modified Kaveri engine for the Ghatak/AURA is to be the second big part of the project. Reported first by Livefist and confirmed years later by Defence Minister Parrikar, we now know that an initial sum of about $35 million has begun to flow into the the pre-project part of the programme since early 2016. A total of approximately $450 million will be spent from the Indian side in bringing the Kaveri engine to satisfactory operating standards through a tech partnership with France’s Snecma as part of committed offsets from the Indian Rafale contract. Top sources confirm that the technology infusion from France intends to make the Kaveri a standard engine for the LCA Tejas, to assist its modification for the Ghatak and for twin-configuration on the AMCA.

UB ji,

This whole article has connection to 2 more parts which contains full history of the project from 2007 onwards, how it got named AURA first then changed to Ghatak.

And also that like Arihant program NaMo has decided that this program reports directly to PMO.

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 18 Jul 2017 08:19

From what I read elsewhere (probably on unmentionable forum) French connection to Kaveri is no more - they wanted to put SNECMA core in Kaveri, but no tech secrets on how to build the core. This Ghatak looks cool. Question is whether they can build 1000 swiftly, and get the composite-building down to an art, to use that in EllSeeYay. Overall, this Ghatak (LIVEFIST artist's conception) is exactly what I was arguing for as well: use it to bring both engine and airframe construction to world-class by sheet trial and error and persistence.

Also very heartening to read of PMO insisting that core competency has to be developed in house.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 18 Jul 2017 08:50

the payload looks a bit less for a good strike mission even if we consider 4 LGBs ....

but I will take that as a starter plater of kababs and wait for bigger meat later - something that can deliver 8 PGMs or missiles and ELO same as the small brother.

GE404 engines could be used to run the flight test program for now until kaveri is certified

Prasad · Post by **Prasad** » 18 Jul 2017 09:47

Well powers that be don't appear to have the confidence that we can do the ghatak build in-house to tfta standards. Hence the clamouring for production tech from faarin via the f-16 line

Sensors and stuff we can maybe build based on existing ability.

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 18 Jul 2017 10:01

Stupid question:

What if body is covered with submarine anechoic tiles and wooden base instead of composites. Would it help with stealth+strength? Only areas around engine heat can be composites+steel.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 18 Jul 2017 10:05

Anechoic tiles are used on subs to absorb sound, which makes it harder for enemy sonar to detect you. Radar is different in that it uses radio waves to detect you and not sound.

ArjunPandit · Post by **ArjunPandit** » 18 Jul 2017 10:15

Prasad wrote:Well powers that be don't appear to have the confidence that we can do the ghatak build in-house to tfta standards. Hence the clamouring for production tech from faarin via the f-16 line Sensors and stuff we can maybe build based on existing ability.

ADA report indicates that Ghatak is in very initial stages, perhaps as a sub item under AMCA(as of 2016 report)

1. Draft PSQR compliance document sent to Air Hq. PSQR is finalized by Air Hq on 10th June, 2016.

2. A lead-in project for “Design of GHATAK and Development of Critical Advanced Technologies for GHATAK and AMCA” is sanctioned for Rs.231.00
crores on 13th May 2016. Major technologies to be developed under this lead-in project are broadly classified under five technology areas viz.,
(a) Model Based Systems Engineering (MBSE)
(b) Autonomous flight control technologies
(c) Aerodynamics and Propulsion technologies
(d) Stealth computations, measurements, structures & materials
(e) Technologies for GHATAK systems

At the moment no GHATAK aircraft program has been sanctioned to ADA and only funds for developing advanced Technologies have been sanctioned.
Using these funds some of the critical technologies will be developed within the country through sponsored projects.

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 18 Jul 2017 10:38

Thanks Rakesh Saar!

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 18 Jul 2017 13:04

Sounds like it's very much a Stealth study so far in every sense.

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 18 Jul 2017 14:55

Manish_Sharma wrote:Stupid question:

What if body is covered with submarine anechoic tiles and wooden base instead of composites. Would it help with stealth+strength? Only areas around engine heat can be composites+steel.

Rakesh wrote:Anechoic tiles are used on subs to absorb sound, which makes it harder for enemy sonar to detect you. Radar is different in that it uses radio waves to detect you and not sound.

To add to that, even if a certain part of stealth comes owing to the skin material, a large chunk comes from the Shaping. CPRF composites are already known to be better in Stealth. So changing material is not going to be a huge benefit (i.e. from composites to anechoic tiles, even if we consider anechoic tiles are made of a material comparable to composites in terms of RADAR wave reflectivity/absorptivity characteristics. Frankly I do not know what materials they are made of). The anechoic tiles + wooden base it not going to be anywhere near the composites in terms of Strength. Also density of the material will have to be considered.

Also one would not want to use Composites near hot regions. There operating temperature currently is limited to around 150-200deg C. Here I am taking meaning of Composites as Carbon Fibre Reinforced Plastics which are the most commonly used Composites on aircrafts. However one could use Ceramic Matric Composites - CMC for hot application, theoretically speaking. For ex on the engine exhaust side.

One would not want to use steel as well, because its simply too heavy. Aluminium, Titanium or Nickel alloys would be preferred over steel. Composites actually offer better material properties than these metals when temperature remains low.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 18 Jul 2017 17:42

UlanBatori wrote: Objective here is to improve the fighter production line, and the engine quality and quantities. Hence relevance to single-injin fighter.

Ah. I see, sorry I missed that part of the narrative.

I am afraid, the UCAV will not help that cause. IMHO, build the UA(C)V on the expertise developed for the manned programs and not the other way around. Unmanned programs can take liberty in areas that manned cannot and therefore one will be compelled to develop higher standards anyways, so just build those higher standards from the start. Else ambies all over again.

A few fleeting comments:

* Composites for 4th Gen and 5th Gen are two diff animals

* UCAV = UAC + missiles and associated HW/SW. Most UCAVs are based on UAVs (India is getting one from Israel as we post). They are pretty good at A2G and plenty ways to go for A2A

* UCAV based PC or asymmetrical warfare NEEDS HUMINIT, else success rate is extremely low (yes, the US gets a LOT of HUMINT help)

* In the case of India they will need techs that no one else may use: forest penetrating radar, as an example

* No matter which type (UAV or UCAV) the need for great sensors will always exist (IMHO of course)

* Under BTW file: PMO has tied, at the hips, the AMCA and Ghatak programs. I would suggest that it is *much better* to go from manned to unmanned. Although it may seem it is easier to go the other way - it is not