International Aerospace Discussion

member_20067 · Post by **member_20067** » 18 Jun 2013 23:14

Air India 787

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 18 Jun 2013 23:30

Air India Dreamliner display is quite graceful and the aircraft looks majestic. I hope we buy A350 in good numbers.

member_20067 · Post by **member_20067** » 18 Jun 2013 23:45

Austin wrote:Air India Dreamliner display is quite graceful and the aircraft looks majestic. I hope we buy A350 in good numbers.

Disagree with the second part of the statement--- we are having difficulties in utilizing our current crop of B-787 --- and some of them are being sold back and leased again...
http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.asp ... 542376.xml

No point in going for every new aircraft model---- remember our good old Malaya sir ostensibly ordering A-380 and making a media circus in Mumbai?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 19 Jun 2013 07:15

the dreamliner/A350 is a bit oversized for the domestic routes except the inter-metro direct flights ... but here too the airlines seem to prefer operating smaller ac and more flights giving a choice of departure times. these flights are usually full in the weekdays.

but they are ok for routes to Gulf and far east though....to replace the A330 & 777 types eventually

member_20067 · Post by **member_20067** » 19 Jun 2013 07:40

Singha wrote:the dreamliner/A350 is a bit oversized for the domestic routes except the inter-metro direct flights ... but here too the airlines seem to prefer operating smaller ac and more flights giving a choice of departure times. these flights are usually full in the weekdays.

but they are ok for routes to Gulf and far east though....to replace the A330 & 777 types eventually

If New Delhi -- Mumbai high-speed railway (travel time 6 hours) becomes a reality --- Airlines are going to take a hit--- in US the automobile and airlines lobby is strong enough to prevent proliferation of rail system-- in India they are not so... So I think airlines will be cautious to expand beyond long term market potential... When Indigo ordered 100 Airbus --- I though it was very ambitious -- now they have ordered 180 additional Airbus A-320 Neo... I am kind of a little sceptical...

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 19 Jun 2013 07:46

delhi-mumbai HSR will need gigantic levels of investment given the distance involved. we have been discussing on IR thread about HSR. getting the trains from japan is the easiest part of the job. its the total overhaul of tracks, ballast, signals, alignment, bridges which is the killer. no track in india is suitable for >150kmph avg speed right now. and the leap to 300kmph is not linear...things have to be way more TFTA per Theo sir in things like track quality and ballast.

member_20067 · Post by **member_20067** » 19 Jun 2013 09:12

Singha wrote:delhi-mumbai HSR will need gigantic levels of investment given the distance involved. we have been discussing on IR thread about HSR. getting the trains from japan is the easiest part of the job. its the total overhaul of tracks, ballast, signals, alignment, bridges which is the killer. no track in india is suitable for >150kmph avg speed right now. and the leap to 300kmph is not linear...things have to be way more TFTA per Theo sir in things like track quality and ballast.

and not to mention stray animals and humans on the track....

Zynda · Post by **Zynda** » 19 Jun 2013 09:20

KF was the only Indian airline which had ordered or committed to A-350 (& also A-380

). With KF going bust and AI the only other airline which operates full-scale International routes and they being firmly in Boeing camp, I guess we'll have to wait for phirangi airlines to start deploying A-350 on Indian routes. Emirates could very well deploy A-350 which is intended to replace A-330s anyway.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 19 Jun 2013 10:45

is emirates, lufthansa and qantas flying A380 to india now?

Zynda · Post by **Zynda** » 19 Jun 2013 11:29

GoI has banned operation of A-380 in India due to fears that its excessive seating capacity might rob traffic away from domestic players. Lufthansa flies 747-8I to BLR & Delhi...

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 19 Jun 2013 11:39

"domestic players" like emirates, etihad and qatar no doubt

member_20292 · Post by **member_20292** » 19 Jun 2013 12:22

^^^

they're domestic saar. Have you seen whom they employ? All desi onlee.

Arunkumar · Post by **Arunkumar** » 20 Jun 2013 10:08

Nice video of su-35. Long live TsaGII !!!

chiragAS · Post by **chiragAS** » 25 Jun 2013 15:07

no air show is complete without a Sukhoi display!

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 25 Jun 2013 15:13

Here is the official Paris Air Show Video of Su-35 display , Watching it on HD its good air display

http://youtu.be/BK8cg1guFAw

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 11 Jul 2013 15:11

The article talks about how the US is now coming around to the view that it may need to fight wars where severe jamming may make AESA and active missile radars ineffective. So, they're working on developing a new gen IRST with superior processing power for the Super Hornet and a new generation AIM-9X Block III missile with a range that overlaps that of the AMRAAM (the MICA and ASRAAM concept).

Perhaps at a later date, the Tejas Mk2 will require a IRST as well. They could have looked at off-the-shelf solutions earlier itself.

The U.S. Navy expects to award contracts soon for a longer-range version of the AIM-9X Sidewinder, known as Block III. Not only will it be a major change to the AIM-9X—retaining only the seeker, optical target detector (laser fuze) and data link of the Block II weapon—but its development is starting before the Block II has finished operational tests.

The Block III is associated with the Navy's effort to fit the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet with a Lockheed Martin infra-red search and track (IRST) system. The two systems are complementary, improving the ability of Navy fighters to operate in what a Boeing engineer calls an “RF (radio frequency)-denied environment” that will challenge X-band systems such as fighter radars and the seeker of the AIM-120 Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missile (Amraam).

With these developments, the U.S. Navy is following the lead of other air arms—notably, the Royal Air Force—in investing in non-RF sensors and weapons that work far outside the within-visual-range envelope. One key technology is better processing that has greatly improved the performance of IRST.

...

The Navy has not disclosed the Block III range target, but Raytheon's vice president for air warfare systems, Harry Schulte, says the goal “overlaps” the Amraam envelope. “It's more than a 10 percent impact,” he says. Boeing has also said that the Super Hornet IRST, tested on a Beech King Air this year, can achieve detection ranges compatible with Amraam.

...

The performance of the Typhoon's Pirate IRST has increased due to better processing and software since it entered service in 2007, says a Eurofighter engineer. The service-entry standard was “pretty raw.” Better processing exploits the fact that the IRST is extremely agile, capable of performing complex tailored scans, because its steering mirror is much lighter than a radar dish. It can scan faster than an AESA, in some cases, because it does not transmit. “The angular and thermal accuracy provides the processor with enough data to analyze the core and the edges” of objects in the field of view, the engineer says. “It's like a fingerprint.”

This is key to IRST performance, because as a passive system it provides no time-based range data, and has been historically susceptible to false alarms from stars, cloud reflections and ground targets. Better processing and fbriast scanning also make it possible to use geometrical techniques for range measurement.

The updated Pirate is believed to have shown its ability to detect the F-22 at significant ranges in 2010, when four of the stealth fighters were deployed to Lakenheath AFB in the U.K., according to European industry sources. Selex leads the EuroFirst consortium that produces Pirate, and its Skyward-G for the Saab JAS 39E Gripen uses similar technology.

The Super Hornet IRST mates a new processor to the sensor of the AAS-42, which was developed in the 1980s for the Grumman F-14D.

..

read further at this link

Note that the Super Hornet's IRST sensor is based on '80s technology, so it appears that the jump in range and resolution is primarily due to the processing power improvements and newer algorithms. That should be within India's reach since software is an area where India excels, not necessarily hardware and sensors.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 11 Jul 2013 16:24

Another technology that I hope DRDO develops for use on our own attack helis, for the HTT-40 (if it ever enters service) and possibly even fast-jets like the Hawk and even Tejas. Laser guided rockets..cheap, effective and good for counter insurgency ops where expending costly missiles or LGBs may be a waste.

Aviation week article

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 11 Jul 2013 17:38

Der Spiegel expose on eurofighter quality issues

Kartik is this dDM or some truth here?

http://www.spiegel.de/international/eur ... 10231.html

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 13 Jul 2013 13:57

AI's "Dreamliner"? Should call it the "Nightmare" instead!

AI should cut its losses,cancel orders and options and take a serious look at the A-350.In fact why AI is not buying the A-380 is a complete mystery.Its large load factor esp. with Indo-Gulf flights where other carriers are making hay transporting our expats,will make it a matchwinner by using existing slots,but carrying far more passengers per flight.

Boeing,Boeing,Going!....The latest double-whammy from the UK yet again raises serious doubts about the quality issues with Boeing's nightmare.

Boeing shares tumble after Heathrow fire on Ethiopian Airlines Dreamliner as second plane forced to return to Manchester

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/ho ... 06427.html

Thousands of passengers booked to fly to and from Heathrow airport have had their travel plans wrecked following a fire aboard a Boeing 787 on the ground.

The Ethiopian Airlines jet had arrived on a routine flight from Addis Ababa early in the morning, and was parked on a remote stand when fire broke out. While the blaze was extinguished, both runways were closed because of the lack of fire cover for arrivals and departures.

The closure lasted for over an hour. When the runways re-opened, Heathrow airport said: “Flights are now operating, but will be subject to delay”.

A second 787 travelling from England to the US had to turn back after experiencing a technical issue. Thomson said that flight 126 travelling from Manchester Airport to Sanford, Florida had returned to Manchester "as a precautionary measure".

Both incidents occurred at one of the busiest times on one of the busiest days of the year. Dozens of flights were diverted to airports as far afield as Paris, Manchester and Edinburgh. British Airways, which operates the majority of flights at Heathrow, was affected more than other airlines, with arrivals from Europe and the US diverted to a range of airports including Gatwick, Bournemouth, Luton and Stansted.

With aircraft and crews out of position, the knock-on effects began at once. As the evening wore on, British Airways cancellations rose to more than 40 – and tempers rose among passengers on diverted aircraft at other airports. Paul Clifton, the transport correspondent for BBC South, was on board one of several planes diverted to Stansted. He tweeted: “My diverted BA flight has now been on ground at Stansted more than three hours with passengers not allowed off. Stansted should be ashamed.”.

Aer Lingus, Air France, KLM, Lufthansa and other airlines also cancelled flights.

As the evening wore on, British Airways cancellations rose to more than 40 – and tempers rose among passengers on diverted aircraft at other airports. Paul Clifton, the transport correspondent for BBC South, was on board one of several planes diverted to Stansted. He tweeted: “My diverted BA flight has now been on ground at Stansted more than three hours with passengers not allowed off. Stansted should be ashamed.”

Affected passengers do not automatically get booked on the next flight, but must instead hope for any spare seats on following departures; passengers holding confirmed tickets take priority.

With flights heavily booked with holidaymakers, the effects of the closure are likely to reverberate through the weekend.

Once services resumed, attention switched to the Ethiopian Airlines plane – and the crucial question of whether the fire was connected with a faulty battery.

The Boeing 787 “Dreamliner” has been lauded as the future of flying - with far better economic and environmental performance, and the ability to open new routes through a combination of fuel efficiency and ultra-long range.

Shares in Boeing fell 6.5 per cent to $99.58 following today's incidents.

Around 60 Boeing 787s are currently flying, but the aircraft has suffered a troubled gestation. The state-of-the-art aircraft was grounded for three months earlier this year because of a series of fires, including one that ignited aboard a Japan Airlines jet at Boston airport shortly after landing from Tokyo.

Investigators found that the revolutionary lithium ion batteries were prone to ignite. A replacement power source was eventually devised, manufactured, certified and installed.

The particular Boeing 787 involved in the Heathrow incident, named Queen of Sheba, was the first Dreamliner to fly commercially once the aircraft type was allowed back into the skies. Boeing executives flew to Addis Ababa for a ceremonial first flight to Nairobi in May.

Deliveries of the aircraft are running years behind schedule. The first UK airline to fly the jet, Thomson Airways, began long-haul services earlier this month – but suffered an unrelated technical problem on a 787 soon after take-off from Manchester, destination Sanford in Florida. As a precaution, the crew dumped fuel over the Irish Sea and returned to Manchester.

British Airways took delivery of its first 787s late last month. The jets are due to enter service between Heathrow and Toronto in September, and to New York’s Newark airport in October. Virgin Atlantic also has 787s on order.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 13 Jul 2013 15:51

India says awaits cause of Dreamliner fire before taking action

Boeing Dreamliner Fire at Heathrow Renews 787 Safety Concern

The stock pared some of its losses after analysts said scorch marks indicated the fire at Heathrow probably wasn’t related to the lithium-ion batteries.

The damage appears to be above the crew rest area and “should have very little connection to electrical systems,” Douglas Harned, a New York-based aerospace analyst with Bernstein Research, wrote in a note to clients. He rates Boeing shares outperform.

“Most importantly, the two key lithium-ion batteries are far away from the location of the fire,” Harned said. He said he doesn’t see the incident as a risk to the 787 program.

Hiten · Post by **Hiten** » 14 Jul 2013 21:36

MiG-29K
http://t.co/xfdBj6nPqm
http://t.co/3X8oEQKEMU
http://t.co/gX3X8MGK6c
http://t.co/KcIcIG9FWy

Hawk AJT
http://t.co/ba5CUbvrQc
http://t.co/8ZiMZITZPU
http://t.co/5VE6n4INda

U-2
http://img9.imageshack.us/img9/7672/sco0.jpg
http://img843.imageshack.us/img843/3465/qzlm.jpg
http://img841.imageshack.us/img841/5314/szkc.jpg
http://img837.imageshack.us/img837/4452/y09e.jpg
http://img839.imageshack.us/img839/7467/w4gj.jpg

Su-27
http://img542.imageshack.us/img542/5796/aqxj.jpg
http://img850.imageshack.us/img850/7660/wqjz.jpg
http://img94.imageshack.us/img94/9082/wia5.jpg
http://img593.imageshack.us/img593/2192/wpeo.jpg

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 16 Jul 2013 00:02

Nasa tests 3D-printed rocket engine fuel injector

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 18 Jul 2013 04:23

What an amazing and original mind would have thought of this 5 engined bomber in 1950s :

Arunkumar · Post by **Arunkumar** » 22 Jul 2013 11:25

Hurray!! As per link Russia and Ukraine are to jointly produce An-124.
Though no time frame has been mentioned, probably just might take at least 5-7 years before the first planes start coming off the line.
As an arm-chair designer would have loved those Giants to be fitted with 4 RR Trent-1000, each spewing 330 kn thrust taking off from Agra-on-yamuna hauling cargo to Leh-on-Indus.

http://www.nst.com.my/latest/ukraine-ru ... e-1.321264

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 22 Jul 2013 11:30

well it seems the PAKDA might be subsonic flying wing based around the Tu-202 classified proj of 1980 shape.
engine studies apparently started in 2011 (one option being upsize 117) so they now know for sure its basic shape, size and weight but aren't telling.

hope Rus resists the temptation to make it as big as Tu160 and produce onlee 20 but run with a backfire size or smaller plane that they can produce some 200 units of.

Yogi_G · Post by **Yogi_G** » 22 Jul 2013 18:36

I am having trouble understanding how smaller nations without capabilities to launch satellites or the clout to rent/hire/lease satellties from the nations that can launch will be able to fight unmanned drone wars of the future. Take for example Bangladesh, they neither have the capability to manufacture and launch satellites or have the clout to rent in numbers the ones from say China or the US. Will these nations be relegated to manned fighters. If the only options for these nations to operate drones is to have terrestrial signal towers spread across distances then these will obviously be the first ones to be taken out much like the SAM sites are taken out. It is relatively tougher to take out the satellites by the enemy so the capability to fly drones guided by satellite navigation will be higher. So will unmanned drones be in the reach of only the big powers and the third tier nations who can neither build or rent will be relegated to manned fighters?

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 23 Jul 2013 07:25

Pravda :: Jul 11, 2013 :: Does anyone need 4th and 5th generation fighter aircraft?

Russia's Mikoyan Design bureau has been going through hard times during the recent years. Not that long ago, the word "MIG" was a symbol of power of the Soviet military aviation. Nowadays, despite its glorious history, the corporation reports losses annually and becomes a regular recipient of government subsidies.

Perspectives on international arms markets are not encouraging either. At the end of 2011, there were contractual obligations to deliver 20 MiG-29 to Myanmar, 45 MiG-29K/UB for Indian aircraft carrier program, plus an order for the modernization of 62 MiG -29 aircraft for Indian Air Force and an order for 24 MiG-29M/M2 planes for Syrian Air Force.

The last of the above-mentioned contracts was dropped for obvious reasons. Another order appeared, though - 24 MiG-29K and 29K/UB for Russian deck-based aviation. Nevertheless, with such a skinny portfolio, MiG remains far behind its main Russian rival - Sukhoi.

In addition, competition on the export market has been extremely high these days. The crisis pushes the countries that either were part of the Warsaw Pact, or had agreements on military cooperation with the Soviet Union, to sell their stockpiles of military hardware and aviation, including used MiG-29 aircraft. Hungary has recently announced the sale of the last batch of these.

High hopes were pinned for a new model, but the MiG-35 - an outstanding representative of the "4 + +" class - has not been lucky on international markets for some reason. This aircraft has attracted widespread attention on the global air shows when it made its debut in 2007. However, it has not received one single serious contract. A crushing blow for the jet was the Indian MMRCA tender. The Russian fighter did not even make into the short list, losing to Dassault Rafale and Eurofighter Typhoon.

Experts and the media name various reasons for the defeat. If we talk only about the technical side of the issue, the majority tend to think that the Indian military declined the Russian jet over the RD-33MK engine, which is an upgraded version of the RD-33 from 1972. In addition, there were reports saying that India did not like Zhuk-AE radar system, even though it is promoted as a major highlight of the MiG-35. According to Russian designers, the radar system guarantees the jet victory in an air battle against any "4 +" fighter. Moreover, the radar system of MiG-35 makes it comparable to 5th generation aircraft.

If we talk about the reasons other than technical performance of the aircraft, then it appears that the motives of the organizers of the tender look completely unclear. MiG-35 would have cost less than its rivals ($10.5 billion for 126 aircraft, plus the transfer of licenses and technology). In addition, Indian Air Force and Navy already have about a hundred MiG-29 aircraft of various modifications. Therefore, purchasing a fighter that is generally unified with the 29th model would have promised extra savings.

Explaining such a strange turn of events, MMRCA experts tend to allude to India's desire to diversify its program of military cooperation. To put it in a nutshell, India tends to limit the dependence of the material part of its aircraft on Russian manufacturers, taking into consideration the existing contracts for the purchase of 230 Su-30MKI fighters and upcoming programs on the joint development of T-50/PAK-FA project.

It was expected that Russia's failure at the Indian tender would have a very negative impact on the prospects of the MiG-35 in Russia. This year, though, the Defense Ministry of Russia decided to purchase a trial batch of 24 fighters. What was it? Was it an order to "preserve the unique personnel" or a "trial balloon" before the decision to replace the remaining 200 MiG-29 in the Russian Air Force with a better aircraft? Time will tell.

As for the current state of affairs in Mikoyan Design Bureau, the failures that the company has been dealing with during the recent years are related to the specific development of Russia's military-industrial complex since Soviet times. MiG and Sukhoi were working in parallel on projects of light and heavy fighters the same way it was done in the United States.

The difference was about the fact that the Americans, when passing aircraft from various commercial manufacturers into service, required maximum unification on main components. This is how a dual control aircraft was born from the F-15 by Boeing and the F-16 by Lockheed Martin - they had a one and the same Pratt & Whitney F-100 engine. The U.S. Air Force not only managed to save on the transition to the fourth generation of fighters, but also simplified their future maintenance and upgrades.

In the USSR, the situation was somewhat different. Major design bureaus in the Soviet military industrial complex were more reminiscent of the property of feudal owners from the High Middle Ages. Both MiG, and Sukhoi could use the developments of only "their own" research institutes, rely only on "their own" production base and were engaged in a competition for the exploitation of resources of the planned economy.

The administration of the Soviet defense industry that was still thinking with the categories of the Great Patriotic War, was convinced that such a state of affairs was quite acceptable. Parallel production chains were seen as a mobilization reserve to dramatically increase military production in case of a large-scale war. Any future unification between Su-27 and MiG-29 in such circumstances was out of the question.

The Soviet Union could afford maintaining two independent systems of fighter aircraft, but the Russian Federation could not. Problems of the past put the two companies in "the winter takes it all" situation. The winner will have to fit into international arms markets.

Something like that was happening in the West too. The end of the Cold War led to sharp reductions in military spending; the new generation of military hardware was many times more expensive than the previous one. The number of independent aircraft manufacturers reduced sharply, whereas other manufacturers joined their efforts to survive. An aircraft could exist if it could be exported. Everybody had to learn to survive on their own, without relying on government support.

Sukhoi entered the new period with the T-10 platform that could be modernized and modified to meet customer's needs. As a result "4 +" clones of Su-27 and Su-30 became in abundance on international markets, while MiG was languishing without significant international contracts for a whole decade.

In addition, the Su-27 was adopted after the MiG-29 and was delivered to numerous allies and partners in much smaller quantities. Sukhoi was playing on the field with no other players nearby.

An export model by Mikoyan, the universal light fighter MiG-29 CMT, did not justify hopes. Developers tried to embrace as wide a spectrum of potential customers and ultimately the plane turned out to be "for all and for nobody." Too heavy for its class, the MiG-29 CMT lost the flight characteristics relative to the original 29th model. It also carried limited ammunition and eventually became as expensive as Sukhoi heavy fighters.

In addition, the creation of a new aircraft required almost the resources of the company for the modernization of the RD-33 engine. MiG engineers later designed RD-33MK engine, which was installed on the MiG-35, with thrust vector control and extended afterburner. However, the trust of potential customers to the engine had been irrevocably undermined.

To crown it all, it turned out that the export MiG model had strong competitors in the markets of third world countries, particularly in the face of Chinese "dragons" J-10 and JF-17. With all their advantages and disadvantages, they had had a major and indisputable advantage in the eyes of buyers - the export price of Chinese aircraft was 10 million dollars less than that of Mikoyan fighters.

In fact, today's potential customer is lost in the wilds of brochures about fighters of "fourth" and "fifth" generation. They do not really understand what they are for. Yet, they are well aware of the fact that having such an aircraft in the fleet of their air force would certainly be prestigious, although it is : a) expensive, b) technically difficult.

If there is a question about the adoption of a system into service, the answer is hidden in the definition of a potential enemy, its technical capabilities and the cost of the equipment required to guarantee the execution of specific military tasks. Global trends are not a clue at all.

Based on this simple logic, aircraft on the 5th, and all sorts of "4 + +" generations will lose to more simple and cheaper solutions, particularly in the markets of the Third World. Technical complexity and versatility are surely able to provide for strategic advantage, but only in combination with a sufficient quantity. The latter will be impossible to reach due to the high price. Having invested heavily in a relatively small fleet of technically advanced aircraft, the air force of a small country is at risk of finding itself in this type of situation: "there will be no air support - the pilot fell ill."

The USA's refusal to use the F-22 during the Libyan conflict - "because the plane was not designed to attack ground targets" - forced many to think.

The assumptions above are partly supported by the behavior of potential customers at the recent Le Bourget Air Show. Customers were mostly interested in attack helicopters, UAV nEUROn and P. 1 HH Hammerhead, simple and inexpensive training and combat aircraft and all kinds of "flying tractors" like the American Archangel or the Brazilian Embraer Super Tucano EM 314B.

Meanwhile, China announced the completion of the work on the light combat training JL-10 fighter jet, which is to become the cheapest aircraft in its class - 10 million dollars against 15 million for Russia's Yak-130. Most likely, this is the type of aircraft that will determine the face of the international aviation market in the next few decades. Non-industrialized countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America, as well as private military companies, will be interested in such aircraft most.

Most likely, a crisis is in store for manned aviation against the backdrop of rising prices and increasing requirements for training of pilots. The number of countries that can afford modern piloted aircraft will inevitably decline. Sooner or later, this number will coincide with the number of countries-manufacturers. As a result, aviation producers will have to choose from either internal markets or a very narrow circle of several potential customers who will be able to afford to have and upgrade a fleet of "fourth" and "fifth" generation fighters.

Alexei Baikov

Pravda.Ru

TSJones · Post by **TSJones** » 25 Jul 2013 10:54

"The USA's refusal to use the F-22 during the Libyan conflict - "because the plane was not designed to attack ground targets" - forced many to think."

Uh, well, yes, seeing as how the F-22 is a fighter and has no bombing systems, you got us, guilty as charged. We feel so bad about that.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 25 Jul 2013 13:31

Singha wrote:the dreamliner/A350 is a bit oversized for the domestic routes except the inter-metro direct flights ... but here too the airlines seem to prefer operating smaller ac and more flights giving a choice of departure times. these flights are usually full in the weekdays.

but they are ok for routes to Gulf and far east though....to replace the A330 & 777 types eventually

Singha, neither the 787 nor the A350 are meant to be used on domestic routes, not unless the demand is huge (like it is in Japan). In India the domestic demand is enough to keep load factors healthy for a 150-160 seater A320/737-800, but it’s not adequate for the 250 seaters to be dedicated to such routes.

The only reason the AI 787 was being flown on domestic routes was to increase the number of landings for the crew, so that they got more landings under their belt before they were moved to longer routes that served destinations outside India. I got this from my maternal uncle who is an A330 captain in Air India (they have just 2 of those, both leased). When the 787 was grounded due to battery issues, the A330s were pressed into service on its domestic routes. Now, they’re back to flying Middle-east and South East Asia.

The 787, is close to 10% more fuel efficient than the A330, which is undoubtedly a very attractive proposition for current A330 operators..i.e. if you can get an early enough slot in the production line for your fleet plans. Thanks to the huge backlog for the 787 and its well-publicized program delay and battery issues, there is still healthy demand for the A330..the 1000th A330 (the first Airbus widebody to cross that number) was recently delivered to Cathay Pacific, a long time A330 operator. But the A330 does apparently score higher on a lower acquisition cost and with a large pool of existing airlines, it is cheaper as far as Introductory Costs and Fleet Commonality are concerned.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 25 Jul 2013 15:38

South Africa may look to sell its Gripen fighters due to lack of budget for operating them!

link

The South African National Defense Force is reportedly considering selling off its Gripen fighter planes and its Agusta A109 helicopters as it has no money to operate them.

According to a Beeld report, the South African Air Force's 18 Agusta helicopters were occasionally enabled but the craft did not ascend.

Due to military budget cuts, the 26 Gripen fighters purchased in the controversial arms deal were also not being used. The report said that the SANDF was considering selling off the aircraft due to the lack of money.

Avinandan · Post by **Avinandan** » 28 Jul 2013 11:00

KAI Publishes Small KF-X Concept : link

Korea Aerospace Industries (KAI) has published a drawing of a moderately stealthy fighter concept based on its T-50 series of supersonic trainers and light-attack aircraft. The concept aircraft is far smaller and less ambitious than the all-new, twin-engine KF-X designs promoted by the Agency for Defense Development, the leading proponent of building an indigenous South Korea fighter.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 29 Jul 2013 08:53

Avinandan wrote:KAI Publishes Small KF-X Concept : link
Korea Aerospace Industries (KAI) has published a drawing of a moderately stealthy fighter concept based on its T-50 series of supersonic trainers and light-attack aircraft. The concept aircraft is far smaller and less ambitious than the all-new, twin-engine KF-X designs promoted by the Agency for Defense Development, the leading proponent of building an indigenous South Korea fighter.

A single engine AMCA?

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 29 Jul 2013 08:54

Drone technology used for pilotless fighter aircraft

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 29 Jul 2013 19:44

NRao wrote: A single engine AMCA?

This is what LCA Mk3 would be.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 29 Jul 2013 20:14

MK-III and a diamond wing? Hmmmmmmmmmmm.... Very, very interesting I must say.

That should be a great morphing exercise.

I likened it to the AMCA due to what appears likes a diamond shaped wing for the SK plane.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 30 Jul 2013 08:06

Open-source airplane could cost just $15,000

Hahahaha. Here we go. A nice trainer to start the program.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 31 Jul 2013 02:48

For kicks:

'Jetman' Rossy takes to the air in the United States

Flies along with a B-17 !!!! He has to slow down for the old dame.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 31 Jul 2013 10:36

NRao wrote:MK-III and a diamond wing? Hmmmmmmmmmmm.... Very, very interesting I must say.

That should be a great morphing exercise.

I likened it to the AMCA due to what appears likes a diamond shaped wing for the SK plane.

No, no, you got me wrong.

What I meant is that LCA Mk3 will not be a new development. It will be LCA Mk2 sprinkled with stealth tech. I expect:
1. Chines along the radome leading to the wing joint
2. Angular air intakes with flat bottom. Work on splitter plate.
3. Trailing edge of wing sweeping forward. Edge matching.
4. Semi conformal hardpoints. Stealth cover for gun barrel opening. Conformal antennas
5. Frameless canopy

Arunkumar · Post by **Arunkumar** » 06 Aug 2013 19:36

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3usd6ZmM_k

video of a walk-around of jumo-004 jet engine that powered the Me-262. An interesting fact shown in the video was it was started by a motorcycle engine which in turn was started by pulling a chord on the nose of the engine. My respect for TVS-Luna went up several notches on realizing that it can be used for starting jet engines.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 07 Aug 2013 09:45

Russian Airforce Chief confirms PAK-DA will be subsonic and bigger than Tu-160

Bondarev: promising aviation complex long-range aircraft will be subsonic

Promising aviation complex long-range aircraft (PAK DA) is subsonic, it differs from the existing long-range aircraft such as the Tu-160, is that it will carry more weapons, told reporters on Tuesday, Chief of the Air Force, Lieutenant General of the Russian Federation Victor Cooper.

"PAK DA will be subsonic, his difference is that it will be bigger than the Tu-160, and weapons will be much more serious. All other tasks will be to decide missiles," - said Cooper.

At present, Russian strategic aviation forces, which are part of the 37th Air Army of the Supreme Command, include the Tu-32 bomber 95MS6, 31 95MS16 Tu-13 bombers and Tu-160. They are capable of carrying more than 850 long-range cruise missiles.

It is assumed that the new bomber will have a high level of combat power and will be able to overcome the modern anti-aircraft defenses. The car will be equipped with the newest complex of electronic warfare and precision-aircraft weapons.

Previous Russian Defense Minister Anatoly Serdyukov reported that Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev decided to establish in the territory of the Kazan Production Association named after Gorbunov new modern factory. It is expected that there will be the An-70, and in the future PAK DA.