LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8228
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby Indranil » 23 Dec 2013 23:02

Avinandan wrote:Indranil Saar,
Do we need to consider the weight of the pylons in your calculations ?

No sir/saar/ji for me me please.

I am not sure whether to add or not. The definition of "clean" is not clear (no pun intended :) ). It definitely contains empty weight + full internal fuel. But does it contain all pylons loaded and 2 AAMs (I am not clear about it). If we do have to add the weights of the pylons, my point will get stronger, so I did not. :wink:. I just took 3.5 Tons of external stores on the LCA Brochure to mean the weight of the stores alone.

nachiket wrote:Indranil, in that particular pic, all three fuel tanks seem to be of the smaller 800Ltr type I think.

May be. If I could have have seen them from the side or back, I could have identified them for sure. Anyways, they have done CFD studies with 2 * 1200 ltr, + 3 * LGB (1000lbs bomb) + 2 AAMs, + LDP. You can see them on the brochure they launched at FOC on the ADA website. Using the same kind of calculations, we would arrive at a number of nearly 3.9 Tons.

The confusion is because they just provide so many brochures and so few of them match. The Brochure at ADA's website does not match the one on Tejas's website and none of them match the ones published at AI-13! Now I don't know what clean take off weight means. Does it contain 2 AAMs? Is the 3.5Tons of external load contain this 2 AAMs or exclude it?! Then should define clean weight officially. Right now we have hearsay and Ajai Shukla's word.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8103
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby nachiket » 23 Dec 2013 23:09

^^I guess the only way to be sure would be to ask someone like Cmdr Maolankar at the next AI.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19840
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby Karan M » 23 Dec 2013 23:20

As of June 2013, the estimate for a new radome being made available was January 2014 (7 months).

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7534
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby Prasad » 23 Dec 2013 23:21

krishnan wrote:http://ians.in/stories/2013/Dec/19/DEB_4172.JPG

Hi.Res close up photo of LCA


What is/was under the starboard intake?

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19840
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby Karan M » 24 Dec 2013 00:24


nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8103
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby nachiket » 24 Dec 2013 00:26


That's under the port intake. The orange thing under the starboard one is probably a camera.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16831
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby NRao » 24 Dec 2013 00:41

nachiket wrote:

That's under the port intake. The orange thing under the starboard one is probably a camera.


yes, you are right, a camera bracket - with no camera in it.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19840
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby Karan M » 24 Dec 2013 00:54

yup the orange thing is likely a camera attachment

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

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby shiv » 24 Dec 2013 07:19

Sriman wrote:
http://api.smugmug.com/services/embed/2 ... height=768

Check around 2:35 mark. It's slower on the original video. It looks like the new video is a little sped up. Of course, this is not to disparage the agility of the aircraft. It looks very agile as it is.

Is there any specific information or input that the earlier video was not slowed down?

Sriman
BRFite
Posts: 1858
Joined: 02 Mar 2009 11:38
Location: Committee for the Promotion of Vice and the Prevention of Virtue

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby Sriman » 24 Dec 2013 09:55

shiv wrote:
Sriman wrote:
http://api.smugmug.com/services/embed/2 ... height=768

Check around 2:35 mark. It's slower on the original video. It looks like the new video is a little sped up. Of course, this is not to disparage the agility of the aircraft. It looks very agile as it is.

Is there any specific information or input that the earlier video was not slowed down?

No. It's possible that the original video is slowed down. It's also possible that both of them are altered. To me it looked like the new video is sped up. I could be wrong, in which case i stand corrected.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5348
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby Kartik » 24 Dec 2013 10:16

Shivji, I too had seen that earlier video and the roll rate appeared to be nearly on par with the Mirage-2000..in this new compilation video, that part is clearly sped up..not just the roll but also the banking is much too fast to be at normal speed.

rajanb
BRFite
Posts: 1945
Joined: 03 Feb 2011 16:56

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby rajanb » 24 Dec 2013 11:13

Kartik wrote:Shivji, I too had seen that earlier video and the roll rate appeared to be nearly on par with the Mirage-2000..in this new compilation video, that part is clearly sped up..not just the roll but also the banking is much too fast to be at normal speed.


Kartik, I would expect that the true performance would not be divulged in the public domain. So was that "speeding" up, just some idea of making the vid snazzy, or deliberate? TIA

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby Singha » 24 Dec 2013 11:16

the onlee place I saw that kind of eyeblink move is the "extreme deep invader" UCAV thing in stealth movie..

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36416
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby SaiK » 24 Dec 2013 12:17

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UeQHV5Z4RRg
do not know when this video was taken..

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19840
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby Karan M » 24 Dec 2013 12:19

Looks like new HAL chief is serious about HALs commitment to the program. Hope it continues. Now for FOC and MK2 asap.

vic
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2412
Joined: 19 May 2010 10:00

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby vic » 24 Dec 2013 13:53

My Guess is:-

LCA Dry Empty weight = 6700kg
Weight required to bring it up to fighting Empty weight like Hydraulic fluids, Oxygen, fuel in pipes & engines etc =500kg
Chaff, flare dispenser, gun, ammo = 200kg
6 Pylons=300kg
2 WVR=210kg
Pilot, helmet, oxygen mask, flight suit, parachute, survival kit=100kg
Fuel=2500kg i.e. Total = 10,510kg

Thereafter the rest of around 3000kg can be bombs, fuel tanks, BVR, ARM Missiles etc giving MTOW of around 13,500kg

While over a period of time some weight will be saved but we will also have addition of refueling probe, internal EW suite, DIRCM(?), towed decoy(?) etc which will add to weight.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby Singha » 24 Dec 2013 13:56

how much of a fail-safe measure and weight saving is the OBOGS thing? the alternative is oxygen cylinder which is safe and well understood tech used all the time in areas like hospitals and in planes for decades. is it just a solution looking for a problem "fly by light" thing or something that really adds to safety / weight in fighters and works at six sigma quality since we are playing with a pilots life here ? in theory its like "cheap" nuclear plants for CV that permits "full speed forever"...reality is more complex than that as the steam turbine machinery and drive machinery have their own limits and problems.

the F22 has some obogs and we know what happened there...lives have been lost
http://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=15338

It's a big deal if you're at high altitude and you run out of oxygen," Weber said.

At 50,000 feet, a human being has less than 10 seconds of useful consciousness, he said. The 25,000-foot altitude restriction would allow the pilot to quickly dive below 18,000 feet, where the atmosphere has enough oxygen to ensure prolonged survival in case of an emergency.

"It would take you so long when you're way up high, you may black out before you make it to a safe altitude," Weber said.

Given the nature of the restriction, the problem with the OBOGS is likely to be a reliability issue, Weber said. While the probability of malfunction is fairly low, it is not something aviators take lightly, he said.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19840
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby Karan M » 24 Dec 2013 14:10

thing is F22 flies higher than almost all other fighters, so the nature of its OBOGS interaction with other air inlets - engine air intake etc is a challenge.

last i remember they were blaming a bunch of factors for the raptor cough - OBOGS was one of the things but not the only thing.

srin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2033
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby srin » 24 Dec 2013 16:32

Is fly-by-light really solution in search of a problem ?

It will result in lighter aircraft, and more power-efficient too. It has less signal loss and also has bigger data bandwidth. And it doesn't dissipate heat or require EM shielding like conventional wires do. When you have thousands of miles of wiring inside an aircraft, weight savings become significant if you convert even a small part into fiber optic.

Moving from fly-by-wire to fly-by-light shouldn't be as radical a leap as moving from pure hydraulic to fly-by-wire

In the commercial world, heavy duty network systems have had fibre-optic interfaces for almost a decade now. You have standard connectors for that.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby Singha » 24 Dec 2013 16:50

All true. But you cannot string them as people do in the lab which is to say in a rats nest way. The danger of wires being damaged or cut due to rough conditions is more in unprotected fiber than copper. If you use heavy duty protection the weight savings are gone. Copper would work fine for high bandwidth in the limited range inside a aircraft.

Dileep
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5855
Joined: 04 Apr 2005 08:17
Location: Dera Mahab Ali धरा महाबलिस्याः درا مهاب الي

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby Dileep » 24 Dec 2013 17:38

It is my considered opinion that Fly By Light is a solution looking for a problem.

(BTW, I am back after a gap)

Fiber-To-The-Desk was the big things when I started working, and we made a number of products for that. But how many of you have that at your desk? How many computers gets sold with fiber interfaces?

Here are the reasons why I think it is a fad:

1. The distances are small within a plane. Copper can easily do the job.
2. Power still needs to be fed through thick copper wires.
3. The Electro-Optic conversion is a weak link.
4. You don't need those gigabits/sec in a plane. You can eaaaaaasily get things done with a few kbps.
5. Maintenance of fiber is a nightmare. (We know.. We make thousands of terminations every day)
6. Electromagnetic immunity is a myth. If fiber is immune, the E/O conversion is frail.

So, I wouldn't hold my breath for a fly by light plane.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16831
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby NRao » 24 Dec 2013 21:34

Dileep wrote:It is my considered opinion that Fly By Light is a solution looking for a problem.

(BTW, I am back after a gap)

Fiber-To-The-Desk was the big things when I started working, and we made a number of products for that. But how many of you have that at your desk? How many computers gets sold with fiber interfaces?

Here are the reasons why I think it is a fad:

1. The distances are small within a plane. Copper can easily do the job.
2. Power still needs to be fed through thick copper wires.
3. The Electro-Optic conversion is a weak link.
4. You don't need those gigabits/sec in a plane. You can eaaaaaasily get things done with a few kbps.
5. Maintenance of fiber is a nightmare. (We know.. We make thousands of terminations every day)
6. Electromagnetic immunity is a myth. If fiber is immune, the E/O conversion is frail.

So, I wouldn't hold my breath for a fly by light plane.


(This discussion should be in the AMCA thread - that is the aircraft on which this technology has been proposed. Having said that:)

Questions for you:

* Telephone industry has used it extensively and they do not seem to have any major issues with it. So what gives?
* In aircrafts, it is not the amount of data (see below), it is the speed of the data, and
* Today's military aircrafts are actually nodes in a network (they are not individual entities) - even transports become nodes (and we are not even talking of AESA as a part of the network)
* Having said, it is not the amount of data - it is also the amount of data - once we consider the plane to be a part of a network. Unknown to the plane it could be a signal booster for all we know
* On amount of data - it could/would be huge. Consider multiple assets (other dozen planes, a few 10s of tanks on the ground, perhaps a AWACS, what else? All sharing info. A very simple plane, with not too much data to deal with - as it takes off - once it hits the air gets very complex, very fast
* Audio, video, live/real-time. Commander in the loop. Network-centric?

I am not too sure, but, I just do not think desk-tops are as complex. But, then I could be wrong.

Oh, BTW, they have been conducting research on the AMCA FbL architecture for close to a decade by now. I would think that has to count for something.

member_28108
BRFite
Posts: 1852
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby member_28108 » 24 Dec 2013 22:46

I read that some of the American choppers like the Apache and planes etc have gigabits of amount of information being processed.

Dileep
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5855
Joined: 04 Apr 2005 08:17
Location: Dera Mahab Ali धरा महाबलिस्याः درا مهاب الي

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby Dileep » 25 Dec 2013 06:36

We are talking about FLY by light, not FIGHT by light. I other words, the subject is about the use of fiber optics to communicate with the control surfaces such as ailerons, flaps and rudder. You can add the FADEC and air sensors if you want.

These activities do not process any significant amount of data. The huge amount of data you talk about belong to the 'sensor fusion'. But even that wouldn't be anything significant compared to the HDTV videos we take for granted on our desktops.

'Speed of data': Fiber is no 'faster' than copper. It just carries more data per space, that is all.

Network of planes/nodes: You can't string fiber between planes. It got to be wireless, and wireless have orders of magnitude less capacity. so, what gives?

It is not only telephone, but ALL forms of communication, be it your cell phone, internet or TV/Radio broadcast, pass through fiber. That is because, fiber is great for distances farther than a few hundred metres. In shorter distances, copper have obvious advantages. (I made my living from fiber, obviously because it had tremendous use) But its use to FLY a plane is a solution looking for a problem.

suryag
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3829
Joined: 11 Jan 2009 00:14

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby suryag » 25 Dec 2013 06:44

I read somewhere that FBL is immune to EM interference while FBW is not

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36416
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby SaiK » 25 Dec 2013 08:26

yes.. but that immunity can be given by cheaper wired twisted shielding technology. nothing big... it is perhaps the weight saving, and using the optic fiber for mega mission computing is what takes the cake. if the mission profile can get complex, fast bandwidth needed to have all data driven on rt-metrics and feedbacks. architecturally, again they have to first decide how independent embedded systems gonna be, and how they are to be integrated.

mission can be actually remote controlled, and fbl may be necessity on UCAVs for guaranteed control systems within the a/c, but for remote controll ops, we need wireless secured connects/messaging. but i would think, a more intelligent mission computing needs little control inputs from remote... perhaps only corrections, and feedbacks.

Dileep
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5855
Joined: 04 Apr 2005 08:17
Location: Dera Mahab Ali धरा महाबलिस्याः درا مهاب الي

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby Dileep » 25 Dec 2013 08:30

The fiber itself is immune to EMI, but the optical to electrical conversion system is doubly sensitive.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36416
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby SaiK » 25 Dec 2013 08:37

great point dileep. they have to take double the efforts to protect the converted signals till it is consumed.
further, you would also think do we really need optic if not much of data is transmitted. need CBA on this.

----
ps:

• Successfully completed more than
2430 flights.
• Sensor evaluation of MMR, Litening
POD, HMDS, RWR, TACAN, IFF,
VOR-ILS successfully completed.
• Spool down engin relight successfully
demonstrated.
• Envelope expansion upto 24 deg
AOA completed.
• Chaff & Flare dispensation integrated
with RWR successfully completed.
• Operational Readyness Platform scramble readiness demonstrated.
• Fuel System, Brake Management System and General Systems performance demonstrated.
• Production Equipment Standard of Preparation & Drawing Applicability Lists (SOP/DAL) released.

https://www.ada.gov.in/images/IOC%20con ... 0Final.pdf

• Alternate engine program for LCA Mk2

very abstract to know details here..

• Digital Weapon Management System Compatible to Russian, Western and MIL-1760C Weapons

two thumbs up:-
check on the PLM activities. a tight PLM integration with HAL is a must.
updated V&V process: IEEE-12207 and RTCA DO-178B [OOAD and MDD] - sweet!

for IT nerds:
Matlab/Simulink, Rhapsody, Rational Development Suite, AdaTest95, Logicscope, LDRA, Understand for Ada/
C++, Beyond Compare and Clearcase are some of the tools used during various stages of software development
to improve the product and make it robust apart from shortening the development and certification time.


++
Last edited by SaiK on 25 Dec 2013 08:38, edited 1 time in total.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16831
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby NRao » 26 Dec 2013 01:07

Dileep,

Thanks, the second post provided more info. However, I am still lost as far as: "But its use to FLY a plane is a solution looking for a problem"

________________________

So, I did a little digging:

* AESA, in 2008 (today it is better):
The capability of that mode encompasses a range of potential operations, from one-way broadcasts to interleaved "fully duplexed" exchanges between two stations, said Dave Robbins, an engineering lead for R-CDL at L-3 Communications.

Raytheon has demonstrated the system can transmit data at rates of 274 megabytes a second — "a speed that starts to approach instantaneous," said Mike Henchey, Raytheon’s director of strategy and business development, Tactical Airborne Systems. It is a speed that easily eclipsed the current military standard. "If you are relying on a tactical data link like Link 16, it might take you close to an hour to get a 72-megabyte file off of the aircraft," said Carmichael. With R-CDL, that transmission "is a matter of 3 to 5 seconds," he said.


* Talking of "tactical data link Link 16": Per Wiki, it is "near real-time".

* As I mentioned India has been at this Fly by Light since around 1997ish. So:

Dec, 2002 :: CSIO develops fly-by-light controls for ALH

Chandigarh, December 22
A hi-tech fly-by-light (FBL) system for the Advance Light Helicopter (ALH) has been developed by the Central Scientific Instruments Organisation (CSIO) here. A team of scientists left for Bangalore this week to install the system in the aircraft for trials.

The FBL is used for sending signals from the cockpit to various instruments and sub-systems which control flight parameters of an aircraft. The ALH, developed indigenously by the Defence Research and Development Organisation, is undergoing user trials with the IAF and the Navy. All three services will have their own versions.

Sources told TNS that the project, initiated last year, was completed some time ago, but non-availability of an ALH had held up trials. The system will enter production once it is cleared and an indigenously produced unit is expected to cost as little as Rs 50,000-60,000, a top CSIO official said. The system would also be modified to be installed in other choppers in service with the forces, including the Chetak and the Mil series.

The FBL system is a further development of the now commonly used fly-by-wire (FBW) system. While signals are transmitted through electrical impulses to various control surfaces from the cockpit in an FBW system, the same is done through light impulses passed via Optical Fibre Cables (OFC) in the FBL system. Prior to the development of these two systems, the controls were operated mechanically.

The ALH will be the first Indian aircraft to be equipped with the fly-by-light system. Even the Light Combat Aircraft (LCA), which made its maiden flight earlier this year, is equipped with a fly-by-wire system. While the technology was earlier restricted to combat aircraft, now civilian airliners, specially the Airbus series, also incorporate the Fly-by-Wire system.

The use of optical fibre cables, instead of copper wires, gives the FBL system several advantages over the FBW system. Besides being considerably lighter and cheaper, the FBL systems had the capacity of transmitting a greater number of signals and data simultaneously. Moreover, optical fibre cables are immune to electro-magnetic interference or electrical conduction and result in better gyro control of an aircraft.

As far as the working principle of the system is concerned, experts say that in FBL systems, signals from the cockpit are converted into light impulses and focussed on the control surface concerned. Control signals between the pilot stations, flight control computer and actuators for rotor blade controls are not transmitted electrically, via wire, but optically, via hair-thin optical glass fibres.


* As far as I know there is a diff between commercial and military networks. I am fairly confident that the Indians are catching up, but, for sure the good guys deal with huge data needs. There are some cases where terabytes is common

* Found out that the US conducted extensive research in *Fly* by Light (I did not even know there was a *Flight* by Light - what is that I wonder) in the 80s. They never implemented it in the military side. Looks like it was not so much to do with technology as much as cost. They then did not have the amount of data they have now. So, I am told (I have not verified it yet) that they are trying the FbL technologies on UAVs first before porting it over to manned machines

* Finally, the AMCA has been under construction for a very long time. And, from day 1 they have been talking of FbL and they have not backed out ----- yet. It is specifically WRT this point that I ask "What gives" (and not your or anyone else experience - which is very important). The AMCA team had a team exclusively for human-machine interface, they built (per open source) a complete cockpit - with a panoramic display, no button or dials, etc (I do not know where all stands today or even if they have retained it in their current plans - just that that was the last data point I have). Point being they have invested some 15 years +/- some in a variety of technologies, which IMHO, cannot be discounted. ???? Will they come to fruition? I certainly hope so. Am I certain? No. But, I do think these technologies will - I cannot find a good reason not to

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36416
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby SaiK » 26 Dec 2013 01:23

what I interpret that is the need for FBL does not arise out of a problem with FBW. The solution required for EMI/EMP protection applies for FBL as well since the signals needs conversion, and at these nodes are the interference vulnerability at high or doubly high.

as I said earlier, the copper weight reduction is one aspect that is on the benefit side, and negative on the cost side.

the bandwidth required to communicate with all embedded control systems is adequate with a shielded copper. so, going FBL does not solve a problem at all... so what is the problem or requirement we are trying to solve?

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16831
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby NRao » 26 Dec 2013 02:05

Well, I would imagine that the problems faced today are not the same as those faced years ago. So, here is some items to add to the list:

* Reaction time:

Requirement of higher bandwidth
As the speeds of the aircraft have increased, the need to increase data transmission rate from the pilot control panel to the control surface of the aircraft has also increased significantly. Higher data transmission rate necessitates higher bandwidth. Bandwidth is the amount of data that can be carried from one point to another in a given time period (usually a second). In aircraft higher bandwidth ensures higher data transfer rate, therefore pilots command passes rapidly from aircraft cockpit to control surfaces (like aileron, elevator, rudder) which ensures smooth aircraft manoeuvring. The higher the bandwidth, the larger the aircrafts safety margin in high gain tracking tasks


* Composites:

The increasing use of composite materials in aircraft structures has decreased EMI shielding previously provided by metal structures .Consequently, FBW are subjected to greater electrical interference which can degrade performance .But optical pulses transmitted by FBL system are unaffected by the much lower frequency electromagnetic waves that characterize the EMI threat.[12]


These are actually WRT civilian aircrafts, but I would imagine they should apply for military ones too.
Last edited by NRao on 26 Dec 2013 02:18, edited 1 time in total.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36416
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby SaiK » 26 Dec 2013 02:16

also please note that bandwidth just not calculated only from physcial data links . the wait time, delays from conversions and end-end transmission needs to be taken into account as well.

control systems operate in certain real-time needs. this period doesn't change by providing higher bandwidth communication channel. the response time of control systems plays in too. so, essentially we have to see how the a/c system is architected to use the optics bandwidth.

Khalsa
BRFite
Posts: 1694
Joined: 12 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: NZL

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby Khalsa » 26 Dec 2013 04:42

When will the flying daggers be raised ?
Please be informative in your answer.... tell me all you know of how it happens... a Squadron being re-raised combined with a new equipment induction ?

Has it already been activated or will that be at FOC ?
Or is there a transitional unit that is responsible for the IOC of the tejas ?

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36416
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby SaiK » 26 Dec 2013 05:31

i don't know if anyone can be as informative as you already know on the squadrons.. i am pretty positive that it should allign with FOC... like they have to still v&v what I quoted earlier (few pages back)
SaiK wrote:^from jtull's clicky:
12 month to-do list:

1. Expand flight envelope to -3.5 to 8G (Currently -2 to 6G).
2. 24° angle of attack (Currently 22°).
3. In-flight refuelling capability (Integration of Cobham probe complete).
4. Demonstration of Rafael ADS Derby BVR air-to-air missile.
5. Demonstration of Rafael ADS Python-5 IIR close combat missile (Related post here).
6. Completion of integration & demonstration of KBP Gryazev-Shipunov GSh-23 23mm cannon.
7. New design drop tanks for supersonic flight.
8. New radome to improve radar and electromagnetic performance.
9. Validate more efficient cooling system for aircraft braking assembly.
10. Additional weapons testing, including PGMs.

ManjaM
BRFite
Posts: 1217
Joined: 15 May 2010 02:52
Location: Padvaralli

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby ManjaM » 26 Dec 2013 05:40

ArmenT wrote:That aux intake/depressurization cock panel seems to have taken a beating -- it has a crumpled look to it. Any ideas what could have caused it?

There also seem to be some paint chips missing in the other pictures (you can see the yellow primer underneath), but that is to be expected from an airframe that is regularly flying.


That particular panel is an ideal candidate for switching to composite. It appears to be fairing out the aux intake and not have a structural role. Maybe have a titanium or CFRP leading edge around the intake to account for bird strike with the rest being GFRP.
Just guessing here, but the panel looks like fabricated hastily and might be something for which an alternate design is planned downstream.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16831
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby NRao » 26 Dec 2013 05:41

Tejas Induction into Air Force to Take More Time

“We hope to have the first aircraft by end by mid of 2014. The first two aircraft (SP-1, SP-2) might not meet our standards for squadron formation as the metal cutting and hardware were done before we froze the IOC-2 test points. We will raise the first Tejas squadron with four aircraft starting from SP-3 to SP-6,” a top source said.


So, perhaps by the end of 2014 or mid-2015.

Dileep
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5855
Joined: 04 Apr 2005 08:17
Location: Dera Mahab Ali धरा महाबलिस्याः درا مهاب الي

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby Dileep » 26 Dec 2013 06:33

Remember that any input and output to the FLY part is mechanical. Anything mechanical is in infinitesimally slow compared to electronics, even good old copper.

That means, you get this fantabulous 'reaction time' of 1 nanosecond, but your actuator will not even know how to move for the next 100 milliseconds!!

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19840
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby Karan M » 26 Dec 2013 07:45

ManjaM wrote:
ArmenT wrote:That aux intake/depressurization cock panel seems to have taken a beating -- it has a crumpled look to it. Any ideas what could have caused it?

There also seem to be some paint chips missing in the other pictures (you can see the yellow primer underneath), but that is to be expected from an airframe that is regularly flying.


That particular panel is an ideal candidate for switching to composite. It appears to be fairing out the aux intake and not have a structural role. Maybe have a titanium or CFRP leading edge around the intake to account for bird strike with the rest being GFRP.
Just guessing here, but the panel looks like fabricated hastily and might be something for which an alternate design is planned downstream.


That intake has already been replaced with a new design. Check LSP-7 and LSP-8.

LSP-7:
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-nPl0-7r7Y5A/T ... C_9062.JPG
http://img42.imageshack.us/img42/1093/lsp7.jpg

LSP8
http://frontierindia.net/wp-content/upl ... -LSP-8.jpg
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-h2rf-3KZHdg/U ... 600/82.jpg

rajanb
BRFite
Posts: 1945
Joined: 03 Feb 2011 16:56

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby rajanb » 26 Dec 2013 08:48

The crumpled intake was LSP-5

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36416
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

Postby SaiK » 26 Dec 2013 09:01

perhaps the learning should feed back into future mk-2 models where they can avoid even the bulge and make it more blended.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 44 guests