LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

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.
Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2620
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Vivek K » 23 Feb 2017 07:20

That means Uttam is doing well.

Avarachan
BRFite
Posts: 560
Joined: 04 Jul 2006 21:06

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Avarachan » 23 Feb 2017 10:29

Karan M wrote:
ramana wrote:Indranil, SO this Aero India was a damp squib visavis LCA. No new capabilities or knowledge revealed.


Uttam flight testing moving ahead + HAL RFP for track-2 AESA/EW suite were big reveals IMHO. The Uttam fully populated prototype is a beauty.


I agree. To see that Uttam prototype was a dream come true for me.

I remember that Arun_S was very concerned about foreign AESA's in Indian service ... Because of their high bandwidth, there is obvious potential for subversion.

Avarachan
BRFite
Posts: 560
Joined: 04 Jul 2006 21:06

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Avarachan » 23 Feb 2017 10:42

Austin wrote:From DRDO Chief Interview to FORCE Mag on Kaveri program
Dassault Aviation is keen to work on the next generation LCA, Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA) or the Unmanned Combat Aerial Vehicle, Ghatak as part of the offsets in Rafale programme. They are willing to work on the configuration design and the entire logistic maintenance software for new system. We want the company to do something for us here in India to harness our potentials.

They have had two rounds of meetings so far with Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA) and GTRE. Hopefully, things will move forward.


?!

I wonder what Dr. Christopher is referring to ... I don't think it's the Tejas Mark II.

I suspect that once an Indian engine is ready, a new variant of the Tejas will be built around it. Perhaps that's it. Tejas Mark III?

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5425
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Kartik » 24 Feb 2017 01:09

Indranil wrote:Pics from Prasun Sengupta.

Image

Image

Pinched DFTs. Very interesting.


Supersonic drop tank? Or a subsonic drop tank like the bulbous nose RPL541/542 drop tanks on the Mirage-2000?

disha
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7527
Joined: 03 Dec 2006 04:17
Location: gaganaviharin

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby disha » 24 Feb 2017 01:35

^^Or just shoddy graphic cut & paste.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5425
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Kartik » 24 Feb 2017 04:59

i don't think its that..the drop tank quite clearly has a pinched mid and aft section, seemingly to cater to area ruling of the jet that's carrying it.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 10635
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Rakesh » 24 Feb 2017 06:30

Tejas MK-2 (Air force version) will be 0.5 metre longer,
will be able to carry a payload of up to 5 tons with MTOW of 16.5 tons.
https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/834278743938105344

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8293
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Indranil » 24 Feb 2017 08:01

Kartik wrote:i don't think its that..the drop tank quite clearly has a pinched mid and aft section, seemingly to cater to area ruling of the jet that's carrying it.

That's the reason it caught my eye. I think they are borrowing that idea from the modified F-35 drop tanks.

I can't make up my mind on this tank. It is pointy enough and is certainly designed to help with the area ruling. But when would the aircraft go supersonic with such a high load. Certainly transonic though.

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

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby shiv » 24 Feb 2017 08:31

Indranil wrote: modified F-35 drop tanks.

Why do the words "F-35 drop tanks" make me laugh?

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55232
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby ramana » 24 Feb 2017 09:50

IDRW has an article on LCA Mk2 getting quiet support from IAF to reach 42 Squadron force.

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 1553
Joined: 26 Aug 2016 19:14

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Gyan » 24 Feb 2017 10:15

Avarachan wrote:
Austin wrote:From DRDO Chief Interview to FORCE Mag on Kaveri program


?!

I wonder what Dr. Christopher is referring to ... I don't think it's the Tejas Mark II.

I suspect that once an Indian engine is ready, a new variant of the Tejas will be built around it. Perhaps that's it. Tejas Mark III?


We should buy or get the design of EADS MAKO design for LCA- MK-3

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

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Singha » 24 Feb 2017 10:43

^^ :rotfl:

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4704
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Cain Marko » 24 Feb 2017 21:59

Rakesh wrote:Tejas MK-2 (Air force version) will be 0.5 metre longer,
will be able to carry a payload of up to 5 tons with MTOW of 16.5 tons.
https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/834278743938105344



Hmm, i bet they struggle to keep the weight down, my guess is about 7.5...8 tons. And then they are looking at a puny 10 ton engine...wtf. They will be in the same boat 10 years later...too little power. Both AF and navy will whine. The f16 should be the model here, not some anaemic euro bird ala gripen or mirage.

If such massive changes are going to be made anyway, why not get a 12.5...14 ton engine.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8293
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Indranil » 24 Feb 2017 22:08

brar_w wrote:
TSJones wrote:the f-16 nick name used by US Air force pilots when first introduced was "yard dart" for obvious reasons. :(


Yup not the first Lawn Dart. They kept producing aircraft as UTC developed changes to their propulsion to add reliability. Same with the mission systems. The early blocks were not even as capable in mission scope as the customers wanted but they kept producing them anyway. When the block 30 arrived they had to retrofit something like 1500 aircraft that had already been produced earlier without meeting the combat requirements. They couldn't even deploy the Sparrow Missile which had at the time become standard in the USAF. The F-16 program at the hight of the cold war was the epitome of concurrent production. They were producing variants and sometimes changing sub-variants within months of sanctioning the last one. The idea was to get a tremendous number of 4th generation aircraft out into front line service and then make necessary changes to get them full combat capable.

A casualty of this was the NEP (Not to Exceed Price), standardized block that met combat system requirements of the warfighter (that did not really come until block 30). They would have done the same with the F-35 had the cold war not ended and we would have had hundreds of block 2 aircraft, a hundreds of block 3I aircraft flying today. Instead they delivered around 150-160 block 2B aircraft including the few dozen that will never see operational use (testing, and training squadrons) and production ramp up only occurred once the contractor began delivering block 3I capability.

This should be remembered. And we are speaking of one of the legendary fighters here.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8207
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby nachiket » 25 Feb 2017 00:42

Cain Marko wrote:Hmm, i bet they struggle to keep the weight down, my guess is about 7.5...8 tons. And then they are looking at a puny 10 ton engine...wtf. They will be in the same boat 10 years later...too little power. Both AF and navy will whine. The f16 should be the model here, not some anaemic euro bird ala gripen or mirage.

If such massive changes are going to be made anyway, why not get a 12.5...14 ton engine.

Saar, can you please tell us which 12.5-14 ton thrust engine would fit inside the LCA MkII and - not to forget - not contribute to a significant weight increase itself?

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4704
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Cain Marko » 25 Feb 2017 12:31

nachiket wrote:
Cain Marko wrote:Hmm, i bet they struggle to keep the weight down, my guess is about 7.5...8 tons. And then they are looking at a puny 10 ton engine...wtf. They will be in the same boat 10 years later...too little power. Both AF and navy will whine. The f16 should be the model here, not some anaemic euro bird ala gripen or mirage.

If such massive changes are going to be made anyway, why not get a 12.5...14 ton engine.

Saar, can you please tell us which 12.5-14 ton thrust engine would fit inside the LCA MkII and - not to forget - not contribute to a significant weight increase itself?


Without a corresponding increase in weight? No, didn't say that. BUT if they plan to create more room for internal fuel, moving the wings 1 foot outboard, 0.5-1 mtr plug etc., it would not be out of the ordinary for there to be a corresponding increase in weight from the current 6500kg to begin with. Following the trend of the TFTA Gripen, from the C to the NG version we are looking at a nice increase to around 8 tons. Current specs from Saab.com for the NG (Length over all15.2 meters, Width over all 8.6 meters). Presently, the Tejas Mk1 is around Length: 13.20 m and width 8.20 m. Now once we add the 0.5 meter length and another 0.35mts to the wings - we are looking at something extremely close to the Gripen NG. So, let us assume that the Tejas follows suit wrt weight as well - I'd wager about 7500-8000kg.

This puts it perfectly in the Mirage 2000 and F-16 category @ 7.5-8.0 tons. Take a gander @ the dimensions of the F-16 or M2k (M2K: Length: 14.36 m, Wingspan: 9.13. F-16: Length: 15.0 m, Wingspan: 9.4 - from Wiki and f16.net).

Now consider the engine specs used by the M2K and F-16).
M2k/M53: Length, width, weight: 199.6 in, 41.5 in, 3,240 lbs, thrust ~ 10tons

F-16/F100: Length, width, weight: 199-208 in, 46.5, 3,365-3600lbs- thrust ~ 12-15 tons

Compare this with the AL-31 family:
Length, width, weight: 195.0in, 48.0 in, 3,373lbs+, thrust ~ 12-15 tons

All in the same ball park except the M53s were rather anemic.

My point is, if we are looking at a fighter that is looking just as heavy, long and wide as the F-16/M2k/Gripen, why tinker around with smaller engines with limited thrust? Unless they are planning to get the F-414 EPE or something, we are essentially looking at 7.5-8.0 ton fighter with an engine that has piddly max power set at 10 tons - just with the internal fuel load alone (forget munitions), we get a bird that is well below the 1.0 TWR threshold. We will get the same narebazi all over again - "under powered", "not capable of hot and high", "not possible for STOBAR ops" etc...

nash
BRFite
Posts: 898
Joined: 08 Aug 2008 16:48

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby nash » 25 Feb 2017 13:20

http://idrw.org/aero-india-2017-uttam-a ... lca-tejas/

seems like uttam is really going well.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4820
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby srai » 26 Feb 2017 06:27

Indranil wrote:
brar_w wrote:
Yup not the first Lawn Dart. They kept producing aircraft as UTC developed changes to their propulsion to add reliability. Same with the mission systems. The early blocks were not even as capable in mission scope as the customers wanted but they kept producing them anyway. When the block 30 arrived they had to retrofit something like 1500 aircraft that had already been produced earlier without meeting the combat requirements. They couldn't even deploy the Sparrow Missile which had at the time become standard in the USAF. The F-16 program at the hight of the cold war was the epitome of concurrent production. They were producing variants and sometimes changing sub-variants within months of sanctioning the last one. The idea was to get a tremendous number of 4th generation aircraft out into front line service and then make necessary changes to get them full combat capable.

A casualty of this was the NEP (Not to Exceed Price), standardized block that met combat system requirements of the warfighter (that did not really come until block 30). They would have done the same with the F-35 had the cold war not ended and we would have had hundreds of block 2 aircraft, a hundreds of block 3I aircraft flying today. Instead they delivered around 150-160 block 2B aircraft including the few dozen that will never see operational use (testing, and training squadrons) and production ramp up only occurred once the contractor began delivering block 3I capability.

This should be remembered. And we are speaking of one of the legendary fighters here.


+1

That's the type of support India needs to extend to its LCA. All the combat aircraft manufacturing powerhouses have done things in similar manner to reach where they are today. Order large quantities, even if not all perfect, and sort things out along the way.

Why kill hard earned indigenous capability with 200 foreign equivalent fighter under the guise of Make in India (MII) screwdriver-giri and spend billions of FOREX? It has already spent some $8 billion on only 36 Rafales.

For comparison, the GoI has spent around $1billion in LCA program costs (over 30-years) and only recently approve a piddly $200 million LCA production expansion by another 8/year capacity with small total orders for 123 units (even when depleting force requirements are for many more). It's like taking one step forward only to take two steps back!

Dileep
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5871
Joined: 04 Apr 2005 08:17
Location: Dera Mahab Ali धरा महाबलिस्याः درا مهاب الي

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Dileep » 26 Feb 2017 08:32

"Why make when you can buy" seems to be in our nature onlee.

We needed to process video coming in into an FPGA via CSI-2 interface. The proposal I got was to buy an IP Block for USD30K. This is the same team I have to get to implement some ARINC protocols at some point of time.

What to do onlee?

ashishvikas
BRFite
Posts: 577
Joined: 17 Oct 2016 14:18

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby ashishvikas » 26 Feb 2017 13:42

Guys, wanted to know who makes these beautiful MFDs ?

Samtel ? Or we Import them.

https://twitter.com/delhidefence/status ... 7864363008

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8293
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Indranil » 26 Feb 2017 14:24

Yes.

Rishi Verma
BRFite
Posts: 1019
Joined: 28 Oct 2016 13:08

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Rishi Verma » 26 Feb 2017 14:27

Kartik wrote:i don't think its that..the drop tank quite clearly has a pinched mid and aft section, seemingly to cater to area ruling of the jet that's carrying it.


yes saar you are right it's very clearly shown to be a pinched fuel tank with aerodynamic contours with obvious very low drag coefficient...... in adobe illustrator .. and "the jet that's carrying it" is also in adobe illustrator...

Rishi Verma
BRFite
Posts: 1019
Joined: 28 Oct 2016 13:08

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Rishi Verma » 26 Feb 2017 14:34

Dileep wrote:"Why make when you can buy" seems to be in our nature onlee.

We needed to process video coming in into an FPGA via CSI-2 interface. The proposal I got was to buy an IP Block for USD30K. This is the same team I have to get to implement some ARINC protocols at some point of time.

What to do onlee?



Above is off topic, but such IP is worth every rupee. Drop it in the FPGA project and focus on what you are good at, make sure their support is good.. because the first time the FPGA is programmed... you ain't gonna see no video...

suryag
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3853
Joined: 11 Jan 2009 00:14

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby suryag » 26 Feb 2017 15:46

Sir please buy from Russians as they almost always have anything you want backed up with excellent technical service and after sales interfacing and maintenance

Khalsa
BRFite
Posts: 1709
Joined: 12 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: NZL

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Khalsa » 26 Feb 2017 16:00

suryag wrote:Sir please buy from Russians as they almost always have anything you want backed up with excellent technical service and after sales interfacing and maintenance



LOL

I don't see Phillip here .... who you talking to ?

Dileep
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5871
Joined: 04 Apr 2005 08:17
Location: Dera Mahab Ali धरा महाबलिस्याः درا مهاب الي

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Dileep » 26 Feb 2017 21:07

Rishi Verma wrote:
Dileep wrote:"Why make when you can buy" seems to be in our nature onlee.

We needed to process video coming in into an FPGA via CSI-2 interface. The proposal I got was to buy an IP Block for USD30K. This is the same team I have to get to implement some ARINC protocols at some point of time.

What to do onlee?



Above is off topic, but such IP is worth every rupee. Drop it in the FPGA project and focus on what you are good at, make sure their support is good.. because the first time the FPGA is programmed... you ain't gonna see no video...


We just need a tiny portion of the IP. We don't need the entire video processing IP here. Also, please remember that "L1 takes all" in govt projects. If we need to spend 30K, then no use trying onlee.

Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4850
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Neshant » 26 Feb 2017 21:35

Dileep wrote:
Rishi Verma wrote:

Above is off topic, but such IP is worth every rupee. Drop it in the FPGA project and focus on what you are good at, make sure their support is good.. because the first time the FPGA is programmed... you ain't gonna see no video...


We just need a tiny portion of the IP. We don't need the entire video processing IP here. Also, please remember that "L1 takes all" in govt projects. If we need to spend 30K, then no use trying onlee.



How about using an external converter chip that takes CSI-2 and converts it into RGB fed into the FPGA.

Or move to a SOC with built-in CSI-2 hw.

You don't want to be re-inventing the wheel here.

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

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Austin » 27 Feb 2017 09:58

‘LCA Tejas is superior to France's Mirage and China's JF-17 fighter jets’

http://www.indiatvnews.com/politics/nat ... ets-370263
Delivering a guest lecture on the inaugural day of 'Footprints X7' in Vadodara on Friday, Siddesha said that the IAF has placed an order of 123 Tejas Mark 1 and that all the aircraft will be inducted in the Indian Air Force by 2024.

"Every year, 16 Tejas aircraft will be built on two assembly lines. By 2024, all the aircraft will be inducted in the IAF whereas Tejas Mark 2 version will be ready by 2021," Siddesha was quoted as saying by Times of India.

He also added that Tejas is superior to France's Mirage and China's JF-17 fighter jets.

“The technical staff can replace engine of Tejas within 45 minutes and the cockpit and flight control system are world class," he added.

He further said that though some countries have evinced interest in procuring Tejas from India, the government is yet to take the decision on whether it should be exported.

Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2643
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Cybaru » 27 Feb 2017 10:04

^^^ Okay thats coming from Siddesha who is "project director and technology director of LCA."

Rishi Verma
BRFite
Posts: 1019
Joined: 28 Oct 2016 13:08

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Rishi Verma » 27 Feb 2017 10:17

Cybaru wrote:^^^ Okay thats coming from Siddesha who is "project director and technology director of LCA."


That's precisely why we shouldn't believe all the claims. Let the IAF kill a few pakis and let the paarformance speak. After all these years I don't believe a word from DRDO/ADA/HAL, nor do their customers.

Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2643
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Cybaru » 27 Feb 2017 10:30

Rishi Verma wrote:
Cybaru wrote:^^^ Okay thats coming from Siddesha who is "project director and technology director of LCA."


That's precisely why we shouldn't believe all the claims. Let the IAF kill a few pakis and let the paarformance speak. After all these years I don't believe a word from DRDO/ADA/HAL, nor do their customers.


My point was information is coming from someone in the know. Its your choice if you want to believe or disbelieve. I like the comparison and the article and I like that he feels confident enough to say that in a lecture!

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

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Austin » 27 Feb 2017 11:31

Rishi Verma wrote:
Cybaru wrote:^^^ Okay thats coming from Siddesha who is "project director and technology director of LCA."


That's precisely why we shouldn't believe all the claims. Let the IAF kill a few pakis and let the paarformance speak. After all these years I don't believe a word from DRDO/ADA/HAL, nor do their customers.


Killing a Paki is not a benchmark for it , As far as IAF goes at AI we got to speak with boss of 45 squad and he was exteremely pleased and delighted with Tejas he did mention minor squadron induction issues but he said it was natural to have it for any new type in service.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8293
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Indranil » 27 Feb 2017 11:52

Rishi Verma

Is any chai spilled from your Kulhar when SAAB officials say that the Gripen engine can be swapped out in 30 minutes?

Kashi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3660
Joined: 06 May 2011 13:53

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Kashi » 27 Feb 2017 12:02

Indranil wrote:Is any chai spilled from your Kulhar when SAAB officials say that the Gripen engine can be swapped out in 30 minutes?


I don't think it's chai that he's spilling over that.

ashishvikas
BRFite
Posts: 577
Joined: 17 Oct 2016 14:18

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby ashishvikas » 27 Feb 2017 13:31

Delhi Defence Review‏@delhidefence

More Tejas cockpit display pictures. Photo Credit @cleanstrike

https://twitter.com/delhidefence/status ... 0047412224

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5425
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Kartik » 27 Feb 2017 23:15

Austin wrote:
Rishi Verma wrote:
That's precisely why we shouldn't believe all the claims. Let the IAF kill a few pakis and let the paarformance speak. After all these years I don't believe a word from DRDO/ADA/HAL, nor do their customers.


Killing a Paki is not a benchmark for it , As far as IAF goes at AI we got to speak with boss of 45 squad and he was exteremely pleased and delighted with Tejas he did mention minor squadron induction issues but he said it was natural to have it for any new type in service.


Great ! more details please, Austin..really want to know how the operational users of the Tejas see it now, after its induction. Not just the pilots, but the guys who actually work on the jet for hours, after it has been through its paces during the day or night.

I wish someone would interview him and get info on the induction schedule, the simulator hours, on the nitty gritties of No.45 squadron's build up towards full strength.

Khalsa
BRFite
Posts: 1709
Joined: 12 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: NZL

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Khalsa » 28 Feb 2017 01:19

^^ aye

I second that Kartiks proposal. I am reminded of similar work that few journalists tried to do with the commanding officers of Su30 K and Su30MKI squadrons but it snow balled to egoistic drum beating essays written of journos allowed on new grounds rather than technical writings for our consumption.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8293
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Indranil » 28 Feb 2017 04:47

Kartik wrote:
Austin wrote:
Killing a Paki is not a benchmark for it , As far as IAF goes at AI we got to speak with boss of 45 squad and he was exteremely pleased and delighted with Tejas he did mention minor squadron induction issues but he said it was natural to have it for any new type in service.


Great ! more details please, Austin..really want to know how the operational users of the Tejas see it now, after its induction. Not just the pilots, but the guys who actually work on the jet for hours, after it has been through its paces during the day or night.

I wish someone would interview him and get info on the induction schedule, the simulator hours, on the nitty gritties of No.45 squadron's build up towards full strength.


Good suggestion. I whispered into the wind.

Dileep
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5871
Joined: 04 Apr 2005 08:17
Location: Dera Mahab Ali धरा महाबलिस्याः درا مهاب الي

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Dileep » 28 Feb 2017 09:06

ashishvikas wrote:Delhi Defence Review‏@delhidefence

More Tejas cockpit display pictures. Photo Credit @cleanstrike

https://twitter.com/delhidefence/status ... 0047412224


That one was displayed by DataPatterns. It is for AMCA, not LCA.

There were at least four Indian companies (and several foreign as well) that showed displays targeted to LCA.

Rishi_Tri
BRFite
Posts: 505
Joined: 13 Feb 2017 14:49

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Rishi_Tri » 28 Feb 2017 15:08

Tejas cockpit - pic.twitter.com/IBx67fnu8d - is smart balance of form and function.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests