Are you flamebaiting? You are quoting ever honest Ajai Shukla, and saying IAF ordered 123 fighter aircraft with a major design flaw,
Please also tell me about the variable intakes of the F-15, F-16, F-18, F-22, F-35, Rafale, Su, Mig 29 and venerable J-20, J-10 all intakes seem fixed like Tejas, are they restricted to Mach 1.4?. Regards
For what it is worthhttps://hushkit.net/2020/03/16/how-all-fighter-planes-suck-an-idiots-guide-to-supersonic-air-intakes/#:~:text=These%20variable%20geometry%20intakes%20are,%2C%20or%20inside%2C%20the%20inlet.
or aircraft with side-mounted intakes (most aircraft not using a pitot intake) some of these issues arose from interactions between the flow on the aircraft fuselage and in the engine inlet. As a result, it was found desirable to stand the intakes off from the side of the fuselage, creating a passage to allow the fuselage boundary layer to flow past the intake without entering it and disturbing the flow to the engine. In many cases, further protection was achieved through the use of a splitter plate to ensure the separation of the boundary layer flow from the intake flow.
Next the Author will say Tejas does not have a splitter plate also? ADA, IAF, HAL are all fools no.
In fact the only Aircraft I see this design flaw might be in is
In developing the F-35, Lockheed-Martin has developed a diverterless supersonic intake, consisting of a shaped ‘bump’ on the fuselage side, which acts like a ‘rock’ in the fuselage boundary layer ‘stream’, causing the boundary layer flow to part and avoid flowing into the intake. The ‘bump’ is coupled with a forward swept intake cowl, and it is claimed this offers a light-weight solution to providing an efficient intake for a supersonic aircraft, with the added advantage of avoiding the radar signature of a boundary layer diverter. This approach has also been used on the Sino-Pakistani JF-17 Thunder aircraft.
It is, perhaps, worth noting that neither the intake, nor the diverter system has any variable geometry. Consequently, the intake system is likely to act like a pitot system in some ways, limiting efficient flight speeds. This is perhaps less of an issue for the F-35, because it has very low signature, and also because it will be limited to about Mach 1.6 by wave drag. One might wonder, however, about the trade off for the JF-17, where perhaps a F-20 Tigershark-like intake with a variable ramp might, with a suitable engine, allow higher performance in the Mach 2 range.