Bharat Rakshak Forum Announcement

Hello Everyone,

A warm welcome back to the Bharat Rakshak Forum.

Important Notice: Due to a corruption in the BR forum database we regret to announce that data records relating to some of our registered users have been lost. We estimate approx. 500 user details are deleted.

To ease the process of recreating the user IDs we request members that have previously posted on the BR forums to recognise and identify their posts, once the posts are identified please contact the BRF moderator team by emailing BRF Mod Team with your post details.

The mod team will be able to update your username, email etc. so that the user history can be maintained.

Unfortunately for members that have never posted or have had all their posts deleted i.e. users that have 0 posts, we will be unable to recreate your account hence we request that you re-register again.

We apologise for any inconvenience caused and thank you for your understanding.

Regards,
Seetal

Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
chola
BRFite
Posts: 1482
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby chola » 10 Mar 2017 02:44

I'm going to say this again: The Koreans started screwdriver-giri of F-Solah decades after we began our assembly of MiGs and then SU. Today, they are selling the T-50 around the world and we are still being screwed by the Russians. Good lord, why do we keep going back to them?

Cybaru
BRFite
Posts: 1862
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby Cybaru » 10 Mar 2017 02:52

I don't think its gotta do with either Russians or Americans, its what we want to do and how we want to proceed. We seem to find it comforting to import and assemble rather than take the more difficult road of designing and building.

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1482
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby chola » 10 Mar 2017 03:48

Cybaru wrote:I don't think its gotta do with either Russians or Americans, its what we want to do and how we want to proceed. We seem to find it comforting to import and assemble rather than take the more difficult road of designing and building.


I'm not saying we are not at fault for a good part of this predicament. But look at the Dhruv. It is a Western partnership and we exported more of those than we ever did after decades of Russian screwdrivering. And guess what, all the bribery shenanigans aside, I think we will sell Advanced Hawks. At the very least, we CAN sell them unlike the Sukhoi or the MiG technology we're supposed to have gotten.

I think there is a fundamental difference between western firms and russian ones when it comes to customers, especially when comes to India.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 47346
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby ramana » 10 Mar 2017 04:24

Neela, Its grapes are sour approach.

IAF is tired of waiting for IJT and hence decide to live with what it has.
But am afraid once IJT is fully canned the need will rise like Lazarus form the dead.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33316
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby shiv » 10 Mar 2017 06:18

On the general consensus that air forces are moving out of "IJT"s and going for just two-stage training - I am reminded of the 1960s when it was predicted that all weapons would be laser weapons by 1990. Why 1960s? Just a decade ago we BRFites were "aheading our curve" by quoting pundits who said that manned aircraft are becoming obsolete. Funnily enough when someone claims that he consulted an astrologer our secular western universalism button gets pressed and we go "harrumph"

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 60187
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: Lupine but moderately dharmic

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby Singha » 10 Mar 2017 06:25

On a related note the jsf finally fired its guns in flight this week.

Has the tejas fully qualified its guns? Due to smoke and vibration this should be one of early than late items

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5705
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby brar_w » 10 Mar 2017 06:31

Singha wrote:On a related note the jsf finally fired its guns in flight this week.

Has the tejas fully qualified its guns? Due to smoke and vibration this should be one of early than late items


viewtopic.php?f=3&t=5098&p=2126302#p2126302

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5582
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Indranil » 13 Mar 2017 09:19

Chinmay wrote:Cybaru, my response was to Shiv's query. CAS is a mission and has been performed by all aircraft ranging from drones to helicopters to B1 bombers, so no aircraft in production today has been 'designed for' CAS. The era of dedicated CAS aircraft like the A-10 or Su-25 is over.

Are you sure? Because the neither the USAF, nor the RuAF are sure.

Chinmay
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 97
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 07:25

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Chinmay » 13 Mar 2017 09:47

Indranil wrote:
Chinmay wrote:Cybaru, my response was to Shiv's query. CAS is a mission and has been performed by all aircraft ranging from drones to helicopters to B1 bombers, so no aircraft in production today has been 'designed for' CAS. The era of dedicated CAS aircraft like the A-10 or Su-25 is over.

Are you sure? Because the neither the USAF, nor the RuAF are sure.


Well, yes. I read about an upgrade plan for the A-10, but that will mean that the plane will soldier on till 2030 max? As for the Su-25, the Russians have plenty of those and they are useful in Syria, but they won't continue beyond a point as well.

None of these aircraft are 'in production', which is what I was asked in the first place, and either way its a moot point for us as we don't need a dedicated aircraft for that purpose.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 60187
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: Lupine but moderately dharmic

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Singha » 13 Mar 2017 09:56

future of CAS is helicopters with laser guided rockets, small ATGMs, cannons at one end and bomb trucks at high level releasing guided weapons...perhaps cued by third party or F&F sensor fused or designated by LDP

the KA52 already seems like a hybrid of a heli and a su25 type plane.

also with artillery & MLRS growing ever more accurate and long ranged, with networking the army will not need so much CAS calls to AF. a 1/2 regiment of 9 x 155mm can deliver some 27 shells/minute on target for 5 minutes for 135 x 40kg with fire spotting by a LOH or UAV. to get this support, will take hours for IAF to send its birds while IA can get it done by arty as and when it needs. a indian division cannot really expect much 24x7 air support so we need to overload on artillery and attack helis.

let the IAF focus on interdiction and high value rear area targets. and provide AD over the front.

so IA, which is loading up on new arty and attack helos will do fine...

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33316
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby shiv » 13 Mar 2017 10:09

Singha wrote:future of CAS is helicopters with laser guided rockets, small ATGMs, cannons at one end and bomb trucks at high level releasing guided weapons...perhaps cued by third party or F&F sensor fused or designated by LDP

One of the main drawbacks of helicopters is speed of response because of flying time to target. Targets that are some distance away are better addressed by a jet capable of flying to the area faster. This was one of the reasons why F-16s proved better than Predators in some situations. During the Meghna airlift in 1971 - the helicopter troop landing areas were being shelled by distant artillery guided by spotters sitting on a 300 foot high grain silo. One sortie in which a Gnat fired 30 mm cannon through the windows of the grain silo onto the faces of the spotter put and end to the artillery barrage

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 60187
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: Lupine but moderately dharmic

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Singha » 13 Mar 2017 10:21

maybe if each corps having its aviation wing => the heli bases owned by the army with be not more than 50km out from most targets. there will ofcourse be downtimes but they can afford a lot more helis too. the Rudra should be fairly cheap vs a proper fighter.

a good army aviation wing staffed with Rudra and LCH with good weapons will carve up the enemy if air cover is provided. LCH has the mistral aam also for chance encounters with other helis.

not sure about manpads threat though

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2684
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Cain Marko » 13 Mar 2017 10:33

Chinmay wrote:
Indranil wrote:Are you sure? Because the neither the USAF, nor the RuAF are sure.


Well, yes. I read about an upgrade plan for the A-10, but that will mean that the plane will soldier on till 2030 max? As for the Su-25, the Russians have plenty of those and they are useful in Syria, but they won't continue beyond a point as well.

None of these aircraft are 'in production', which is what I was asked in the first place, and either way its a moot point for us as we don't need a dedicated aircraft for that purpose.


What about the su34? Tbh though it is multirole

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 60187
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: Lupine but moderately dharmic

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Singha » 13 Mar 2017 11:40

fighters are definitely a lot more resilient vs the AA/manpad threat.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17016
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Philip » 13 Mar 2017 13:19

The IA should also posses light attack aircraft apart from attack helos like the KA-52,heavily armoured ,flying tanks and LCHs. The MI-35s have served us v.well. The IAF shouldn't have this dog-in-the-manger attitude when it comes to attack helos,which in most services abroad,come under the army's control. If they sacrifice the attack helo role to the IA,they could use the funds tied up for that for increasing numbers of fighters and LR strike aircraft like SU-34s,Backfires,whatever. However,a former chief was dead against the creation of new "small air forces" or words to that effect. What the IAF could also do by sacrificing the attack helos,is to induct a new light attack jet for close support,which could be an armed version of a trainer like the Yak-130,armed Hawk,a task urgently required ,since the MIG-27s too will be retired soon. I earlier suggested new armoured Jags to replace the MIG-27s,but small armed trainers too would be quite attractive. The little subsonic Gnat performed v. well in our past wars with Pak,none lost to ground fire.

vina
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5958
Joined: 11 May 2005 06:56
Location: Doing Nijikaran, Udharikaran and Baazarikaran to Commies and Assorted Leftists

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby vina » 13 Mar 2017 13:22

Singha wrote:future of CAS is helicopters with laser guided rockets, small ATGMs, cannons at one end and bomb trucks at high level releasing guided weapons...perhaps cued by third party or F&F sensor fused or designated by LDP

Future of CAS is a HTT-34 with weapons and an integral cannon for plinking tanks. Yes. That fixed wing component should be under Army command. A HTT-40 kind will have a range of close to 1000Km. Need not be based in forward areas and will have great persistence if based there.

Marten
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2158
Joined: 01 Jan 2010 21:41
Location: Engaging Communists, Uber-Socialists, Maoists, and other pro-poverty groups in fruitful dialog.

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Marten » 13 Mar 2017 14:21

OT but how is a small trainer more efficient than a Rudra? The operational cost aside, how effective is it?

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 835
Joined: 26 Aug 2016 19:14

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Gyan » 13 Mar 2017 15:01

Two engined CAT AJT proposed by HAL powered by HTFE 25 may also be suitable

Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3828
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Manish_Sharma » 13 Mar 2017 15:23

Tejas powered by Kaveri mfrd in 270 numbers would be best for CAS role !!!

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 60187
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: Lupine but moderately dharmic

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Singha » 13 Mar 2017 15:26

its going to need a powerful engine for sure. payload adds up. a basic trainer usually flies clean and 1 hr missions only. CAS is more like a 3 hr mission with a decent payload to strike targets of opportunity.

else we will get unseemly sights like what the iraqis were forced to use before getting czech,korean,russian and american planes.

a grand total of 4 hellfires on 2 external pylons. but perhaps a long loiter time
Image

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5582
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby Indranil » 16 Mar 2017 05:12



HAL's ambitious amphibian design specs:
1. 15 tons payload :eek:
2. Range 4000 kms :eek:
3. Loiter time: 1.5 hours
4. Service ceiling: 9 km
5. Gross weight: 47 Tons
6. Twin turbofan: 133 kN each
7. 100 passengers
8. fuselage length: 32 mtrs
9. T Tail
10. Sponsonless. New method called SAGAR, also aids in STOL.

So this an US-2/AG-600 class aircraft!!

Mihir
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 833
Joined: 14 Nov 2004 21:26

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Mihir » 16 Mar 2017 05:53

vina wrote:Future of CAS is a HTT-34 with weapons and an integral cannon for plinking tanks. Yes. That fixed wing component should be under Army command. A HTT-40 kind will have a range of close to 1000Km. Need not be based in forward areas and will have great persistence if based there.

An integral cannon on a Deepak? :eek: It isn't going to be powerful enough to plink anything other than soft-skinned keeps and tricks. Even the GAU-8 comes up short against a T-72.

GShankar
BRFite
Posts: 868
Joined: 16 Sep 2016 20:20

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby GShankar » 16 Mar 2017 08:01

How did the subject change from "Indian Military Aviation" to "LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016"?

This trend start from this post - viewtopic.php?f=3&t=7098&p=2129592#p2128188

FYI.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33316
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby shiv » 16 Mar 2017 08:23

GShankar wrote:How did the subject change from "Indian Military Aviation" to "LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016"?

This trend start from this post - viewtopic.php?f=3&t=7098&p=2129592#p2128188

FYI.

Those posts were in the LCA thread but moved to this thread by Adminulla (May Choice Goat Droppings be Upon Him)

vina
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5958
Joined: 11 May 2005 06:56
Location: Doing Nijikaran, Udharikaran and Baazarikaran to Commies and Assorted Leftists

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby vina » 16 Mar 2017 13:26

Indranil wrote:10. Sponsonless. New method called SAGAR, also aids in STOL.
So this an US-2/AG-600 class aircraft!!


Highly risky . Unproven. Looks quaint. Will need sub scale model to be tested and control systems proven before it can be put into a full aircraft. And I am a little confused here.

1. They have made the float/hull stable like a ship (by having metacenter above CG).. So I guess in a static/rest position it will be stable and wont topple.

2. However, while take off, since it is a planing hull (where , weight NOT = buoyancy, a portion of weight is supported by hydrodynamic lift in water), the stability is an issue as the water plane area reduces. I guess this stability augmentation scheme is for these regimes.

Again, I am not sure if the they have thought all this out. So let me summarise what I THINK (could be wrong) they have done.

The stabilisation scheme (on water) is like a conventional boat. To possibly cater to stability decrease during high speed taxiing and take off run, and landing , they have active stability augmentation. I think the more difficult problem is stability during landing where it touches down in a flare and there isn't enough waterline area for it to have transverse stability.

Which brings back the question. Have they REALLY thought this through ? Who are the customers for this. Turbofan engines ? Why ? A turbo prop will be more efficient. Is it going to be a transonic plane like an airliner that flies at mach 0.85 or so, having a swept wing and hence turbofan engines , or is it going to be a straight wing, fly at mach 0.65 odd, plane that is meant for SAR and patrol and stuff able to land and take off in pretty rough sea states ?

If it is the latter and not airliner substitute, that lands and takes off in calm water and the risks involved in active stabilisation and the development effort involved , this entire thing seems ill considered and frankly quite overdone.

Which brings us back to the question.

Question : So how does a catamaran /outrigger canoe differ from a traditional monohull (yeah, catamaran have multiple hulls .. that is not the question. how do they differ in working?)

Hint/Ans : A catamaran /outrigger canoe are different in how they work from a traditional monohull . A monohull is stabilised by gravity (just CG and buoyancy at play here). A catamaran /outrigger are geometry stabilised. A traditional seaplane is like a catamaran /outrigger canoe with the outrigger floats, while what HAL is proposing is a monohull with artificial stability augmentation in critical phases. If they want to get rid of the outboard wing floats, they are better off going for the Boeing 314 Clipper / Dornier flying boat kind of scheme, and they can put the landing gear in that as well for amphibious operations, in addition to make that sponson generate lift
Last edited by vina on 16 Mar 2017 13:54, edited 1 time in total.

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

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby Rishi Verma » 16 Mar 2017 13:42

How about NLCA trainer version as IJT with software change.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3423
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby srai » 16 Mar 2017 14:51

Rishi Verma wrote:How about NLCA trainer version as IJT with software change.


That conversion would be more like Lead In Fighter Trainer (LIFT) -- an step up from Hawk AJT.

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 835
Joined: 26 Aug 2016 19:14

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Gyan » 16 Mar 2017 20:25

Manish_Sharma wrote:Tejas powered by Kaveri mfrd in 270 numbers would be best for CAS role !!!


Also as an AJT and Combat Trainer

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33316
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby shiv » 16 Mar 2017 20:40

Indranil wrote:
HAL's ambitious amphibian design specs:
1. 15 tons payload :eek:
2. Range 4000 kms :eek:
3. Loiter time: 1.5 hours
4. Service ceiling: 9 km
5. Gross weight: 47 Tons
6. Twin turbofan: 133 kN each
7. 100 passengers
8. fuselage length: 32 mtrs
9. T Tail
10. Sponsonless. New method called SAGAR, also aids in STOL.

So this an US-2/AG-600 class aircraft!!


I wish them well. Unless we are bold and grow out of "light this" and "medium that" we are never going to move forward. I need to see more of this

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33316
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby shiv » 16 Mar 2017 20:48

A little comment on the video above and the photo of women working on Tejas in the LCA thread. People of my generation (and earlier) have spent decades sending our sons abroad to make a new life outside what we thought was a useless nation with no future. I am moved to see our daughters taking up the slack. I wish them well.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5582
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby Indranil » 17 Mar 2017 01:10

Vina, I completely agree with you. I don't see the point of this project. How many large amphibians are in service today? How many does India need 20-30 at most. And for that, we undertake such a high risk undertaking. It involves hydrodynamics, aerodynamics and now this completely unproven rowing technology. I thought they were talking about adding floats to the 228 or converting it for amphibious use. That made sense, because that kind of tourism is kicking off in India. But how the hell will you feel up 90 passengers from a jetty or something. And how will one ensure safety. Who will generate that facility on the shore.

There are much lower lying fruits. NCAD project should not be an ab-initio development. The time, experience and resources we have are short. We should get an existing design and modify or upgrade. We lost the Dornier 328/428/528/728/928 series to Turkey. The Saudis are running with the Antonov designs. HAL should try to find out if ATR would like to sell the Jetstream 61 designs. ATR has no use for them, and it is developed from the HS-748 which HAL license built. A turbofan variant can be developed from this version. In addition, they can go with Kawasaki with the higher capacity version. They are also looking for a partner.

A mid-tire transport is another open void for which there will be orders as soon as a plane arrives.

Hakeem, I am also very very happy to see all these women in NAL/HAL/DRDO/ISRO. Not many countries can brag about women leading such ambitious projects of national importance.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5582
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby Indranil » 17 Mar 2017 02:40


vina
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5958
Joined: 11 May 2005 06:56
Location: Doing Nijikaran, Udharikaran and Baazarikaran to Commies and Assorted Leftists

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby vina » 17 Mar 2017 06:43

Indranil wrote: How many large amphibians are in service today? How many does India need 20-30 at most.


For this, I have no hesitation in saying this. HAL. Don't waste your time with such a niche product. GO BUY THIS / license produce this.


In fact, if the Japanese are acting antsy with the US-2, we should get the militarised version of this. This is exactly what HAL wants to develop. The Russians will be willing to sell. They have not made any money whatsoever out of developing it and haven't many themselves.

It is just possible that the US-2 has better STOL capabilities and can operate in higher sea states. That is important for SAR and to ensure access to remote places like Andamans in all sorts of sea conditions.

abhik
BRFite
Posts: 1981
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby abhik » 17 Mar 2017 07:41

I didn't watch the whole video but isn't it just conceptual study a.k.a a paper plane which will never be built?

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3423
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby srai » 17 Mar 2017 10:24

abhik wrote:I didn't watch the whole video but isn't it just conceptual study a.k.a a paper plane which will never be built?


It's a very early conceptual study taking requirements gathered from market survey and guidelines like FAR-25. Basically, the design looks like what it will be if all the broad-sets of requirements, i.e. one-size-fits-all, are applied. From here, they will be iteratively refining the design to come up with a more optimal solution that has trade-offs and learning curve. Maybe they will be using proposed partnership to design a seaplane around the Do-228 platform as a first-step. It is possible this would eventually lead to a JV of sorts with US-2/Be-200 but on a more equal partner footing as HAL would be able to bring something to the table as well. However, amphibious plane market is somewhat limited at this point in time. It remains to be seen if the market could be expanded into something that makes the project feasible.

Good to see even public-sector companies, like HAL, initiating and investing on such R&D endeavors and filing Patents on some innovated AI rowing/stabilizing mechanism.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5582
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby Indranil » 17 Mar 2017 11:33

Vina,

What they are suggesting is a plane with twice the AUW and payload of the Be-200. IT will be in same weight category as the US-2 or the new Chinese amphibian. In terms of capability, currently nothing beats the US-2. Actually IN/CG wanted amphibians and Be-200 won the shootout against the CL-415. However, a strategic decision was made to appease the Japanese, and the poor Russians were shafted. Since then, MoU after MoU have been signed to get the US-2. Nothing has materialized.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17016
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby Philip » 17 Mar 2017 12:03

BE--200/220 performed at Aero-India 3-4 air shows ago,fire-bombing the runway. It also comes with an ASW package,v.reasonable price ($35-40M )when compared with the US-2 ($!!)+M).12 DO-228 amphibs and around 6-8 BE-220s MPAs will be a good package for the IN and CG.

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1482
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby chola » 17 Mar 2017 14:29

shiv wrote:
Indranil wrote:
HAL's ambitious amphibian design specs:
1. 15 tons payload :eek:
2. Range 4000 kms :eek:
3. Loiter time: 1.5 hours
4. Service ceiling: 9 km
5. Gross weight: 47 Tons
6. Twin turbofan: 133 kN each
7. 100 passengers
8. fuselage length: 32 mtrs
9. T Tail
10. Sponsonless. New method called SAGAR, also aids in STOL.

So this an US-2/AG-600 class aircraft!!


I wish them well. Unless we are bold and grow out of "light this" and "medium that" we are never going to move forward. I need to see more of this



Amen! Many applause from me on this. Looking forward to this project.

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1482
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby chola » 17 Mar 2017 14:37

Philip wrote:BE--200/220 performed at Aero-India 3-4 air shows ago,fire-bombing the runway. It also comes with an ASW package,v.reasonable price ($35-40M )when compared with the US-2 ($!!)+M).12 DO-228 amphibs and around 6-8 BE-220s MPAs will be a good package for the IN and CG.


I'm sorry Philipji. I like reading your posts on naval matters but this constant pushing of Ivana's ware is growing thin. I rather wait for an Indian solution.

We are NOT surrounded by great or even competent military powers requiring everything phoren to be bought urgently here and now. What we have now is already an overkill for TSP and the other insects of the neighborhood and whatever rump forces the PRC could spare from the US, Japan and their allies.

JayS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2295
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Aviation - 21 Sept 2015

Postby JayS » 17 Mar 2017 16:18

Seminar from Tapas (Rustom 2) team from ADE. A lot of interesting information on Tapas and lessons learnt from the project and some tidbits on future improvements.


Some pointers from the video off the top my head (If someone can do better job, please do the honors)

- Most interesting tidbit is Single engine twin boom (V-tail..??) version of Tapas in development. They didn't switched to this config because of delays in the project. But they figured out this one is most optimized config from multidisciplinary POV.
- A lot of scope for optimization in Aero, structural and avionics fields and significant weight reduction.
- One of the key lessons learned that we are unsure about how to certify a MALE UAV using existing FAR-23 requirements. They played safe and used Factor od safety of 1.5 instead of 1.25 which is norm elsewhere in the world - giving higher weight. Similarly they used higher sinking rate for landing making LG overweight. This in turn demanded for higher powered engine and so on.
- A lot of challenges in designing CLAW for UAV considering that there is no man to deal with the contingency in case of failure of data link or some component failure. First flight was delayed by months just for this reason, how to cover data link loss situation during first TO.
- 7-8 optimization initiatives proposed to reduce weight:
- Use of FoS of 1.25 instead of 1.5, reducing weight all over the place, totol target of 280 kg on this account.
- Integrated avionics package in single LRU saving some 80kg due to reduction in mounting structures et al
- 180 kg targeted reduction on aero structure. Wing composited to be moved to pre-preg manufacturing giving some weight loss.
Last edited by JayS on 17 Mar 2017 22:37, edited 1 time in total.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: chola, srin, suryag and 39 guests