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

LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

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.
Marten
BRFite
Posts: 1199
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 » 07 Apr 2017 19:08

The smaller one 8122 weighs lesser iirc, but I may be wrong.
The point was that they could find other uses and found a shorter path to certification, user acceptance. A multi ejector rack would be useful across platforms and wing redesign or structural strengthening could thereby be left for later. I would love to learn the tradeoffs discussed before they chose the path they did.

negi
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 12503
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Trying to mellow down :)

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby negi » 07 Apr 2017 19:20

Karan M wrote:Negi, that future proof Arjun is too heavy for the IA. Perhaps we need to put a cannon in a pod for the LCA and sell it to IA as lighter than T-72 MBT and sell the Arjun to AF as Brahmos capable heavier than MMRCA class. See, problem solved!! :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

Karan well Arjun being heavy is a different argument does IA like it or not is a 'subjective' matter but the point I was trying to make in this context was Arjun surpassed it's competition in trials and that has been quantified and established . You know this probably the best on this board but Arjun is a nice case study for all those in MIL product development as to why starting with a larger platform works better than going with 'compact' approach when the mission scope, requirements are fluid and development cycles are long. If Arjun would have started off with T-72 replacement objective and stuck to small compact tank theme in letter it would not have been better protected than say the T-90 today nor would it be able to lend itself to quick upgrades; remember Arjun outran and outgunned the latest offering from Ru in the same segment , that is no mean feat . My intention here is not to take sides but to merely point to the fundamental fact that Tejas has a uphill task when it comes to any requirement around re-equipping or increase in loadout because of it's compact size nothing more nothing less.

JayS
BRFite
Posts: 1798
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby JayS » 07 Apr 2017 19:38

srai wrote:Image


Looking at this image, if the two outboard pylons were unusable for CCMs (and thereby any other weapon), LCA would need too many combinations of dual racks to be able to keep the same weapons loads e.g. 800ltr tank + CCM, 1000lb LGB + CCM, BVR + CCM, AShM + CCM and so on.

One option was, (which I have advocated previously and I rather like it) is to induct MK1 in A2A + limited A2G role and quickly move on to MK2 with full multirole capabilities. I believe it would have been possible to induct such limited capability MK1 by 2010 time frame.

Bala Vignesh
BRFite
Posts: 1755
Joined: 30 Apr 2009 02:02
Location: Standing at the edge of the cliff
Contact:

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Bala Vignesh » 07 Apr 2017 19:50

JayS wrote:
One option was, (which I have advocated previously and I rather like it) is to induct MK1 in A2A + limited A2G role and quickly move on to MK2 with full multirole capabilities.

This ideally would have been the way to go for the LCA!!!
It's been quite a learning session for me the last couple of weeks in this thread. There was always something new to learn!!!
Many thanks to all the contributors.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 45702
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby ramana » 07 Apr 2017 20:10

Karan M wrote:btw, the fa-18 issue? minor problem of hypoxia only. f-22 also had it.

no problem. don't fly as much. or high. or this or that...

meanwhile our "desi products" are in news for "3-legged cheetah" while of course, these imports get fawning editorials in all the press and from rtd bigwigs talking about how they are "essential for superiority" vs TSPAF or PRC or whatever.



The US knows it has to fix those issues.
However in India the bigwigs can fart all they want about desi products and keep quiet about flaws in imports.

JayS., One factor we need to consider is the MoD and MoF * which are tardy in asking and releasing the funds. This causes the schedule crunch. Hence accelerated testing happens as they are still needed for achieving milestones.

* MoD delays in asking for funds and argues with the services and DRDO if those are needed. And then MoF claims budget priorities and allocates late and often less than asked for.
Reason is these worthies think the great white hope will swoop down and save India if push comes to shove.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 45702
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby ramana » 07 Apr 2017 20:17

Just for my ignorance, how much does the Astra weigh?

Thanks, ramana

JayS
BRFite
Posts: 1798
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby JayS » 07 Apr 2017 20:21

ramana wrote:
Karan M wrote:btw, the fa-18 issue? minor problem of hypoxia only. f-22 also had it.

no problem. don't fly as much. or high. or this or that...

meanwhile our "desi products" are in news for "3-legged cheetah" while of course, these imports get fawning editorials in all the press and from rtd bigwigs talking about how they are "essential for superiority" vs TSPAF or PRC or whatever.



The US knows it has to fix those issues.
However in India the bigwigs can fart all they want about desi products and keep quiet about flaws in imports.

JayS., One factor we need to consider is the MoD and MoF * which are tardy in asking and releasing the funds. This causes the schedule crunch. Hence accelerated testing happens as they are still needed for achieving milestones.

* MoD delays in asking for funds and argues with the services and DRDO if those are needed. And then MoF claims budget priorities and allocates late and often less than asked for.
Reason is these worthies think the great white hope will swoop down and save India if push comes to shove.


Saar, we can reason somewhat with DRDO and IAF, but MoD is beyond that. No point in even discussing.

Imagine if MP was RM in 2001. Though JF was very supportive, I doubt he could have reconciled the two side like what MP achieved in 2015.

Zynda
BRFite
Posts: 974
Joined: 07 Jan 2006 00:37
Location: J4

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Zynda » 07 Apr 2017 20:29

ramana wrote:Just for my ignorance, how much does the Astra weigh?

Thanks, ramana

~155 Kg

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 45702
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby ramana » 07 Apr 2017 21:16

Good. Most likely Astra will get CCM role once its qualified.
Then don't want rhona/dhona about can't fit on LCA outer pylons.

Zynda
BRFite
Posts: 974
Joined: 07 Jan 2006 00:37
Location: J4

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Zynda » 07 Apr 2017 21:26

Ramana, per the poster from AI which was posted earlier in this thread, Astra can be used both for CCM as well as BVR engagements. But per tsarkar, the current weight qualification of LCA's outboard pylons are 150 Kg onlee.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2407
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Cain Marko » 07 Apr 2017 21:59

Karan M wrote:Comrade! We hab solution!

Future proof Arjun/future proof LCA. You decide.

Image

We must trash all domestic products and buy this since it is Russian made, at once.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 45702
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby ramana » 07 Apr 2017 22:22

Zynda, The IIR seeker version of Astra might not weigh 155 kg.

sankum
BRFite
Posts: 491
Joined: 20 Dec 2004 21:45

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby sankum » 07 Apr 2017 23:21

Armed forces lost 48 aircraft, 21 choppers since 2011

Defence Minister Arun Jaitley, replying to another query, said the ADA is also developing MK-II version of LCA for the Navy with a higher thrust engine than the one used in MK-I version of Tejas.

“Final Operational Clearence (FOC) of LCA (Navy) MK II is likely to be obtained by 2023 for induction in Indian Navy and FoC for Air Force MKII is likely to be obtained by December 2025,” he said.

Cybaru
BRFite
Posts: 1739
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Cybaru » 07 Apr 2017 23:53

sankum wrote:
Defence Minister Arun Jaitley, replying to another query, said the ADA is also developing MK-II version of LCA for the Navy with a higher thrust engine than the one used in MK-I version of Tejas.

“Final Operational Clearence (FOC) of LCA (Navy) MK II is likely to be obtained by 2023 for induction in Indian Navy and FoC for Air Force MKII is likely to be obtained by December 2025,” he said.


FOC a full year before the Mythical GripenNG! Nice!

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4952
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby brar_w » 08 Apr 2017 00:04

Cybaru wrote:
sankum wrote:


FOC a full year before the Mythical GripenNG! Nice!


That would be Planned FOC a year before Planned FOC..given the way most aerospace programs have been going of late around the world...

Cybaru
BRFite
Posts: 1739
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Cybaru » 08 Apr 2017 00:19

brar_w wrote:
Cybaru wrote:
FOC a full year before the Mythical GripenNG! Nice!


That would be Planned FOC a year before Planned FOC..given the way most aerospace programs have been going of late around the world...


Yes, I noticed! Just wanted to highlight it nonetheless.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3114
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby srai » 08 Apr 2017 06:11

Zynda wrote:Ramana, per the poster from AI which was posted earlier in this thread, Astra can be used both for CCM as well as BVR engagements. But per tsarkar, the current weight qualification of LCA's outboard pylons are 150 Kg onlee.

These new studies show the outboard pylon rating may be around 250kg.
Image

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 31538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby shiv » 08 Apr 2017 07:11

Let me ask a question based on two diametrically opposite statements made by various people:
1. Tejas outboard pylon was stressed only to 45 kg (or 60 kg?)
2. Tejas Navy undercarriage was over-engineered and can do with weight reduction in future iterations.

Now for years I have heard people tell me how marvellous modern computer modelling is and how very accurate estimates of load bearing ability can be arrived at by some mouse clicks and smart engineers. I know that and that is not the answer I am looking for, but I need to word my question carefully.

An outboard pylon that was designed for 45 (or 60) kg might possibly be able to take a greater load. I guess that "load" would mean both static loads where increasing weights are slung off that hardpoint till the something breaks - which is relatively easy. But dynamic loads as experienced in flight would ultimately have to be proven over a longer period of time - presumably by simulating wing stresses with increasing loads and testing for fatigue damage. To me - what this means is that when a hardpoint is "proven" to be able to withstand a 45 (or 60) kg load it does not mean that it cannot take anything higher. Unless it has been tested and proven that it breaks at 75 kg or that fatigue life becomes intolerably low at that higher load the designers/testers may not know the absolute maximum load that it can safely take.

Does anyone have any information about whether the LCA wing has been tested to breaking with heavier and heavier loads on the outboard pylon? Is there any information (article/video) where someone states that the outboard pylon can (for example) take a maximum of say 80 kg onleee and then phuttt!?

We know for a fact that the no one in ADA knew at exactly what load the undercarriage of the LCA Navy would go phutt. We only know that they realized that it was overdesigned. What information do we have that the outboard pylon was not overdesigned but instead honed to such great and accurate perfection that it would snap at loads greater than 45 (or 60?) kg?

In fact all these pretty pictures of outboard pylon carrying something in excess of 150 kg - or at least an R-73 indicate that the pylon can probably carry more. What evidence do we have in the form of statements, articles or videos that the weight carrying capacity of that pylon was "increased" by suitable strengthening as opposed to simply proving that it was over engineered in the first place and can actually carry more?

I put it to folks that without such information it would be unfair and inaccurate to respectively read the minds and intentions of past ADA designers/engineers.

I would like to know if anyone has come across any specific information related to these questions and preferably not general engineering books/college gyan handed down sneeringly by people with good teeth to non engineers.

Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3974
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Neshant » 08 Apr 2017 08:05

One thing i am sure of is the LCA will not crash anywhere near as frequently as aircraft designed by countries with Northern climates.

geeth
BRFite
Posts: 1135
Joined: 22 Aug 1999 11:31
Location: India

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby geeth » 08 Apr 2017 08:30

I would like to know if anyone has come across any specific information related to these questions and preferably not general engineering books/college gyan handed down sneeringly by people with good teeth to non engineers.


That is what I was also trying to say. The wing is not a rigid structure. In fact it is quite flexible for the loading (both static and dynamic) it undergoes during a flight. There will be issues emerging in each flight regime which even the best designers would not be able to predict even with best computing power. Abd ADA engineers are novices so they are extra cautious..thats all. They are not sure hence cautious. If we had a few hot headed mavericks heading the design team, LCA would have crashed and project wound up long back. They have reached this far by reading books and observing others and occasional help from experts where available. Isnt it great?

For all you know, it may be possile to sling a 500 kg bomb at wing tip and fly. How many times and what speed and what damage to aircraft is the question.

This is a machine which has to fly for decades with a human being, overcome all adversaries and return to base safely everytime and remain as good as a new one.

It is not rocket science...something much more than that. If people dont realise it, you will continue to get boring posts vomiting undergrad gyan. That is also necessary,but repetition kills the dynamic interest.

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 445
Joined: 26 Aug 2016 19:14

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Gyan » 08 Apr 2017 08:57

ramana wrote:Zynda, The IIR seeker version of Astra might not weigh 155 kg.
There is no indication yet of IIR aversion. The target weight of Astra was 155kg but it can be slightly heavier due to so many iterations & changes. So anything between 150-180kg.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 45702
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby ramana » 08 Apr 2017 08:59

Shiv The ADA will gradually find out the limits of the LCA. So far they have calculated stresses and flight loads induced strains. Design margins will be 1.5 as pilot is involved.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 31538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby shiv » 08 Apr 2017 09:35

ramana wrote:Shiv The ADA will gradually find out the limits of the LCA. So far they have calculated stresses and flight loads induced strains. Design margins will be 1.5 as pilot is involved.


Sure ramana - and at the risk of belabouring the point let me do a hypothetical "backwards guesswork" on what might have been one ADA thought process.

In 1983 (or whenever the spec was frozen) they wanted X kilos total on inboard pylons - for dumb bombs etc. What did they want for outboard pylons? The only spec they had was ~50 kg for R-60. So they went ahead and designed a wing that would take a total load of all the pylons - i.e several thousand kg for inboard pylons and ~50 kg for outboard. Then they would have tested each of these for loads individually and collectively. They would certainly have proven the ability of the outboard pylon to carry 50 Kg + 50% extra safety margin. That is why they stated that it was ready to take the R-60.

But did they stop there because the design specs (of 50 kg+ 50% margin) were met or did they go ahead and test to destruction and did that testing to destruction prove that ~50 kg (+50% margin) was the absolute limit of the outboard pylon? In fact further testing may have shown that those outboard pylons can actually hold much higher loads up to 150 kg static and dynamic plus margins. We just don't have information to either confirm or deny that. Without such information everything is speculation. General gyan like "engineers will do this and software will do that" is pointless in this instance

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 31538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby shiv » 08 Apr 2017 10:25

geeth wrote:For all you know, it may be possile to sling a 500 kg bomb at wing tip and fly. How many times and what speed and what damage to aircraft is the question.

Exactly. The 45 kg limit was never stated as being the absolute, final wing breaking limit. It was only equal to a design requirement. There may be design redundancy for higher loads that can be stated only after testing. That testing will be done only if it is necessary to prove a higher load. I think that is what has been done. Sitting here today and saying that 45 kg is the absolute limit for the outboard pylon may not necessarily be right.

JayS
BRFite
Posts: 1798
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby JayS » 08 Apr 2017 10:50

Well, I thought wing redesign due to increased pylon load on outboard pylon and the delay hence is a fact and accepted by all. Maybe Vina can provide the link to the old discussions if those posts are available still..? I dont remember those discussions perhaps because its before I started lurking here.

And so far I have not seen any report on STS testing for LCA. Its a pending work. Was planned for 2012 but didnt happen then.

Well that reminds me that one poster here posted chaiwalla info that fatigue life for gun integration (gun mounting structure perhaps) is already done and proven for LCA.

Zynda
BRFite
Posts: 974
Joined: 07 Jan 2006 00:37
Location: J4

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Zynda » 08 Apr 2017 12:05

JayS wrote:And so far I have not seen any report on STS testing for LCA. Its a pending work. Was planned for 2012 but didnt happen then.

What does STS mean?

Marten
BRFite
Posts: 1199
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 » 08 Apr 2017 12:31

Structural test specimen.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3114
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby srai » 08 Apr 2017 12:37

ramana wrote:Shiv The ADA will gradually find out the limits of the LCA. So far they have calculated stresses and flight loads induced strains. Design margins will be 1.5 as pilot is involved.


1.5 x breaking point is ideal as stated by the PM working on the HTT-40. But Indian designers, being inexperienced, have tended to be more cautious with their designs and over-engineer for safety. Closer to 2 x breaking point is more common. These things are proven with a static stress specimen. LCA has had a stress airframe and testing that for a long time now. Look at any LCA brochure and you will see it.

Other thing to point out is that even if an airframe/wing can carry more weight, the heavier loads, more Gs and speed will stress the airframe and engines more than normal usage. Things won't last as long.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 31538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby shiv » 08 Apr 2017 12:48

As long as the wingtip/outboard section of the wing can bear a heavier load it should be possible to keep the total stress on the wing roots within design limits by reducing the load carried on the inner pylons no?

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3114
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby srai » 08 Apr 2017 12:49

Marten wrote:Structural test specimen.

Image
Image
Image

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3114
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby srai » 08 Apr 2017 13:36

Boeing-777 Wing being tested to breaking point. Breaks at 154%.
Last edited by srai on 08 Apr 2017 15:22, edited 1 time in total.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 31538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby shiv » 08 Apr 2017 14:42

Structural testing of HF 24 Marut
Image

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 31538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby shiv » 08 Apr 2017 20:29

srai wrote:These things are proven with a static stress specimen. LCA has had a stress airframe and testing that for a long time now. Look at any LCA brochure and you will see it.

Watch about 2 minutes from the point linked below. Two scenes even show an R-60 mounted on a LCA wing and being put through tests. I am sure the same tests were later repeated with the R-73 or whatever and I am guessing the wings stood up well. My guess that is
https://youtu.be/755G4aqQ9mk?t=406

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3114
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby srai » 08 Apr 2017 21:41

^^^
Good videos. Hadn't seen it in a while.



JayS
BRFite
Posts: 1798
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby JayS » 08 Apr 2017 21:53

shiv wrote:
srai wrote:These things are proven with a static stress specimen. LCA has had a stress airframe and testing that for a long time now. Look at any LCA brochure and you will see it.

Watch about 2 minutes from the point linked below. Two scenes even show an R-60 mounted on a LCA wing and being put through tests. I am sure the same tests were later repeated with the R-73 or whatever and I am guessing the wings stood up well. My guess that is
https://youtu.be/755G4aqQ9mk?t=406


FYI, the particular test they showed with R60 on is called Structural Coupling Test (The narrator mentions it in the list of test facilities he spell out). Its done to find out the frequency response of various airframe components so that those frequencies can be eliminated from the FCS's response using filters (basically FCS will ignore those vibratory motions) to avoid resonance or any other such issues.

Here is a paper from LCA team which nicely describes this.

[url]nal-ir.nal.res.in/5026/1/INCAST_2008-117.pdf[/url]

It seems there are three main structural tests for LCA involving entire Airframe:
- MAST (Main Airframe Static Test)
- MAFT (Main Airframe Fatigue Test)
- SCT (Structural Coupling Test)

From this video we see that they have done SCT on the TD airframe in early 2000s for sure, and may be MAST/MAFT too. And from Broadsword blog, it is clear that these tests are repeated on early LSP series (Picture posted by srai above). Its not too much of a stretch of imagination to think that these must have been again repeated with late LSPs which are very close to production standard.

They must have done Design load tests but I highly doubt the Ultimate load test is done so far. I think its still pending.

PS: http://ajaishukla.blogspot.in/2008/03/h ... -test.html

Karan M
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 13696
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby Karan M » 09 Apr 2017 03:40

Is it 115km?

JayS wrote:
Karan M wrote:Rough estimate, 660 odd TRMs, each of around 7.9W peak power.
For reference: my post from October 2015
viewtopic.php?p=1922326#p1922326


Some infor on Uttam from my side. My knowledge of avionics is limited so asked only some simple questions. I was having general chat with a young lady there who works on the SW side and with a more senior guy for few minutes. Expressed my gratitude for working for the nation's progress.

- It has ~700 TR modules
- Expected range 150km for 2m2 target size.
- Weight of entire package is 110kg.
- GaAs based. No GaN so far. Earlier GaAs was procured from US, but they sanctioned it few years ago (may be 4yr ago?) After that, now we make GaAs TRMs in India.
- They have 3 prototypes so far and by end of the year it would be 6. some more might be built.
- All SW coding is done - all modes are covered - A2A, A2G, SAR etc. What's remaining is putting it on a Fighter and test/debug. But LDRE seemed very confident that they can fully qualify Uttam on LCA within 2yrs.
- Extensive ground testing done. They had done a Tech Demo project in the past where they built small AESA radar and flight tested it on helicopter. THey have run through entire dev cycle on that TD. That's what gives them confidence on Uttam now, they told me.
- Right now it can search for up to 100 targets, track 20 and target 1 at a time. There is no particular limitation to increase number for simultaneous targeting as they have ample reserve processing power. Right now its kept at 1 for the ease of testing/debugging.
- Cooling requirement is of 3.6kW. IIRC, LCA has heat exchanger qualified for 3.5kW already (IR may remember better, its from one of the tenders). So Uttam may need some minor changes on that front.
- A lot of experience from Netra AWACS is helping the Uttam project.


I have some pictures, one with a close up view of individual TR module. I am not sure if its OK to put that one on internet. I took similar pic for Rafale Radar as well. But I will put other pics soon. Not getting time to process the pics. Need to compress them for uploading somewhere.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3114
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby srai » 09 Apr 2017 05:13

I have some pictures, one with a close up view of individual TR module. I am not sure if its OK to put that one on internet. I took similar pic for Rafale Radar as well. But I will put other pics soon. Not getting time to process the pics. Need to compress them for uploading somewhere.


BR upload page:
http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/media/main.php

JayS
BRFite
Posts: 1798
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby JayS » 09 Apr 2017 07:27

Karan M wrote:Is it 115km?

I didnt know before going to AI that Uttam specs say 115km. So i didnt ask for clarification. But I might have misheard "one fifteen" as "one fifty". However I did get it clarified it was for 2m2.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 31538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby shiv » 09 Apr 2017 07:42

JayS wrote:They must have done Design load tests but I highly doubt the Ultimate load test is done so far. I think its still pending.

It follows from this statement that accusing designers of lack of foresight and not planning for the future because the outboard pylon was qualified only for the R-60 at the outset is a conclusion that is both inaccurate and unfair. At best we lack the information to reach any such conclusion.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3114
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: LCA: News & Discussions - October 2016

Postby srai » 09 Apr 2017 07:51

^^^
For certification, 150% test is required. Things shouldn't break before that. How much more beyond that 150% things break at could be a continuing exercise. Useful for airframe optimization and weight reduction.

It's not a trivial exercise integrating new weapons. Lots of studies need to be performed in the airframe side of things using CAD, CFD, wind tunnel, separation studies, structural load and vibration testing. Given how much goes into integration, not at all difficult to see issues showing up and needing to rectified. Just another day in an engineer's work ;)
Last edited by srai on 09 Apr 2017 08:12, edited 1 time in total.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: achoudhury, dkhare, Google Feedfetcher, rnareddy, RohitAM and 18 guests