HJT-36 Sitara Intermediate Jet Trainer: News & Discussion - 24 April 2019

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.
JTull
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2601
Joined: 18 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: HJT-36 Sitara Intermediate Jet Trainer: News & Discussion - 24 April 2019

Postby JTull » 03 May 2019 19:03

Neela wrote:
ramana wrote:I would propose get the SItara flight testing completed and order the first batches with the AL-55 and meantime accelerate the HTFE-25 engine certification and cut in by SP-30.

This leads to an interesting question....what is the business case for HTFE? Yes, I know we have heard of trainers and business jets. But Jaguar is on its way out. And trainer numbers are not high (?). Business jets is just a pipe-dream for now.


Business case? Would it be a bad thing even if it was just to build local ecosystem and expertise?

You can't just pull an engine out of thin air when you need it. It takes decades of investment. We've been finding that out with LCA/Sitara/Saras and ALH/LCH/LUH.

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7228
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: HJT-36 Sitara Intermediate Jet Trainer: News & Discussion - 24 April 2019

Postby Prasad » 03 May 2019 21:41

We have a lot of Hawks.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7390
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: HJT-36 Sitara Intermediate Jet Trainer: News & Discussion - 24 April 2019

Postby Indranil » 03 May 2019 22:04

Haridas wrote:
rrao wrote:.. since KIRAN MKII is proven as SKAT ,why dont we resurrect KIRAN with HTFE-25(if it fits) and Glass cockpit and new avionics..With cannon it can become a mini A-10.. JMT

What will be mini-A10 fate in current / real war front that will have many man portables Anti aircraft missiles?

Perhaps we can send the mini-A10 back to 1971 Longewal battle or 1965 Khemkaran, just need time travel machine to be made by HAL. I would add to that list my wish to add 4 guns of Hunter to make the resurrected Kiran become a mini-Canberra :D

I would say while at it , in time travel back to 1970's we can have HAL make 90 more extra airframes, so that in 2020 they can be use those airframe with glass cockpit and HTFE-25. + 4x 30mm guns.

Oh well I stop my craze here.

Haridasji,

Is a combat helicopter against more survivable than an attack heli against todays man portable anti-aircraft gun/missiles?

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 52377
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: HJT-36 Sitara Intermediate Jet Trainer: News & Discussion - 24 April 2019

Postby ramana » 03 May 2019 22:18

Building, certifying and deploying own design jet engine is a worthy goal.
It has been quite elusive so far.
HAL is using own funds to do this.
Depending on MOD/GOI with IAF advice has deprived India of this crucial technology since the late 1960s.
Problem is every one has the power to say no but only the PM can say yes.
And usually Congress PMs the case was how much kick back.

Business case bokwas was thrown in to justify imports all along.
India chose Vampires in 1948. the deal was UK would supply jet engines and air-frame would be built by HAL.
In 1952 UK threatened to cut off engine supply. Business case babus would ensure only minimum engines were bought while the nation was being looted by Congress.
Then GOI went to Dassault and bought 150 Ouragans with no build by HAL. Then Mystere, then M2K and now Rafale.

Business case lobby hung on to unreliable UK, Canberra, Gnat, Hunter, Jaguar.

Vivek K
BRFite
Posts: 1958
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: HJT-36 Sitara Intermediate Jet Trainer: News & Discussion - 24 April 2019

Postby Vivek K » 03 May 2019 22:28

Well said Ramana! With the ATV in the water and Agnis flying all around, the only missing item in India’s arsenal is the capability to develop aircraft engines!! This cannot be looked as a business case.

Haridas
BRFite
Posts: 469
Joined: 26 Dec 2017 07:53

Re: HJT-36 Sitara Intermediate Jet Trainer: News & Discussion - 24 April 2019

Postby Haridas » 05 May 2019 04:54

Indranil wrote:Haridasji,

Is a combat helicopter against more survivable than an attack heli against todays man portable anti-aircraft gun/missiles?

Question not clear Indranil ji, please restate.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 52377
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: HJT-36 Sitara Intermediate Jet Trainer: News & Discussion - 24 April 2019

Postby ramana » 05 May 2019 11:16

He is asking which is more survivable in AA enviornment?

Combat or attack helicopter?

hnair
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3694
Joined: 03 May 2006 01:31
Location: Trivandrum

Re: HJT-36 Sitara Intermediate Jet Trainer: News & Discussion - 24 April 2019

Postby hnair » 05 May 2019 11:27

The question might be which is more effective, a fixed wing or rotary wing for CAS?

(because there are a lot of slow moving rotary wings with guns, that seem to effectivelydeal with man-portables in a hectic war theatre, why not a fixed wing? If not safe, why are we buying lots of LCH/Rudras up?)

Neela
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3614
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 15:05
Location: Spectator in the dossier diplomacy tennis match

Re: HJT-36 Sitara Intermediate Jet Trainer: News & Discussion - 24 April 2019

Postby Neela » 05 May 2019 12:06

For HTSE, ALH, LUH , LCH are all potential platforms. Considering 3 engines over a lifetime,there is definitely a large production run possibility.
For HTFE however, apart from IJT, there aren't as many candidates. Even here, IJT order numbers will be < 150?. HAL cannot afford to risk the program and will stick with Al-55. I don't think the business jets case will fly as SFC becomes a big criteria.
End of the day, HTFE needs to recuperate the investment. Which is why the business case for HTFE looks weak.

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7228
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: HJT-36 Sitara Intermediate Jet Trainer: News & Discussion - 24 April 2019

Postby Prasad » 05 May 2019 13:01

Well HAL also thinks the HTFE is a stepping stone towards a larger higher thrust engine. So not sure it needs to recover all the investment.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3516
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: HJT-36 Sitara Intermediate Jet Trainer: News & Discussion - 24 April 2019

Postby chola » 05 May 2019 14:56

The HTFE is core to HAL's and maybe India's expansion into engines. This is something designed and tested by a manufacturer. Unlike the Kaveri where GTRE attempted to create a world class turbofan from a laboratory that the industry cannot quite make, the HTFE is a small and solid step towards a realistic goal in my opinion.

It is every bit as important as the Sitara but I do agree they will not be testing the HTFE on the IJT and risk a new engine on it until both programs mature.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7390
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: HJT-36 Sitara Intermediate Jet Trainer: News & Discussion - 24 April 2019

Postby Indranil » 06 May 2019 03:25

Haridas wrote:
Indranil wrote:Haridasji,

Is a combat helicopter against more survivable than an attack heli against todays man portable anti-aircraft gun/missiles?

Question not clear Indranil ji, please restate.

Sorry Haridasji for that mumbled post. In my head, I had written a cogent one. Obviously not!

We can't say that a A-10 like aircraft should be relegated to history because it's survivability is low against modern ground to air munition while inducting hundreds of attack helicopters. Wherever the role is for the pilot to survey, acquire and deliver A2G munition, slow and stable launch platforms will be desirable.

The real question is cost. Countries don't want to invest inn expensive and special purpose aircraft. Instead, they are repurposing their AJTs and large surveillance UAVs with a secondary light attack role.

Haridas
BRFite
Posts: 469
Joined: 26 Dec 2017 07:53

Re: HJT-36 Sitara Intermediate Jet Trainer: News & Discussion - 24 April 2019

Postby Haridas » 10 May 2019 09:16

Indranil wrote:Sorry Haridasji for that mumbled post. In my head, I had written a cogent one. Obviously not!

We can't say that a A-10 like aircraft should be relegated to history because it's survivability is low against modern ground to air munition while inducting hundreds of attack helicopters. Wherever the role is for the pilot to survey, acquire and deliver A2G munition, slow and stable launch platforms will be desirable.

The real question is cost. Countries don't want to invest inn expensive and special purpose aircraft. Instead, they are repurposing their AJTs and large surveillance UAVs with a secondary light attack role.

Sorry I was away from BRF and social media for few days, so a late response.

Few observations to share that might be of help :
1. All recent (say last 20 years or even 30 years) close air support (against ground targets) has ONLY happened when the attacker had complete air superiority AND the defenders had no SAM/MANPAD. How likely will Indian aggression be in similar situation on against TSP/China?

2. A10 based attack in second US-Iraq war was against gun shooting ground-force/resistance. IIRC not once was A10 hit by MANPAD/SAM, because defenders had none.

3. Converting the Kiran into an armoured A10 will make it so heavy that its range and 'payload to battle field' will be unusable. Attack helicopters OTOH are scaled to be in balance wrt engine power, armour protection and fire power. IMHO a morphed Kiran into min A10 will be so unbalanced to be a failure in range, protection & firepower.


4. IIRC all countries that are re-purposing AJT with secondary attack capability have a target that are insurgent/militia armed with AK/LMG/MMG/HMG & RPG. Most such nations are third world countries. USA is considering one (trexton based prop trainer) only because economies of time-on station in Afghanistan is horrendously expensive and demand for close ground support is high. (Once the targeted malitia gets a MANPAD even an A10 like craft is history)

5. Now consider Pakees (what to speak of resource laden PLA) they have at least 4000 MANPADs and vehicle mounted Short range SAM and Medium range SAMs with 3-10 km range against sub-sonic aircraft. What is the imagined probability/role for Armoured Kiran where a Packee army formation devoid of MANPAD needs to be taken care of? I say none.

6. IMHO attack helicopters and close air support (meaning low altitude) attack planes are way past their expiry date. On Packee front all air support will be provided by air platform precision weapon that operate out of the MANPAD and SAM envelop that enemy may be carrying. IAF has learnt from Kargil loss of the Mi-8 and Mig-21. Balakot was long range stand off.
New weapons are seeker based and slow moving UAV are doing the job of spotter and forward air controller.

7. In another 5 year 100% of global MANPADs will be made with dual/multispectral seeker and computing engine to make chaffs & flairs useless. In another 7-9 years most Manpads will have mmW based end game seeker to overcome current countermeasures.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7390
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: HJT-36 Sitara Intermediate Jet Trainer: News & Discussion - 24 April 2019

Postby Indranil » 10 May 2019 23:04

I am not in favour of a modified Kiran to act as a mini A-10. It's a deadend. I will also not speak on the efficacy of attack helicopters. Frankly, I don't know well enough. But, both India and China are bulking up on that front. Deejay and Hari Nair are much better placed to throw light on that.

I contend that new upcoming trainers should be light attack capable and that they would most likely be the most efficient and effective way to do so. The Su-25 did play that role recently in Syria. Yes, Russia had air supremacy, but the there were a lot of MANPADs (or equivalents).

souravB
BRFite
Posts: 492
Joined: 07 Jun 2018 13:52

Re: HJT-36 Sitara Intermediate Jet Trainer: News & Discussion - 24 April 2019

Postby souravB » 10 May 2019 23:34

There are a lot of options for gun pods which could be attached to the hard points. Only modifications needed are to the targeting system and integration of the pods.
No mods to the airframe is needed I think. A LDP could also be integrated to provide night firing capability.

Bart S
BRFite
Posts: 1693
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 00:03

Re: HJT-36 Sitara Intermediate Jet Trainer: News & Discussion - 24 April 2019

Postby Bart S » 11 May 2019 05:37

Couldn't the Sitara serve as a cheap (both to acquire and operate) surveillance platform (can also be lightly armed) to help with anti insurgency operations, for e.g the wide swathe of Maoist infested areas etc? It would be a good way to prove the platform and put it to good use.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17890
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: HJT-36 Sitara Intermediate Jet Trainer: News & Discussion - 24 April 2019

Postby Karan M » 11 May 2019 05:46

Against a prepared opponent with MRSAMs i.e. PRC, A-10 is dead meat.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7428
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: HJT-36 Sitara Intermediate Jet Trainer: News & Discussion - 24 April 2019

Postby brar_w » 11 May 2019 06:53

Something very seriously would have gone wrong if the A-10 is put into a contested environment to provide Close Air Support. Its role is relegated to much later in a conflict once the Air defenses have been degraded, or when there is sizable SEAD in theater. Until then, CAS would continue to be performed by more survivable fighters, bombers, UAV's and land based fires.

Haridas
BRFite
Posts: 469
Joined: 26 Dec 2017 07:53

Re: HJT-36 Sitara Intermediate Jet Trainer: News & Discussion - 24 April 2019

Postby Haridas » 11 May 2019 13:19

^^^ exactly my point.


souravB wrote:There are a lot of options for gun pods which could be attached to the hard points. Only modifications needed are to the targeting system and integration of the pods.
No mods to the airframe is needed I think. A LDP could also be integrated to provide night firing capability.

CAS requires armouring the aircraft, not just addition of gun pod.

To know more kindly study SU-7 use in 1971 war. With MANPAD & SRSAM/MRSAM what changes?

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3516
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: HJT-36 Sitara Intermediate Jet Trainer: News & Discussion - 24 April 2019

Postby chola » 11 May 2019 14:47

CAS and COIN will be taken over by cheap armed drones. We are already seeing that trend from the Middle East battle grounds with the Saudis and Gulf states flying mass produced UAVs instead of precious manned fighters.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19141
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: HJT-36 Sitara Intermediate Jet Trainer: News & Discussion - 24 April 2019

Postby chetak » 11 May 2019 15:25

Indranil wrote:I am not in favour of a modified Kiran to act as a mini A-10. It's a deadend. I will also not speak on the efficacy of attack helicopters. Frankly, I don't know well enough. But, both India and China are bulking up on that front. Deejay and Hari Nair are much better placed to throw light on that.

I contend that new upcoming trainers should be light attack capable and that they would most likely be the most efficient and effective way to do so. The Su-25 did play that role recently in Syria. Yes, Russia had air supremacy, but the there were a lot of MANPADs (or equivalents).



Image

the HAL kiran was possibly an offshoot of the jet provost and i am being very polite here. :) Its a dead end like you say.

a trainer with a lethal alter ego may be a contradiction in terms. Best to concentrate on one role, otherwise, with two groups pulling in different directions it may go nowhere fast.

let us have a go at it, one bite and one mouthful at a time, otherwise, we will end up like the kaveri where everyone and his uncle had a say but no one had the responsibility.

deejay
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3858
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: HJT-36 Sitara Intermediate Jet Trainer: News & Discussion - 24 April 2019

Postby deejay » 17 May 2019 23:54

Indranil wrote:I am not in favour of a modified Kiran to act as a mini A-10. It's a deadend. I will also not speak on the efficacy of attack helicopters. Frankly, I don't know well enough. But, both India and China are bulking up on that front. Deejay and Hari Nair are much better placed to throw light on that.

I contend that new upcoming trainers should be light attack capable and that they would most likely be the most efficient and effective way to do so. The Su-25 did play that role recently in Syria. Yes, Russia had air supremacy, but the there were a lot of MANPADs (or equivalents).


A fixed wing vs helicopter in CAS role act differently and are employed differently. At its slowest, the fixed wing will probably be in action at speeds that match the helicopter's max speed.

Helicopters are also airfield independent and therefore can be positioned closer to forward units if required.

Attrition in CAS role will have to be accepted. Attack helicopters provide quick strike/escort/ CAS opportunities and given our terrain they will come in handy.

Since we are not an Air Force of the size of USAF, we really do not need to look into HJT 36 Sqns in CAS role in my humble opinion but since it is an intermediate trainer it should have armament role built in.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7390
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: HJT-36 Sitara Intermediate Jet Trainer: News & Discussion - 24 April 2019

Postby Indranil » 18 May 2019 06:02

Agreed. Would like to know your opinion on what our next AJT should look like?

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4073
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: HJT-36 Sitara Intermediate Jet Trainer: News & Discussion - 24 April 2019

Postby JayS » 19 May 2019 10:50

In my wet dreams HAL would design an AJT with 5th Gen characteristics, mainly ultra low RCS shaping, sensor fusion and NW centric warfare capabilities (they have shown concepts of some of these things for SPORT). There are two key things - IAF will need to impart training to its pilots for 5th and 6th gen warfare in coming decades. If some part of it can be covered on AJT, that much saving on airframe time on main fighters, and it would be far more cost effective. Second, HAL could develop its own 5th Gen design capability (they have a slim chance of getting any exposure thru FGFA now). A trainer is relatively low risk platform to cut teeth on. They will have their own engine too, on which they can try LO design tricks.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19141
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: HJT-36 Sitara Intermediate Jet Trainer: News & Discussion - 24 April 2019

Postby chetak » 19 May 2019 12:03

JayS wrote:In my wet dreams HAL would design an AJT with 5th Gen characteristics, mainly ultra low RCS shaping, sensor fusion and NW centric warfare capabilities (they have shown concepts of some of these things for SPORT). There are two key things - IAF will need to impart training to its pilots for 5th and 6th gen warfare in coming decades. If some part of it can be covered on AJT, that much saving on airframe time on main fighters, and it would be far more cost effective. Second, HAL could develop its own 5th Gen design capability (they have a slim chance of getting any exposure thru FGFA now). A trainer is relatively low risk platform to cut teeth on. They will have their own engine too, on which they can try LO design tricks.


very few airforces in the world do the kind of very expensive flying that the IAF does in peace time.

most other airforces depend majorly on simulators for the bulk of their training needs beyond the basic flying, of course and we do not seem to have such a culture. Critical phases of flying training are done on the actual aircraft with the bulk of the flying done on full motion simulators.

a trainer is basically a low cost platform to teach certain specific as well as general skills which may be basic or advanced. It needs to be economical to operate, practical to maintain, easy to integrate into a multitude of tasks and most of all easy to produce and the ability to serve for many years.

one needs to look at a classic design like the T-6 Texan which is a very successful american single-engined advanced trainer aircraft, which was named as the Havard when used by commonwealth air forces, including India and pak and served its purpose admirably for many decades. It was also used in a limited role on many battlefields too.


ImageAn original T-6 Texan aircraft (painted as a US Navy SNJ), right, with the new T-6 Texan II

what are the benefits of a "ultra low RCS shaping, sensor fusion and NW centric warfare capabilities" being inbuilt into a trainer. None of the trainers anywhere in the world are built on such design requirements and such capabilities are best suited to expensive mainstream fighters.

aren't such features, in varying degrees, specific to individual fighter categories, especially when the IAF has a plethora of multi generation platforms, each built with differing design philosophies, capabilities and generally operating with an EWACS somewhere in the background.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7390
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: HJT-36 Sitara Intermediate Jet Trainer: News & Discussion - 24 April 2019

Postby Indranil » 19 May 2019 12:35

I would try to keep costs down. Also, the SPORT category has two entries from famous design houses namely Boeing T-X and Lockheed Martins T-50. Following them are the Yak130 derivatives.

I would design a modern day F-11 based on HTFE-25/F125 afterburning engine.

srin
BRFite
Posts: 1727
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: HJT-36 Sitara Intermediate Jet Trainer: News & Discussion - 24 April 2019

Postby srin » 02 Jun 2019 11:09

http://www.newindianexpress.com/cities/bengaluru/2019/jun/02/hal-confident-of-getting-its-jet-trainer-project-out-of-spin-1984887.html
Given the delays and failure to clear spin tests -- which is a critical feature in a jet trainer -- the IAF had told HAL to junk the project. “During the meeting in 2018, the IAF told us to close the project. However, I had promised them of flying the aircraft in April after completing all modifications required to take up the spin tests,” Arup Chatterjee, Director, Engineering and R&D at HAL Design Complex in Bengaluru, told The New Sunday Express. “We flew the aircraft in April. We have taken it as a challenge and are confident of completing all tests by April 2020 and after that we will again go back to the IAF,” he said.

They plan to start spin tests in October this year and it will go on for six months. To take up the tests, the HAL has completely modified one of the 12 aircraft that are manufactured after the IAF had given a go-ahead for Limited Series Production. The modification of second aircraft is under way at HAL Bengaluru complex.

The HAL hopes to complete the tests and certification process by the time Kiran aircraft are phased out. “IAF has gone for life cycle extension of Kirans, which will continue to fly till around 2024 and by that time IJT will be ready with all certifications. We will go back to IAF and I am positive that IAF will accept it,” the director added.

However, not everyone is equally confident. “There is a lot of uncertainty with HAL projects and the IJT is one such example,” said Air Marshal (retired) B K Pandey, former Chief of IAF Training Command. “The IAF is not waiting for the IJT. They are going ahead with their training programme and have made some changes. Earlier, they had three stage-three aircraft, now it is three-stage two aircraft training. Stage one and two is done by Pilatus and third stage on Kiran Mark II. I don’t see IJT programme succeeding at all.

deejay
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3858
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: HJT-36 Sitara Intermediate Jet Trainer: News & Discussion - 24 April 2019

Postby deejay » 02 Jun 2019 22:15

Indranil wrote:Agreed. Would like to know your opinion on what our next AJT should look like?


Sorry, I saw this late. I think the ASQR of IAF while seeking the HAWk were very clear on what they want from an AJT. Performance and capability requirements will remain same. I am sorry, I could not lay my hands on the HAWK ASQR. Not that I searched much.

deejay
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3858
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: HJT-36 Sitara Intermediate Jet Trainer: News & Discussion - 24 April 2019

Postby deejay » 02 Jun 2019 22:18

JayS wrote:In my wet dreams HAL would design an AJT with 5th Gen characteristics, mainly ultra low RCS shaping, sensor fusion and NW centric warfare capabilities (they have shown concepts of some of these things for SPORT). There are two key things - IAF will need to impart training to its pilots for 5th and 6th gen warfare in coming decades. If some part of it can be covered on AJT, that much saving on airframe time on main fighters, and it would be far more cost effective. Second, HAL could develop its own 5th Gen design capability (they have a slim chance of getting any exposure thru FGFA now). A trainer is relatively low risk platform to cut teeth on. They will have their own engine too, on which they can try LO design tricks.


Good points my friend. A LIFT role. Hmmm.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7428
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: HJT-36 Sitara Intermediate Jet Trainer: News & Discussion - 24 April 2019

Postby brar_w » 02 Jun 2019 23:00

Not even the USAF with its budget and the willingness to go clean sheet on a trainer went for an RCS optimized, internal weapons bay equipped trainer. They emphasized flying qualities and the cockpit layout and synthetic training and LVC environments. I don't think anyone is going to be interested in paying for all those features on a trainer given how fast LVC and actual full mission simulators are advancing.

HAL should focus on LO to VLO Unmanned systems if it wants to develop its Low Observable design skills and competency . There is going to be a need for all sorts of aircraft, weapons, decoys, missiles etc that would require varying degree of signature optimization. Much to be learned and incorporated into Next Gen. designs and capabilities by pursuing something like THIS which could be relatively (to a manned LIFT) cheap, faster to get off the ground, and potentially have several applications for manned, unmanned, optionally manned fighters, strike aircraft etc. In fact large aerospace companies and organizations must frequently invest IR&D into projects like these to ensure that their design competencies are up to the required standard and that they are constantly having their engineers and designers push the envelope and work on new things.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Shivaji and 49 guests