Apologies in advance if this questions comes off as too naive.
Is it possible to make NLCA STOVL capable? Is the current engine capable of doing that or it requires a whole new one? I understand that there would be serious design changes required for this along with TVC, but if at all we can achieve this in a reasonable time frame, then it might be useful in realizing this strategy.
Philip wrote:
This why I postulate that for the IN which cannot afford a USN style navy or supercarriers,puttign all its eggs into one supercarrier basket,should build all its major surface warships above 10/12k t with flat tops/flight decks to accommodate a variety of aircraft ,both fxd wing and STOVL and helos.Missiles can be accommodated flush-deck. The increase/dispersal of aviation assets in such manner will vastly increase the combat radius and defensive zone of warships and task forces and their survivability.Instead of possessing just 2-3 carriers, a dozen such flat tops will spread the responsibility of ops depending upon the nature of the threat,whether it requires a CBG, large task force or smaller flotilla to deal with the threat. SoKo and the Japanese are systematically building such ships which are in fact mini-carriers and will in the future definitely operate JSF-B multi-role fighters.
kapilrdave wrote:Apologies in advance if this questions comes off as too naive.
Is it possible to make NLCA STOVL capable? Is the current engine capable of doing that or it requires a whole new one? I understand that there would be serious design changes required for this along with TVC, but if at all we can achieve this in a reasonable time frame, then it might be useful in realizing this strategy.
Its a newbie question buddy. And the answer is no, LCA CANNOT be a STVOL aircraft ever, never ever ever. Not even in the dreams of its designers, and not even in the dreams of silly babu's and IAF leadership. No never. It is just not possible.
kapilrdave wrote:Apologies in advance if this questions comes off as too naive.
Is it possible to make NLCA STOVL capable? Is the current engine capable of doing that or it requires a whole new one? I understand that there would be serious design changes required for this along with TVC, but if at all we can achieve this in a reasonable time frame, then it might be useful in realizing this strategy.
Its a newbie question buddy. And the answer is no, LCA CANNOT be a STVOL aircraft ever, never ever ever. Not even in the dreams of its designers, and not even in the dreams of silly babu's and IAF leadership. No never. It is just not possible.
If they put two engines on this bird, it will almost be == rafale
Add the uber gold plated avionics on the rafale and it will be completely == rafale, but fully customizable and at a quarter-half of its cost onlee
Shivji, very nice video, revived old memories. In my young days, I used to visit our school library for an expensive set of "Reference books" which could only be read in the library - so read them by missing play time in "recess". I forget the name of the encyclopedia series, but it was not Indian. I used to be amazed looking at the pictures of the prototypes in this video .
A question for the questioners - What is the advantage of a Vertical Takeoff planes? I can understand short landings. And short takeoffs. Why vertical takeoffs?
kmkraoind wrote:
What a shot, it gives trajectory of NLCA on skijump.
Fantastic image. One of the best ever.
Will wrote:Is the MK-2 still on? Its only the MK-2 that will enter IN service.
MK2 for IAF is slightly different than the NLCA "MK2". As such they are two different projects - with lot of commonalities of coarse. If I am correct the NLCA will be slightly longer as well than proposed IAF MK2 which itself is longer than the MK1/MK1A.
prahaar wrote:Shivji, very nice video, revived old memories. In my young days, I used to visit our school library for an expensive set of "Reference books" which could only be read in the library - so read them by missing play time in "recess". I forget the name of the encyclopedia series, but it was not Indian. I used to be amazed looking at the pictures of the prototypes in this video .
I know - I used to visit the local British Library - which was called "British Council Library" back then and scour though any issues of "Flight" magazine I could find
perhaps we could have three jet engines for vtol. two on the wings that can rotate (both the wings and the engine) from 0-90* and one on the rear central dorsal end. a dual rudder may be mounted on the tails. might look weird. worth the investments? we might as well create a bigO aircraft carrier for that money for accommodating all kinds of STOL.
.
SaiK wrote:perhaps we could have three jet engines for vtol. two on the wings that can rotate (both the wings and the engine) from 0-90* and one on the rear central dorsal end. a dual rudder may be mounted on the tails. might look weird. worth the investments? we might as well create a bigO aircraft carrier for that money for accommodating all kinds of STOL.
.
Too much load on the wing pivots - load of entire wing with the weapons load and engine passed on to a single pivot structure - might be ok for TO/Landing but under high G manoeuvres?? That would be one hell of a piece of an engineering if someone can make it work. Rotating wings will necessitate high wing structure - else very tall LG needed. High wing - restrictions on manoeuvrability.
^^ I guess that would be the plan now. A lot has changed after MP convinced IAF/HAL/ADA to make MK1A. Makes sense to just strip down NLCA to make MK2 for IAF. If all the MK1A stuff will go in NLCA as well, and with added features such as longer fuselage, new engine etc - IAF will be more than happy with it if they are happy with MK1A already.
*Notice on walls of pilot changing room in Aircraft Carrier*.
" The three best things in life are Good Landing, a Good Orgasm and a Good Bowel Movement. One of the few opportunities in life when you get to experience all three at same time is a Night Landing on an aircraft carrier."
Dennis wrote:To complement the excellent technical inputs from Indranilroy and JayS related to the LEVCONs, here's a couple of pics of the LEVCONs on the machine itself, and the team that flies and tests them.
According to the Tejas FB page they are concentrating on the Navy MK1 currently due to limited resources and their immediate concern is arrested recovery tests.
I personally think LCA Navy Mk1 would purely be a experimental program with maximum few Trainers being built for service and it will take minimum 3 to 4 years for LCA Navy Mk2 prototype to start flying
Okay. Thanx.
.
