Indian Military Aviation
Re: Indian Military Aviation
GJ, expeditionary/overseas deployment is an important as aspect of the choice.
The A330MRTT's main assets as the IAF sees it is versatility, high uptime, and economy of operation. The MRTT is meant to be a Multi Role Tanker Transport. You don't need to send it into the shop each time you have it change roles.
What the MRTT offers a huge advantage over a single decked IL-76 or C-17, in that it can carry over twice the number of troops plus a belly load of supplies over greater distances.
The A330MRTT's main assets as the IAF sees it is versatility, high uptime, and economy of operation. The MRTT is meant to be a Multi Role Tanker Transport. You don't need to send it into the shop each time you have it change roles.
What the MRTT offers a huge advantage over a single decked IL-76 or C-17, in that it can carry over twice the number of troops plus a belly load of supplies over greater distances.
Re: Indian Military Aviation
So then the question is.........are we getting the MRTT to eventually do away with the IL-76 transports (which can carry 40T of cargo vs 45T on the MRTT) and the IL-78 MARS (which can transfer 105T of fuel vs 111T on the MRTT)...but keep the IL-78 AWACS? And get C-17 for pure heavy lift roles since it can haul up to 77T vs 40T on the IL-76. I think I am beginning to like this logic.Rupak wrote:GJ, expeditionary/overseas deployment is an important as aspect of the choice.The A330MRTT's main assets as the IAF sees it is versatility, high uptime, and economy of operation...........You don't need to send it into the shop each time you have it change roles. What the MRTT offers a huge advantage over a single decked IL-76 or C-17, in that it can carry over twice the number of troops plus a belly load of supplies over greater distances.
Re: Indian Military Aviation
^^^ Also is it possible to hold additional fuel tanks in the cargo area? This will boost its capability to refuel many aircrafts.
Re: Indian Military Aviation
The mantra, as I said earlier is economy of operation and flexibility. The longevity of the IL-76 fleet will be determined both by the success of the MTA, as well as the C-17 in Indian service. I imagine they will still be around for some years to come. Mind you, the Airbus is handicapped by a lack of autonomous cargo handling capability.
Re: Indian Military Aviation
Ok this is getting tricky. The IL-78 has a TRANSFERABLE FUEL LOAD of 105T from 3 cargo tanks. So its own fuel systems is independent of the fuel that is meant for transfer. The A330 MRTT carries 111T of fuel with no additional tanks as stated above. The A330 MRTT is based on the civilian A330-200 which has a range (w/max. passengers) 13,400 km which I am guessing is made possible by carrying 111T of fuel. If the MRTT starts transferring some of that fuel....then its own range goes down and obvious it cannot transfer ALL of the 111T of fuel so amount that can be transferred is also much less than the IL-78's 105T TRANSFERABLE FUEL LOAD.http://www.airbus.com/index.php?id=1343 wrote:.......The A330 MRTT’s significant fuel capacity (111 tonnes/245,000 lbs.) – combined with high offload rates – ensures that all receiver aircraft can be refuelled efficiently and quickly........Thanks to its true widebody fuselage with the optimised Airbus 222-inch cross-section, the A330 MRTT can also be used as a pure transport aircraft, able to carry up to 380 passengers or a payload of up to 45 tonnes/99,000 lbs. It can also easily be converted to accommodate up to 130 stretchers for medical evacuation.
As no additional fuel tanks are needed, the A330 MRTT maintains the lower deck forward, aft and bulk cargo hold payload capacity, unaffected by any air-to-air refuelling equipment.
Sure the rate of transfer is much higher but HOW MUCH of of the 111T fuel is really meant of other a/c and how much for itself is the key question?
Last edited by George J on 10 Jan 2010 09:37, edited 1 time in total.
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 4668
- Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
- Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3
Re: Indian Military Aviation
Quantity of transport aircraft too makes a difference. In times of war, IL-78 will be dedicated to refuelling, while the numerous IL-76s will be employed for ferrying troops and supplies. However, the number of C-17s that we are purchasing is pretty limited. So, will there be a problem servicing multiple fronts simultaneously?George J wrote: So then the question is.........are we getting the MRTT to eventually do away with the IL-76 transports (which can carry 40T of cargo vs 45T on the MRTT) and the IL-78 MARS (which can transfer 105T of fuel vs 111T on the MRTT)...but keep the IL-78 AWACS? And get C-17 for pure heavy lift roles since it can haul up to 77T vs 40T on the IL-76. I think I am beginning to like this logic.
Re: Indian Military Aviation
The IL-78 cannot refuel the P-8 or the C-17. That may be the reason for the MRTT.
All one has to do to convert an IL-78 to an IL-76 is remove the tanks located in the cabin and you have another Il-76, with rear ramp and all the capabilities of a strategic/tactical aircraft.
The present new model Il-76MD-90 carry 50 tonnes. No too far from the 74 tonnes of the C-17A. If the stretched IL-76MF is ever sold, it will haul 60 tonnes. There is an IL-476 in the works.
Having the Strategic Aircraft, the In flight Refueller and the AWACS (Il-76, IL-78 and A-50) all based on the same airframe is a huge advantage. Maintenance, tooling, parts, pilot and mechanic training, simulators are mostly common to all three. This represents an advantage that can offset the disadvantages that these individual aircraft may have when compared to other aircraft (IL-76 vs C-17, IL-78 vs A-330 MRTT and A-50 vs ?)
India has been flying its sole A-50 for just a few months now, an aircraft based on a new generation IL-76. Is it already dissatisfied with it ? Or does it like it ?
All one has to do to convert an IL-78 to an IL-76 is remove the tanks located in the cabin and you have another Il-76, with rear ramp and all the capabilities of a strategic/tactical aircraft.
The present new model Il-76MD-90 carry 50 tonnes. No too far from the 74 tonnes of the C-17A. If the stretched IL-76MF is ever sold, it will haul 60 tonnes. There is an IL-476 in the works.
Having the Strategic Aircraft, the In flight Refueller and the AWACS (Il-76, IL-78 and A-50) all based on the same airframe is a huge advantage. Maintenance, tooling, parts, pilot and mechanic training, simulators are mostly common to all three. This represents an advantage that can offset the disadvantages that these individual aircraft may have when compared to other aircraft (IL-76 vs C-17, IL-78 vs A-330 MRTT and A-50 vs ?)
India has been flying its sole A-50 for just a few months now, an aircraft based on a new generation IL-76. Is it already dissatisfied with it ? Or does it like it ?
Re: Indian Military Aviation
I dont think having a dual-role cargo hauler and tanker will work in wartime - not with the palty number of airframes we talk of. anything capable of tanking will just be sucked into a black hole by the need to suckle the sukhois and MRCA deep strike attacks and CAPs. this will drastically affect ability to support the IA with vital cargo and medevac missions.
if we had 150 A330 then sure it would work.
if we had 150 A330 then sure it would work.
Re: Indian Military Aviation
I believe that "if required" the cabin of A330MRTT can be used to add anything upto 30-40 tons of additional fuel. Further A330 is "supposed" to be more fuel efficient, so consumes less fuel. So the total MTOW and max fuel carrying capacity and or even transferable fuel would be roughly same, the stickler would be "own consumption"George J wrote:Ok this is getting tricky. The IL-78 has a TRANSFERABLE FUEL LOAD of 105T from 3 cargo tanks. So its own fuel systems is independent of the fuel that is meant for transfer. The A330 MRTT carries 111T of fuel with no additional tanks as stated above. The A330 MRTT is based on the civilian A330-200 which has a range (w/max. passengers) 13,400 km which I am guessing is made possible by carrying 111T of fuel. If the MRTT starts transferring some of that fuel....then its own range goes down and obvious it cannot transfer ALL of the 111T of fuel so amount that can be transferred is also much less than the IL-78's 105T TRANSFERABLE FUEL LOAD.http://www.airbus.com/index.php?id=1343 wrote:.......The A330 MRTT’s significant fuel capacity (111 tonnes/245,000 lbs.) – combined with high offload rates – ensures that all receiver aircraft can be refuelled efficiently and quickly........Thanks to its true widebody fuselage with the optimised Airbus 222-inch cross-section, the A330 MRTT can also be used as a pure transport aircraft, able to carry up to 380 passengers or a payload of up to 45 tonnes/99,000 lbs. It can also easily be converted to accommodate up to 130 stretchers for medical evacuation.
As no additional fuel tanks are needed, the A330 MRTT maintains the lower deck forward, aft and bulk cargo hold payload capacity, unaffected by any air-to-air refuelling equipment.
Sure the rate of transfer is much higher but HOW MUCH of of the 111T fuel is really meant of other a/c and how much for itself is the key question?
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 2131
- Joined: 30 Apr 2009 02:02
- Location: Standing at the edge of the cliff
- Contact:
Re: Indian Military Aviation
Its not possible to convert the IL78 we use back into a cargo transport.. It was only possible on the earlier variants of the aircraft.. The variant we use is the customised IL78ME which does not support the conversion...Gilles wrote:The IL-78 cannot refuel the P-8 or the C-17. That may be the reason for the MRTT.
All one has to do to convert an IL-78 to an IL-76 is remove the tanks located in the cabin and you have another Il-76, with rear ramp and all the capabilities of a strategic/tactical aircraft.
The present new model Il-76MD-90 carry 50 tonnes. No too far from the 74 tonnes of the C-17A. If the stretched IL-76MF is ever sold, it will haul 60 tonnes. There is an IL-476 in the works.
Having the Strategic Aircraft, the In flight Refueller and the AWACS (Il-76, IL-78 and A-50) all based on the same airframe is a huge advantage. Maintenance, tooling, parts, pilot and mechanic training, simulators are mostly common to all three. This represents an advantage that can offset the disadvantages that these individual aircraft may have when compared to other aircraft (IL-76 vs C-17, IL-78 vs A-330 MRTT and A-50 vs ?)
India has been flying its sole A-50 for just a few months now, an aircraft based on a new generation IL-76. Is it already dissatisfied with it ? Or does it like it ?
Source- wikipedia
Re: Indian Military Aviation
I checked with our friends. The IAF operates IL-78MKI fly with about 85 T of transferable fuel, with about 35 T in cargo hold tanks and the balance in wing tanks. They also do not have cranes, etc in the hold, so limited autonomous ground handling capability.With the existing D-30 (118 kN x 4 for Max TO weight of 210,000 kg) engines that IL-78MKI's have anything more would be greatly compromise handling. The MRTT offers 2 x 320 kN of pow er for a marginally larger TO weight of 233,000 kg. Compare with 4 x 157 kN for the PS-90 on our Phalcon and 4 x 180 kN PW F117-100 on the C-17.
I suppose this puts the MRTT purchase in a new perspective.
P.S. random googling shows that the A330 bruns between 4800-6000 kg/hr in JET-A1, whereas the Volga-Dneper webiste puts Il-76 consumption at 9000 kg/hr.
I suppose this puts the MRTT purchase in a new perspective.
P.S. random googling shows that the A330 bruns between 4800-6000 kg/hr in JET-A1, whereas the Volga-Dneper webiste puts Il-76 consumption at 9000 kg/hr.
Re: Indian Military Aviation
How do aircraft handle sloshing of fuel in tanks?
Re: Indian Military Aviation
Finite element analysis of resonant sloshing response in 2-D ...by JR Cho - 2005 - Cited by 9 - Related articles
The shape and design concept of the sloshing damper varies depending on the ... works [11] and [15] for illustration of the fuel sloshing suppression linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0022460X05000714
Sloshing of fuel is a problem in all vehicles but acute in an environment where the sloshing itself generate sounds with frequencies which interfere the electronics of the vehicle itself
The shape and design concept of the sloshing damper varies depending on the ... works [11] and [15] for illustration of the fuel sloshing suppression linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0022460X05000714
Sloshing of fuel is a problem in all vehicles but acute in an environment where the sloshing itself generate sounds with frequencies which interfere the electronics of the vehicle itself
Re: Indian Military Aviation
floating roofs in tanks i believe in some cases
(also, lots of moving the fuel around to maintain trim and i would expect some consolidation in core tanks)
(also, lots of moving the fuel around to maintain trim and i would expect some consolidation in core tanks)
Re: Indian Military Aviation
The A-330-200 weighs empty between 110 and 120 tonnes (does it have passenger seats and galleys or not etc). It takes off at 233 tonnes. Theoretically, it can carry a theoretical max load of 113 to 123 tonnes, according to empty weight. There may be "zero fuel weight" limitations that further limit what it can carry in the main cabin, I don't know.Bheem wrote: I believe that "if required" the cabin of A330MRTT can be used to add anything upto 30-40 tons of additional fuel. Further A330 is "supposed" to be more fuel efficient, so consumes less fuel. So the total MTOW and max fuel carrying capacity and or even transferable fuel would be roughly same, the stickler would be "own consumption"
The IL-78 weighs empty (as far as I know) around 90 to 95 tonnes. It takes off at 210 tonnes, so its theoretical max fuel capacity is around 115 to 120 tonnes.
However the A330-200 burns in the 5.5 tonnes an hour. The IAF IL-78 burn 9 tonnes an hour, while flying 50 knots slower than the A-330.
I read that its the D-30 powered IL-76s that burn 9 tonnes an hour. The PS-90 powered one burns 7.2 tonnes/hr.Rupak wrote: P.S. random googling shows that the A330 bruns between 4800-6000 kg/hr in JET-A1, whereas the Volga-Dneper webiste puts Il-76 consumption at 9000 kg/hr.
http://www.volga-dnepr.com/eng/charter/ ... /specific/
Last edited by Gilles on 11 Jan 2010 19:37, edited 2 times in total.
Re: Indian Military Aviation
on a 4 hr mission A330 would burn 20t and transfer upto 95t. not too different in raw terms than IL78 85t.
but being a civilian 2 engined bird and potentially faster maybe it has other advantages in uptime and time to station?
if the transferable loads are so similar, why in 1st place did IAF consider the A330?
but being a civilian 2 engined bird and potentially faster maybe it has other advantages in uptime and time to station?
if the transferable loads are so similar, why in 1st place did IAF consider the A330?
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 13112
- Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
- Location: Ban se dar nahin lagta , chootiyon se lagta hai .
Re: Indian Military Aviation
Well to a large extent the high SFC for Il-76 family (even the latest IL-78 ) can be attributed to the fact that these aircraft were designed ground up for the Military and around certain requirements (rough field ops , protection against small/medium caliber fire , engines capable of providing extra thrust when under attack and may be need for extra redundancy in terms of controls when compared to an AC built for civilian applications) in comparasion A-330 MRTT is a civilian (low SFC is of primary concern to all operators ) airframe adapted for a specific role hence it inherits the low SFC from the latter. One major beef with legacy RU platforms across all services is their large logistical footprint some of the mechanical modules are too complex and unserviceable not only in India but anywhere in the world (at times not even in RU) thanks to the wierd SU standards (even the nut and bolts are of different specs for which no 'craftsman' screwdriver/wrench exists ).
Re: Indian Military Aviation
Perhaps...I am reposting this...but I am Just puzzled that the man said that Su-30MKI has 20* susstained turn per sec which is no where near raptor..!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fLDHbAybzo4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fLDHbAybzo4
Re: Indian Military Aviation
The keywords used to attract people to that video are interesting. The video is meant to attract people to cause takleef. I say this because it is a mirror image of what I do to Pakis.sumshyam wrote:Perhaps...I am reposting this...but I am Just puzzled that the man said that Su-30MKI has 20* susstained turn per sec which is no where near raptor..!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fLDHbAybzo4
media news Indian Hindu army state sponsored terrorism rss ram sena Rama hindutva bjp air force navy special commandos war terror terrorist jihad mumbai assault human rights women men IT computer Pub Attack alquida Taliban USA uk Russia china India Iraq Iran Pakistan Afghanistan Saudi Arabia turkey Greece France Germany UN sri lanka Netherlands Australia
Re: Indian Military Aviation
How many times do we have to go though the same discussion? At least take a look at locked threads before posting about such old topics.sumshyam wrote:Perhaps...I am reposting this...but I am Just puzzled that the man said that Su-30MKI has 20* susstained turn per sec which is no where near raptor..!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fLDHbAybzo4
Also, before posting, you could have done the same thing I did, google and going through old posts. Why do you expect others to spoon feed you?
http://vayu-sena.indianmilitaryhistory. ... rnof.shtml
Look for Vishnu's post
-
- BRFite
- Posts: 150
- Joined: 30 Jan 2009 18:49
Re: Indian Military Aviation
US offers its latest fighter to India
http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/unc ... 02791.html
carrot !!!
http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/unc ... 02791.html
carrot !!!
Re: Indian Military Aviation
Sugar coated misery?SanjibGhosh wrote:US offers its latest fighter to India
http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/unc ... 02791.html
carrot !!!
Re: Indian Military Aviation
I think this post explains why IAF is lusting after A330....pandyan wrote:Here is Vivek Ahuja's comparison between the IL 78s and A330. According to his analysis, A330 with 10 hours of endurance has 80 tonnes of fuel available to top-up other crafts. But this analysis seems to assume that A330 burn rate is around 3 tonnes/hr. With similar endurance IL78s would be able to transfer only 40 tonnes of fuel.
Also, another interesting note: in his comparison he is assuming that IL78s have 50 tonnes in primary tank and 35 tonnes in auxiliary tanks. What is the true IL78 capability? Is it 85 tonnes just in auxiliary tanks or is 85 tonnes available only after combining both primary as well as auxiliary?
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 30#p603098
Re: Indian Military Aviation
Guys, urgent info needed:
What are the different makes of Flight Data Recorders and Black boxes we have used till today?
Which country/co have they been from? Have we used indigenous ones also?
What are the different makes of Flight Data Recorders and Black boxes we have used till today?
Which country/co have they been from? Have we used indigenous ones also?
Re: Indian Military Aviation
LM has always said that the the F-16 could pave the way for the F-35 .............. with the F-16 embedding some of the F-35 techs.SanjibGhosh wrote:US offers its latest fighter to India
http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/unc ... 02791.html
carrot !!!
What seems to be new in this is the presentation with the blessing of the DoD and the presentation was made to the IN.
I am not too sure that the IAF would be interested given that the FGFA is supposedly close to fruition.
Re: Indian Military Aviation
AFAIK we have been using SAAB FDR's in Su-30MKI. I am pretty certain about it. I'll try to dug up the source.What are the different makes of Flight Data Recorders and Black boxes we have used till today?
Which country/co have they been from? Have we used indigenous ones also?
NAL has already developed FDR for LCRA. Here is the source :
http://nal-ir.nal.res.in/1802/
Here is another one developed by CABS for AN 32:
http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/media/Aer ... 2.jpg.html
Re: Indian Military Aviation
NRao wrote: LM has always said that the the F-16 could pave the way for the F-35 .............. with the F-16 embedding some of the F-35 techs.
What seems to be new in this is the presentation with the blessing of the DoD and the presentation was made to the IN.
I am not too sure that the IAF would be interested given that the FGFA is supposedly close to fruition.
Well the first scenario which popped in my mind is "Would this also mean that a naval variant of PAK-FA is not yet planned"
With IAF having a definite plan in PAK FA and later MCA for its 5th Gen capability, navy would definitely seek one. F-35 would be the only choice right now if the naval variant of PAK-FA it not planned yet.
Re: Indian Military Aviation
IIRC ze Rambha uses a South African FDR....ze swedish stuff I believe is used on ze malay MKM version primarily the IFF and other yehudi isecret stuff that the malays did not have access to...sunny y wrote:AFAIK we have been using SAAB FDR's in Su-30MKI. I am pretty certain about it. I'll try to dug up the source.What are the different makes of Flight Data Recorders and Black boxes we have used till today?
Which country/co have they been from? Have we used indigenous ones also?
NAL has already developed FDR for LCRA. Here is the source :
http://nal-ir.nal.res.in/1802/
Here is another one developed by CABS for AN 32:
http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/media/Aer ... 2.jpg.html
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 13112
- Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
- Location: Ban se dar nahin lagta , chootiyon se lagta hai .
Re: Indian Military Aviation
MKI's FDR is sourced from SA based Aerospace Monitoring and Systems (AMS) which is now owned by Saab Grintek where SAAB AB is a 70% stake holder.
Re: Indian Military Aviation
Aaah ofcourse I forgot this part completely danke' for the correction...negi wrote:MKI's FDR is sourced from SA based Aerospace Monitoring and Systems (AMS) which is now owned by Saab Grintek where SAAB AB is a 70% stake holder.
Re: Indian Military Aviation
Thanks a lot.
More the inputs, better it is.
What abt the LCA FDR? Where is it from?
More the inputs, better it is.
What abt the LCA FDR? Where is it from?
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 13112
- Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
- Location: Ban se dar nahin lagta , chootiyon se lagta hai .
Re: Indian Military Aviation
Hey don't take my word for it come to think of it I was wondering why is that MKI filght data recorders were sent to England after the recent crash if SAAB AB's SA division is the original supplier.
Dammn where is GJ moni when you need him.
Dammn where is GJ moni when you need him.
Re: Indian Military Aviation
Moi first answer was based on remember from the Camp and Watson's book on ze Rambha onlee...which mentioned that the FDR was South African...but if the company itself has changed hands which I also vaguely remember reading about then you are quite right there....negi wrote:Hey don't take my word for it come to think of it I was wondering why is that MKI filght data recorders were sent to England after the recent crash if SAAB AB's SA division is the original supplier.
Dammn where is GJ moni when you need him.
Re: Indian Military Aviation
LCA has HAL Korwa developed FDR. They have been developing FDR's for Jaguar & Mig-27.What abt the LCA FDR? Where is it from?
http://www.hal-india.com/AvionicsKorwa/products.asp
Here is the link where everything we have developed for LCA alongwith the name of the organisation is mentioned in tabular format....Check out Appendix I
http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/MONITOR/I ... ainis.html
Re: Indian Military Aviation
Thx.
Self deleted.
Self deleted.
Last edited by NRao on 14 Jan 2010 04:31, edited 1 time in total.
-
- BRFite
- Posts: 162
- Joined: 09 Jan 2009 19:24
Re: Indian Military Aviation
A little bit of an update on the An-32 upgrade program.
The aircraft that were supposed to fly to Kiev in Dec and Jan, haven't left. Blame the severe winter across Europe and Central Asia.
The aircraft that were supposed to fly to Kiev in Dec and Jan, haven't left. Blame the severe winter across Europe and Central Asia.
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 4668
- Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
- Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3
Re: Indian Military Aviation
Is there any details on what all the upgrade entails?anand_sankar wrote:A little bit of an update on the An-32 upgrade program.
The aircraft that were supposed to fly to Kiev in Dec and Jan, haven't left. Blame the severe winter across Europe and Central Asia.
Re: Indian Military Aviation
one mistake we should NEVER EVER make is another round of the "MCA is the worlds smallest lightest 5th gen bomber" thing. even it means the kaveri-snecma never finds a real host.
import the AL41 if needed but make sure its big enough to carry a good bombload internally.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ ... /fb-22.htm
the FB22 delta winged bomber derivative of F22 that was proposed would carry 24 small bombs
internally and 2.5 times the range using a fat wet wing.
import the AL41 if needed but make sure its big enough to carry a good bombload internally.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ ... /fb-22.htm
the FB22 delta winged bomber derivative of F22 that was proposed would carry 24 small bombs
internally and 2.5 times the range using a fat wet wing.
Re: Indian Military Aviation
A single AL41 would be too little and 2 AL41s would be too much for 20 ton a/c. The other option would be to use the engine being developed for MiG-LMFS which will be in the same class as NGFA. It is said that Klimov has already started work on the engine dubbed VK-10.Singha wrote:one mistake we should NEVER EVER make is another round of the "MCA is the worlds smallest lightest 5th gen bomber" thing. even it means the kaveri-snecma never finds a real host.
import the AL41 if needed but make sure its big enough to carry a good bombload internally.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ ... /fb-22.htm
the FB22 delta winged bomber derivative of F22 that was proposed would carry 24 small bombs
internally and 2.5 times the range using a fat wet wing.
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 2131
- Joined: 30 Apr 2009 02:02
- Location: Standing at the edge of the cliff
- Contact:
Re: Indian Military Aviation
Can't we use 2 AL41F1A for nearly the same performance???KrishG wrote:A single AL41 would be too little and 2 AL41s would be too much for 20 ton a/c. The other option would be to use the engine being developed for MiG-LMFS which will be in the same class as NGFA. It is said that Klimov has already started work on the engine dubbed VK-10.Singha wrote:one mistake we should NEVER EVER make is another round of the "MCA is the worlds smallest lightest 5th gen bomber" thing. even it means the kaveri-snecma never finds a real host.
import the AL41 if needed but make sure its big enough to carry a good bombload internally.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ ... /fb-22.htm
the FB22 delta winged bomber derivative of F22 that was proposed would carry 24 small bombs
internally and 2.5 times the range using a fat wet wing.