Indian Military Aviation

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 19 Apr 2010 13:44

LIVEFIST: EXCLUSIVE PHOTOS: India's Intermediate Jet Trainer HJT-36 Sitara LSP-1

And many more pics.

That indeed is an air strake to regulate the airflow to the intakes.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 19 Apr 2010 13:51

Gagan wrote:
That indeed is an air strake to regulate the airflow to the intakes.

Yes there is!

Maybe to prevent unlocked canopy from opening?

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 19 Apr 2010 13:58

So there are three known prototypes that have been built. Serial numbers:

S 3466
S 3474
S 3851 (This one) and it is in Airforce camo. Shiv calls it the LSP-1

merlin · Post by **merlin** » 19 Apr 2010 14:24

shiv wrote:
Gagan wrote:
That indeed is an air strake to regulate the airflow to the intakes.
Yes there is!

Maybe to prevent unlocked canopy from opening?

So what was the final word on that one? Pilot error, or canopy lock failure?

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 19 Apr 2010 14:58

Indian Air Force phasing out MiG-21s: Antony

"The MiG-21 is a very old aircraft. It is now in the process of being phased out," Defence Minister A K Antony said during question hour in the Lok Sabha. "The normal life of an aircraft is 30-34 years," he added. The IAF currently operates a little over 200 MiG-21s. Of these, 121 have been upgraded to the Bison version and are likely to fly till 2017, an IAF source said. The remaining 80-90 aircraft will be phased out in the next two-three years, the source added, requesting anonymity.

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 19 Apr 2010 15:18

arun wrote:BAE in talks to supply Hawk jets to India

Thats so strange.. not too long ago there were report of IAF/HAL being upset over problems relating to spares supply for British Hawk advanced jet trainers (AJTs) and had shelved plans to place follow-on orders for the aircraft and instead floated new tenders to supplement its trainer fleet?? Not only that but HAL demanded 10mil in compensation for the troubles it faced in assembling jet trainers bought from the firm... Wonder whats changed since then??

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 19 Apr 2010 17:32

This is from the Ecudorean Dhruvs: Link

AOA

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 19 Apr 2010 19:35

Was the strakes a requirement driven by the new engine? Maybe the airflow to the new engine wasn't right without the strakes?

Ashish J · Post by **Ashish J** » 19 Apr 2010 19:36

Is the Sikh Person standing in front of IJT LSP same as the one shown in National Geographic documentary shown few years back named "Hot Science from India" or something like that? It showed a Sikh gentleman as the test pilot of IJT....He must be a brave person:)..Nice 2 see IJT in IAF Colors...

Rien · Post by **Rien** » 19 Apr 2010 20:04

shiv wrote:In 2009 Vayu Aerospace review had a great article that was mentioned on here by Philip and me, but it was never discussed. I found it again. It is a real gem and needs to be read, digested and discussed.

http://rapidshare.com/files/377207669/c ... impler.pdf

This is an interesting article, and it makes the correct points based on completely wrong premises. It is correct that many of todays fighter planes, such as the F-22 and Eurofighter typhoon are useless as practical fighting weapons. And that logically leads to low cost alternatives that can far outdo these superexpensive hangar queens. The F-22 has no value as a weapon, in any conceivable war that the US could ever end up fighting. Except for the Gripen, the Tejas and the J-10, most of today's fighter planes are unaffordable in the numbers needed. The US, continues to use low tech planes like the F-16 for combat in Afghanistan. Not one single F-22 has gone into combat! So much for "multi role" or "bomb dropping" capabilities.

As an example, if Pakistan was given the F-22 for *free*, it would lose more easily to the IAF than otherwise. High maintenance costs matter! Inability to actually fly the plane count, as does the sheer value of the plane. Can you justify attacking a million dollar target with a 500 million dollar plane?

But his specific implementation ideas are way off base. Carbon composites are a great advance over aluminum and other materials. They resist corrosion, are more lightweight, and offer better performance against radar. Single engined turbines are *just* as reliable now as two engines. It is better to improve the reliability of single engine aircraft than the extra cost of two. Fly by wire offers massive performance advantages. So most of specific remedies are wrong. Extra guns is ridiculous. 1 extra BVR missile is far better than a gun.

What would make much better sense are drone planes, like the Tejas, but minus a pilot, with much greater amount of composites. You don't care about losing a plane because no loss of life, the costs of all that equipment needed to support a pilot is lost, and greater stealth and performance result. This approach is much better than the low tech reversion to aluminium. A human pilot can only sustain 9 gs at best. A drone plane can easily outfly Baron Richthofen in a F22. High tech planes without pilots are the future. Todays fighter planes have no relevance to future fighters. Rather, all the money spent on the F-22 and Eurofighter are completely wasted.

rajatmisra · Post by **rajatmisra** » 19 Apr 2010 20:11

On naval aviation (not sure if there is a diff thread for that), what is happening to the plans of upgrading sea harrier?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 19 Apr 2010 20:14

but the US has a raft of open and secret UCAV projects going on in parallel , and even the squabbling euros have the neuron project. they are not sitting idle. I am sure prc and israel are also working hard on long range strike-UCAVs.

methinks the MCA should be a UCAV seeing as how it wont enter service before 2025.
Russia too needs a ucav...Sukhoi had some interesting models....

the MRCA will retain the manned strike role upto 2040+ (25 yrs) if it enters service in 2015, using MLUs.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 19 Apr 2010 21:58

shiv wrote:
Gagan wrote:
That indeed is an air strake to regulate the airflow to the intakes.
Yes there is!

Maybe to prevent unlocked canopy from opening?

nope, you don't need strakes to keep a canopy locked. a simple working canopy lock can do that.

It's for generating vortices that help keep the boundary layer attached to the wing in high-alpha flight regime.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 19 Apr 2010 22:01

putnanja wrote:Was the strakes a requirement driven by the new engine? Maybe the airflow to the new engine wasn't right without the strakes?

This is the third time I'm writing that STRAKES HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ENGINE !! STRAKES ARE TO IMPROVE HIGH ANGLE OF ATTACK PERFORMANCE TO DELAY STALL.

what on earth can a strake do to help airflow to an engine ? you want turbulent air flow to enter the air channel ? you want an intake that has high buzz airflow ? where have you even read that strakes improve airflow to any damn turbofan engine ?

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 19 Apr 2010 22:05

Ashish J wrote:Is the Sikh Person standing in front of IJT LSP same as the one shown in National Geographic documentary shown few years back named "Hot Science from India" or something like that? It showed a Sikh gentleman as the test pilot of IJT....He must be a brave person:)..Nice 2 see IJT in IAF Colors...

he is HAL's Chief Test Pilot, Sqn Ldr (retd.) Baldev "Baldy" Singh. he's the same person you saw in that documentary.

and why must he be a brave person ?

Ashish J · Post by **Ashish J** » 19 Apr 2010 22:13

Kartik wrote:
Ashish J wrote:Is the Sikh Person standing in front of IJT LSP same as the one shown in National Geographic documentary shown few years back named "Hot Science from India" or something like that? It showed a Sikh gentleman as the test pilot of IJT....He must be a brave person:)..Nice 2 see IJT in IAF Colors...
he is HAL's Chief Test Pilot, Sqn Ldr (retd.) Baldev "Baldy" Singh. he's the same person you saw in that documentary.

and why must he be a brave person ?

Thanks Karthik Sir,,,
I think he must be brave, because being a test pilot needs that extra strength,,,
i mean i cant imagine how would it feel to fly a plane for the first time,,validating it for safety of other pilots by pushing yourself to unknown territories....Kudos

sunny y · Post by **sunny y** » 19 Apr 2010 22:45

Is the Sikh Person standing in front of IJT LSP same as the one shown in National Geographic documentary shown few years back named "Hot Science from India" or something like that? It showed a Sikh gentleman as the test pilot of IJT....He must be a brave person:)..Nice 2 see IJT in IAF Colors...

Hi....Is there any way I can download this documentary for free

Thanks

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 20 Apr 2010 00:00

Ashish J wrote:
Thanks Karthik Sir,,,
I think he must be brave, because being a test pilot needs that extra strength,,,
i mean i cant imagine how would it feel to fly a plane for the first time,,validating it for safety of other pilots by pushing yourself to unknown territories....Kudos

The role of a test pilot is not like what most people think. It is absolute copy book stuff. No adrenaline rush here. They never even go close to pushing the unknown territories. Their job is not to see what a component can do. It is strictly limited to whether the component does what it is designed to do!

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 20 Apr 2010 00:49

Rien wrote:
This is an interesting article, and it makes the correct points based on completely wrong premises. It is correct that many of todays fighter planes, such as the F-22 and Eurofighter typhoon are useless as practical fighting weapons. And that logically leads to low cost alternatives that can far outdo these superexpensive hangar queens. The F-22 has no value as a weapon, in any conceivable war that the US could ever end up fighting. Except for the Gripen, the Tejas and the J-10, most of today's fighter planes are unaffordable in the numbers needed…

Single engined turbines are *just* as reliable now as two engines. It is better to improve the reliability of single engine aircraft than the extra cost of two. Fly by wire offers massive performance advantages. So most of specific remedies are wrong. Extra guns is ridiculous. 1 extra BVR missile is far better than a gun.

I agree. The premise and some of the arguments are completely ignoring today’s facts. For instance he refers to attrition rates of MiG-21s, F-104, F-100s and so on during peace time service. How about comparing those with the peace-time attrition rates of modern 3rd generation fighters like the Mirage-2000, MiG-29 or F-16 or the Gripen, Rafale, Typhoon, etc.. They’re far better. Take the single-engined Gripen for instance- it’s flown close to 1,35,000 hours totally and how many aircraft have been lost ? 4-5? Compare that to the single-engined MiG-23. When it retired it had flown 1,54,000 hours in the IAF and how many were lost in accidents?

Today’s turbofan engines are much more reliable than the turbojets that powered the earlier generations of fighters. With modern FBW flight control systems, the pilot in many cases is prevented from exceeding the aircraft’s limits that in the past could have resulted in a catastrophic loss.

But his specific implementation ideas are way off base. Carbon composites are a great advance over aluminum and other materials. They resist corrosion, are more lightweight, and offer better performance against radar.

Another topic where Prodyup Das is inaccurate is about composites. There is plenty of experience, data, statistics, etc. available on the use of composites for high performance airplanes. They are better in fatigue, which means for a given design, the service life is nearly twice that of conventionally built fighters, especially the legacy Russian ones. What must be taken care of is to not get carried away and indiscriminately use composites everywhere without thoroughly analyzing its weight vs. strength and stiffness benefits. I know of cases where composite ribs ended up being heavier than metallic ribs since they couldn’t have as many lightening holes drilled in the web section to reduce weight.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 20 Apr 2010 11:14

indranilroy wrote: They never even go close to pushing the unknown territories. Their job is not to see what a component can do. It is strictly limited to whether the component does what it is designed to do!

Err Sirji, in case of a test pilot there job is to VERIFY that the component does what it is designed to do, by definition a unknown territory.

It it was not so and you knew what was going to happen, why test?

There is a reason why test pilots are most experienced, with the best nerves and most resourceful.

Because they fully expect that the components WILL NOT behave as promised and then they will need to save both the system and their lives (and that sort of stuff routinely happens)

They not only test components but also flight regimes, maneuvers etc.

Sid · Post by **Sid** » 20 Apr 2010 11:51

http://tarmak007.blogspot.com/2010/04/s ... r-hot.html

The Intermediate Jet Trainer (IJT) Sitara of HAL will enter a significant phase with the hot weather trials scheduled to begin at Jaisalmer soon. The aircraft (PT-I) is on its way to Jaisalmer from Bidar Air Force Station on April 19.
"It will be for the first time that the IJT will undertake the hot weather trials with the AL-55I engine and the tests will continue this quarter with PT-2 too set to join the trials later," top sources told tarmak007.
The IJT flew with the Russian-made AL-55I engine in May 2009 and all the flight tests for certification were completed by February 2010. "Thirty-one (31) flights with new engine were conducted," a top HAL official said.
During the Jaisalmer trials, various functional parameters of the aircraft will be tested and monitored, including cockpit condition, avionics, load performance, instrumentation and engine temperature. "These parameters will be compared against the sea trials as well," the official added.
HAL, on its part, has kept an Avro aircraft aside to support the trials, to be undertaken by HAL's chief test pilot (fixed wing) Sqn Ldr (Redt) Baldev Singh.
The IAF is desperately in need of the IJTs for their Stage-II training as a replacement for Kiran. HAL has in its kitty the LSP order for 12 aircraft and the IAF has shown keen interest to buy more (~70 plus) in future.

Ashish J · Post by **Ashish J** » 20 Apr 2010 12:15

Sanku wrote:
indranilroy wrote: They never even go close to pushing the unknown territories. Their job is not to see what a component can do. It is strictly limited to whether the component does what it is designed to do!
Err Sirji, in case of a test pilot there job is to VERIFY that the component does what it is designed to do, by definition a unknown territory.

It it was not so and you knew what was going to happen, why test?

There is a reason why test pilots are most experienced, with the best nerves and most resourceful.

Because they fully expect that the components WILL NOT behave as promised and then they will need to save both the system and their lives (and that sort of stuff routinely happens)

They not only test components but also flight regimes, maneuvers etc.

Could not agree more..Thanks Sanku Ji

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 20 Apr 2010 16:10

Chidambaram Drops Air Force Idea To Take On To A New Move Against Maoist

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 20 Apr 2010 18:55

Bids Submitted For Indian Basic Trainers

Industry hopefuls last week submitted bids to build 75 basic trainer aircraft for the Indian air force, at a cost of roughly $6 million each.

Contenders include the Embraer EMB-312 Tucano, EADS PZL-130 Orlik, Grob G120, Hawker Beechcraft T-6, Pilatus PC-7A, Korea’s KT-1 and Daher-Socata TB30 — with the last three having the same basic platform and engine. Once a decision is made, Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. (HAL) will float a bid for the design of 104 aircraft.

The tender comes with a 30% offsets clause, which one original equipment manufacturer (OEM) says will not be difficult to fulfill in India. However, the ejection seat is a distinct requirement, and those that do not have one built-in may be disqualified, a senior official told Aviation Week. “An ejection seat is not easy to fit as it requires structural strengthening,” the official adds.

The urgent requirement comes with the grounding of a fleet of more than 100 Hindustan Piston Trainer (HPT)-32s following a spurt of crashes. Pilots are currently being trained on another indigenous HAL aircraft, the Kiran, a straight-wing aircraft earlier used in stage-two training of pilots. HAL is developing an Intermediate Jet Trainer (IJT), which the Indian air force plans to buy, but it is not expected to fly for at least three years. Final training is on the advance jet trainer Mk132, the Hawk, which is suffering from production delays with only 29 available of the 66 ordered. “This experiment [training on Kirans] has been quite successful,” Indian air force chief of air staff P.V. Naik told Aviation Week recently. “Maybe for another year and a half we will continue with this. I am sure by then we will be able to find an alternative to HPT-32 to continue training unhindered.”

Fuel system problems with the HPT-32 has led HAL to ask for bids for an emergency parachute recovery system to fit 120 grounded trainers, a commercial-off-the-shelf item. BRS, one of the three contenders, has designed, manufactured and distributed emergency parachutes for 30 years and says it has sold more than 31,000 units and documented 243 lives saved. “Our BRS system is ideally suited for the application ... this technology was adapted to faster and heavier experimental aircraft, which evolved into FAA-approved parachute installations in certified aircraft,” President and CEO Larry Williams told Aviation Week.

The most significant advancement of this technology was its incorporation as standard equipment on all Cirrus Design aircraft in 1998, which currently account for one-third of all new single-engine general aviation aircraft sales in the U.S.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 20 Apr 2010 20:22

^^The Grob G-120 seems to be an oddity among the others. It is piston engined while all the others (except the Socata TB30) are turboprops. Its speed characteristics also seem to be inferior to the others. AFAIK it is used only by Lufthansa as a civilian pilot trainer.

Katare · Post by **Katare** » 20 Apr 2010 21:00

Kartik wrote:
shiv wrote:
That indeed is an air strake to regulate the airflow to the intakes.
Yes there is!

Maybe to prevent unlocked canopy from opening?

nope, you don't need strakes to keep a canopy locked. a simple working canopy lock can do that.

It's for generating vortices that help keep the boundary layer attached to the wing in high-alpha flight regime.

Well the canopy lock didn't work last time did it

. I think Shiv is right those strakes are for keeping canopy locked

Shalav · Post by **Shalav** » 20 Apr 2010 21:38

shiv wrote:
Gagan wrote:
That indeed is an air strake to regulate the airflow to the intakes.
Yes there is!

Maybe to prevent unlocked canopy from opening?

Those are anti-spin strakes.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 20 Apr 2010 21:44

Sanku wrote:
Err Sirji, in case of a test pilot there job is to VERIFY that the component does what it is designed to do, by definition a unknown territory.

It it was not so and you knew what was going to happen, why test?

There is a reason why test pilots are most experienced, with the best nerves and most resourceful.

Because they fully expect that the components WILL NOT behave as promised and then they will need to save both the system and their lives (and that sort of stuff routinely happens)

They not only test components but also flight regimes, maneuvers etc.

You are right to the extent that they are the first guys that validate a system and they would be the best of the best fighter pilots. But they are not the top gun kind of guys who do acts of bravado. In fact for each flight they have a strict flight manual which they strictly adhere to, they would not start a roll a sec early, nor would they exceed set speed for the flight. I am saying this from what I saw some years back from a program out of discovery. That episode was dedicated to the test pilot of Boeing. His statement was "Like 007 would make the worst spy ever, something out of Top Gun would make the worst test pilot".

There is no denying that they would fly unproven things yet, especially when they would try to test the flight envelop, but pushing or experimenting, no sir, no way! Even what they "test" is ground tested first, and all that they would test would be incremental.

They are the coolest of the cool as you rightly marked out But they strictly stay away from bravado or heroic acts. That said their job profile is no less heroic than a flying ace! As the LM fighter pilot concluded, "there is not a single f-18 in the world which was not flown by him, first!"

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 20 Apr 2010 21:45

Shalav wrote:
Those are anti-spin strakes.

Going by the width of those things, even I feel so

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 20 Apr 2010 22:00

Contenders include the Embraer EMB-312 Tucano, EADS PZL-130 Orlik, Grob G120, Hawker Beechcraft T-6, Pilatus PC-7A, Korea’s KT-1 and Daher-Socata TB30 — with the last three having the same basic platform and engine. Once a decision is made, Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. (HAL) will float a bid for the design of 104 aircraft.

The tender comes with a 30% offsets clause, which one original equipment manufacturer (OEM) says will not be difficult to fulfill in India. However, the ejection seat is a distinct requirement, and those that do not have one built-in may be disqualified, a senior official told Aviation Week. “An ejection seat is not easy to fit as it requires structural strengthening,” the official adds.

The EADS PZL-130 Orlik, T-6II Texan, Pilatus PC-7, KAI KT-1 Woong Bee and EMB-312 Tucano have ejection seats..the Grob G120 is the only one that doesn't meet that requirement as is and should probably be removed from the list since there is little time to have them fit ejection seats, certify it and what not..Don't know about the TB-30 Epsilon.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 20 Apr 2010 22:31

indranilroy wrote: You are right to the extent that they are the first guys that validate a system and they would be the best of the best fighter pilots. But they are not the top gun kind of guys who do acts of bravado.

Sir, aviation is a strict field, there is no place for top gun kind of bravado, any where.

The best pilots are not Tom "pants on fire" Cruise style caricatures. They are like Wg Co (Now AVM) Karnik, quiet, sober resolute, with extremely quick reflexes.

All the Hollywood hype is misleading.

The real bravery is getting into a cockpit fully well knowing what are the odds in aviation and that too in when testing components. With full idea of the statistical life span and such stuff. And then doing your job, again, and again and again.

But then it appears that we are both actually saying the same thing.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 21 Apr 2010 00:35

On the Basic Trainer tender. Is it not possible for, say, and IIT group to design one of these? Profs at such institutions? Buy an engine from someone else (as usual) and get it to fly.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 21 Apr 2010 01:56

NRao wrote:On the Basic Trainer tender. Is it not possible for, say, and IIT group to design one of these? Profs at such institutions? Buy an engine from someone else (as usual) and get it to fly.

Who is going to fund them?! To come up with a prototype needs enormous amounts of money. Unfortunately, that is lacking. After they do manufacture the plane. They have to certify it. The whole process is going to take 5 years atleast. Think about setting up the assembly lines after that and then the first planes. Unfortunately, we can't wait till then.

I am not saying that such an approach should not be taken. In fact it should be highly encouraged, but not for this batch of trainers which are so urgently required!

Jagan · Post by **Jagan** » 21 Apr 2010 03:13

indranilroy wrote:
Shalav wrote:
Those are anti-spin strakes.
Going by the width of those things, even I feel so

Maybe the "anti-spin" is a misnomer - IIRC such strakes would get an aircraft to recover out of the spin without any effort from a pilot. Military trainers on the other hand do not want automatic recovery out of spins - they want to teach pupils to get them out of the spins by themselves. Maybe the strakes have a different purpose - like making the spin stable or more predictable.

Craig Alpert · Post by **Craig Alpert** » 21 Apr 2010 05:22

Sitara PT-I off to Jaislamer for hot weather trials, AL-55I engine to undergo rigorous test

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 21 Apr 2010 05:33

Craig Alpert wrote:Sitara PT-I off to Jaislamer for hot weather trials, AL-55I engine to undergo rigorous test

Yes they better be "rigorously" tested.. to avoid any more disasters or casualties.. We cant afford to loose any more of our valued pilots to coz of damnned planes..

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 21 Apr 2010 06:18

indranilroy wrote:But they are not the top gun kind of guys who do acts of bravado. In fact for each flight they have a strict flight manual which they strictly adhere to, they would not start a roll a sec early, nor would they exceed set speed for the flight.

Absolutely true and some BRFites may recall a BRF Aero India meet where there was a joke about this. We had invited the pilot of a particular aircraft and he joked about how the test pilot flying the same aircraft for the display did nothing exciting and in fact did a chukker around the whole of Karnataka just to turn around before returning after each fly-by/display in front of the audience. No names will be mentioned.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 21 Apr 2010 06:26

indranilroy wrote: Who is going to fund them?! To come up with a prototype needs enormous amounts of money. Unfortunately, that is lacking. After they do manufacture the plane. They have to certify it. The whole process is going to take 5 years atleast. Think about setting up the assembly lines after that and then the first planes. Unfortunately, we can't wait till then.

I am not saying that such an approach should not be taken. In fact it should be highly encouraged, but not for this batch of trainers which are so urgently required!

No better time than "Now".

However, I find it very hard to believe that this predicament was not forecast 5 years ago. Also, there should be plenty of non-military interests too within India and outside it too.

Perhaps there is some effort going on that I am not aware of.

On funding, how much would it cost? Any guestimates? TIA.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 21 Apr 2010 07:05

I wish GTRE would start working on an indigenous engine to power the IJT. Unlike the Kaveri which is to replace the F404, the technical requirements for the IJT's engine were probably more modest with the order size still being substantial.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 21 Apr 2010 07:25

Viv S wrote:I wish GTRE would start working on an indigenous engine to power the IJT. Unlike the Kaveri which is to replace the F404, the technical requirements for the IJT's engine were probably more modest with the order size still being substantial.

Someone has mentioned (in some thread maybe this one) the idea that an IIT dept should be given teh job of designing an aircraft. I think this engine idea should go to at least two separate university depts and not the GTRE.

"Research" is actually a form of play. The best researchers are funded for doing what they love with no penalty for not reaching a pre-set goal. I am not sure the GTRE qualifies as such an establishment. As an audited govt dept they have to have pre set goals, timelines etc and they fail all round.

Note that in aero-engine development - mistakes you make also count as learning. Having many centers making different mistakes adds to the body of knowledge.

In addition we need an engine test bed aircraft of our own. Recall the Fairchild Packet with a dorsally mounted jet engine? India has some experience (now crashed) of a dorsally mounted radar idli on an Avro 748. Why not take a proven engine - such as the one used in Kirans, mount it dorsally on an Avro and develop a test bed aircraft?