Newbie Corner & Military Miscellaneous

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 11 May 2010 09:10

Time for a prayer in memory of Lt Kalia and his men. I still cherish is father's post card about his brave son.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 11 May 2010 09:44

May god grant eternal peace to the departed souls and strength to the family. Amen.

prabhug · Post by **prabhug** » 11 May 2010 10:42

Hi
Is there anybody who can help me membership with ASI(Aeronautical society of India) ,Bangalore?

Cheers

Prabhu.G

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 11 May 2010 11:02

shiv wrote:Thanks Manish. I thought the change to digital was because of the various long range sensors that are used to detect targets at long ranges all ultimately break a signal into pixels in a sensor and imitating the pixellation produced by the surrounding environment serves as better camouflage against electronic sensors as opposed to the naked eye which cannot see beyond a few 100 meters.

I may be wrong - your link says

"Digital" camouflage is actually a misnomer, based on the superficial resemblance of these patterns to quantized or coarse digital images. In fact, the patterns of squares (or whatever shape we use) is employed to model the texture of typical backgrounds using a mathematical function. We could use hexagons or shapeless blobs as well, except that it is easier to render complex patterns by computer using squares. It is easy to misunderstand the purpose and mechanisms of this kind of design, which is why so many measures that try to use the approach without insight fall short

You see using words like "quanitized" even I google and find the explanation still I can't understand. It uses such a difficult way of explaining.

I will be very grateful if you can find some time to post the gist of this article for simple Data Entry Operator level minds.

wig · Post by **wig** » 14 May 2010 09:13

for mango abduls like me it is difficult to understand anything, if not everything. where do you get pee ech dees in tech strat ?

Pratik_S · Post by **Pratik_S** » 15 May 2010 08:37

Are there any rules which forbid Pakistani members from becoming member of this forum, asking this because i haven't come across a Paki members so far.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 15 May 2010 09:47

no such rule. there are however some in mufti who think that their identities are not known.

most however can't control the inherent pakiness and start abusing fellow members after a couple of posts and therefore have to be kicked out.

wig wrote:for mango abduls like me it is difficult to understand anything, if not everything. where do you get pee ech dees in tech strat ?

wig sir, here you go. http://sites.google.com/site/brfdiction ... y-strategy

Pratik_S · Post by **Pratik_S** » 15 May 2010 19:27

Thanks for the info. I haven't come across a sound minded Paki either !!

wig · Post by **wig** » 15 May 2010 19:51

thanks rahul m ji for coming to my assistance.

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 15 May 2010 20:17

On livefist there is news about a light helicopter competition. Why do we not buy our own Dhruv, or does it not fit the requirements?

sum · Post by **sum** » 15 May 2010 21:07

Carl_T wrote:On livefist there is news about a light helicopter competition. Why do we not buy our own Dhruv, or does it not fit the requirements?

Dhruv falls in the "na idhar ka na udhar" category, too heavy for a light chopper and too light for a heavy chopper.

IIRC, the 384 chopper deal was selaed and ready to sign with Eurocopter when Bell raises a hungama and given the proximity of the current GoI to Amirkhans, the tender promptly cancelled.

The tender was then split into HAL making 197 LOH ( light observation helo) and rest bought off shelf. Seeing the way the tender is going, the entire thing might just go to HAL if it delivers on the LOH?

atreya · Post by **atreya** » 16 May 2010 11:08

sum wrote:
Carl_T wrote:On livefist there is news about a light helicopter competition. Why do we not buy our own Dhruv, or does it not fit the requirements?
Dhruv falls in the "na idhar ka na udhar" category, too heavy for a light chopper and too light for a heavy chopper.

IIRC, the 384 chopper deal was selaed and ready to sign with Eurocopter when Bell raises a hungama and given the proximity of the current GoI to Amirkhans, the tender promptly cancelled.

The tender was then split into HAL making 197 LOH ( light observation helo) and rest bought off shelf. Seeing the way the tender is going, the entire thing might just go to HAL if it delivers on the LOH?

The earlier deal of Eurocopter Fennec was also for 197 choppers, IIRC. I don't think there was any requirement of 384 helicopters ever. Kindly correct me if I am wrong.
The competition this time is between Kamov Ka 226, AgustaWestland AW 119, Eurocopter Fennec and MD 500 Defender.

And secondly, how can the LOH fulfill the requirement? Is the LOH similar to other light utility helicopters? The name sure is misleading (observation helicopter, as opposed to utility helicopter)

Srivastav · Post by **Srivastav** » 16 May 2010 12:06

The LOH and the LUH are one and the same thing....the HAL designed LUH is being called the LOH, earlier the whole order was supposed to go to eurocopter now its split between HAL and whoever.....If you do end up googling youll find the source.

anirban_aim · Post by **anirban_aim** » 16 May 2010 14:27

Cross Posting from the Indian Military Aviation Thread

http://beta.thehindu.com/news/national/ ... 431223.ece

The Indian Air Force, which lacks a basic aircraft trainer to train its flying cadets, has given clearance for a parachute recovery system (PRS) to be fitted on the Hindustan Piston Trainer-32 (HPT-32). The PRS, it is hoped, will improve the confidence of HPT-32 pilots, enhance survivability during an emergency in the air and prevent the trainer from dropping out of the sky like a stone.

I was waiting for this to happen, with the currently grounded HPTs, I don't know how are the rookies managing.

GregJ · Post by **GregJ** » 17 May 2010 02:08

Nayak wrote:I think we need to post all miscellaneous questions here.

Even though I have been lurking on BR for the last 6 years, I am still very wet behind the ears when it comes to military matters.

There are many diggajs here who can share their knowledge with us noobs.

With a Hail to Hanumanjee (and a tribute to PeeArrEff adminullahs) I am starting this thread.

Please do not derail other threads and consolidate your questions here.

Thanks.

-------------------
I have changed the title to "Military Miscellaneous Posts and Discussions Thread" from the 'Military Nukkad Thread' to preclude the idea of a free for all anything goes based on the word Nukkad in the title. Thanks, ramana

-------------------
Modified title given by ramana ji to clear any doubts.
Newbies and Oldies,
post here on any topic that you are unsure of about the thread it belongs to.
and ask those burning questions !
Rahul.

good discussion forums

Pratik_S · Post by **Pratik_S** » 19 May 2010 19:31

atreya wrote:
The earlier deal of Eurocopter Fennec was also for 197 choppers, IIRC. I don't think there was any requirement of 384 helicopters ever. Kindly correct me if I am wrong.
The competition this time is between Kamov Ka 226, AgustaWestland AW 119, Eurocopter Fennec and MD 500 Defender.

And secondly, how can the LOH fulfill the requirement? Is the LOH similar to other light utility helicopters? The name sure is misleading (observation helicopter, as opposed to utility helicopter)

MD 500 is in the race too ?? AFAIK its only between first 3 helos.

atreya · Post by **atreya** » 19 May 2010 21:14

smpratik wrote:
atreya wrote:
The earlier deal of Eurocopter Fennec was also for 197 choppers, IIRC. I don't think there was any requirement of 384 helicopters ever. Kindly correct me if I am wrong.
The competition this time is between Kamov Ka 226, AgustaWestland AW 119, Eurocopter Fennec and MD 500 Defender.

And secondly, how can the LOH fulfill the requirement? Is the LOH similar to other light utility helicopters? The name sure is misleading (observation helicopter, as opposed to utility helicopter)
MD 500 is in the race too ?? AFAIK its only between first 3 helos.

MD 500, according to a news item WAS in the race, though the latest articles make no mention of it. According to the old reports, along with MD 500, Bell was supposed to compete also, but it didn't. As the new reports omit MD 500, it must either have pulled out or wasn't there in the competition in the first place. Currently, the race is between Kamov and the Fennec only as the AW fielded in the trials was the civilian version. I only hope that after the trials are over, AW doesn't cry foul like Bell did last time (sore losers...huh!)

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 19 May 2010 22:12

Time for another dumb question...

Let's assume the BMD failed to stop the incoming missile. What is the reaction time of Akash? How affective a sub-kiloton nuke explosion at 15000 ft altitude? what will be the impact on the incoming missile?

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 20 May 2010 01:26

I was going through the LCA thread and I saw Kartik's post regarding Diverterless Supersonic Intake (DSI). However, the question that comes to mind is what advantage does DSI provide over intake splitter plate and how? Does it increase simplicity by reducing the no of moving parts required in the intake or does it also have any performance benefit? Can Kartik or someone else educate us regarding this?

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 20 May 2010 06:14

I have a question:

Since Kaveri engine is giving dry thurst of 52kn and dogfights are happening only on subsonic speed then why is there need to go for 95 kn AB engine?

What are the uses of Afternburner other than:
1. Reaching the troubled spot to intercept on supersonic speed.
2. Running away from missiles.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 20 May 2010 09:50

Manish_Sharma wrote:I have a question:

Since Kaveri engine is giving dry thurst of 52kn and dogfights are happening only on subsonic speed then why is there need to go for 95 kn AB engine?

What are the uses of Afternburner other than:
1. Reaching the troubled spot to intercept on supersonic speed.
2. Running away from missiles.

1. how fast you accelerate!
2. With a stronger engine can compensate higher rate of energy bleeding during tighter turns in any plane!
3. rate of climb!

There should be more!

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 20 May 2010 11:09

Gaur wrote:I was going through the LCA thread and I saw Kartik's post regarding Diverterless Supersonic Intake (DSI). However, the question that comes to mind is what advantage does DSI provide over intake splitter plate and how? Does it increase simplicity by reducing the no of moving parts required in the intake or does it also have any performance benefit? Can Kartik or someone else educate us regarding this?

this might be helpful: http://www.codeonemagazine.com/archives ... ess_1.html

RSoami · Post by **RSoami** » 20 May 2010 13:21

This is related to the fresh order of 124 Arjun tanks..
Say if DRDO comes up with some ingenious new development ragarding arjun, can it incorporate the same into the tank midway during the production or does it need to seek the client`s(army) approval to change every `screw type` in the tank??!!
Apparently everyone says that developing a tank is a process, so when is the new development/invention to be implemented??!!

Pratik_S · Post by **Pratik_S** » 20 May 2010 17:15

atreya wrote:
smpratik wrote:
MD 500 is in the race too ?? AFAIK its only between first 3 helos.

MD 500, according to a news item WAS in the race, though the latest articles make no mention of it. According to the old reports, along with MD 500, Bell was supposed to compete also, but it didn't. As the new reports omit MD 500, it must either have pulled out or wasn't there in the competition in the first place. Currently, the race is between Kamov and the Fennec only as the AW fielded in the trials was the civilian version. I only hope that after the trials are over, AW doesn't cry foul like Bell did last time (sore losers...huh!)[/quote]

Thanks for info, now it looks like the deal might be off again. If it does than I think there no need to issue a new RPF. Funding for LOH could be increased and looking at the time frame required by LCH to come off drawing board and flying we can estimate that they can induct the helo in 5-6 years.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 20 May 2010 17:31

Cross posted from the LCA thread

Looking at US as the first choice is not wrong. How much ever hatred we have, they ARE the best in the business.

I have an objection to this statement (Is anyone surprised?

)

I mean - I would be at the front of the crowd pointing out that the US is a military and technological leader in this world. I would similarly be willing to have the words "The US is the wealthiest nation in the world" tattooed on my forehead.

But what bothers me is how the US manages to insidiously gives out "invisible rays" that make people believe that it is greater than it actually is.

Let me explain that. The above statement says the US is "the best in the business" without saying what business. One is generally expected to swallow without any protest a statement hat the US is "the best in the business". And hence this post. The US is not necessarily the best in every business.

But such assertions go unchallenged because there is a fundamental belief among Indians in general about the US's greatness. No harm in that - but when that fundamental belief in the US's greatness statement comes along with another post on this forum that says "F 22 can fly without one wing" alarm bells start ringing in my mind. Alarm bells for my country and my countrymen.

Here we have one statement that is a white lie - that the US is "the best in the business" with no attempt to explain it. And that appears simultaneously on BRF with an obvious lie that one can expect started from Discovery channel or some fanboy forum - that the f 22 can fly on one wing.

Excuse me. The F 15 has actually flown on one wing. But not the F 22. The statement that the F 22 can fly without one wing has to be a glossy brochure claim. A plain lie that people want to believe just like we want to believe that the US is "the best in the business"

I believe Indians admire the US so deeply that we will never be able to oppose the US if the US should take a worse anti India stance than i has historically taken. This goes to the extent that criticism of the US by an Indian gets translated to "hatred of the US"

God If you exist, please stop acting like a silly twit and save my country.

nikhil_p · Post by **nikhil_p** » 20 May 2010 18:27

shiv wrote:Cross posted from the LCA thread

Looking at US as the first choice is not wrong. How much ever hatred we have, they ARE the best in the business.
I have an objection to this statement (Is anyone surprised? )

I mean - I would be at the front of the crowd pointing out that the US is a military and technological leader in this world. I would similarly be willing to have the words "The US is the wealthiest nation in the world" tattooed on my forehead.

But what bothers me is how the US manages to insidiously gives out "invisible rays" that make people believe that it is greater than it actually is.

Let me explain that. The above statement says the US is "the best in the business" without saying what business. One is generally expected to swallow without any protest a statement hat the US is "the best in the business". And hence this post. The US is not necessarily the best in every business.

But such assertions go unchallenged because there is a fundamental belief among Indians in general about the US's greatness. No harm in that - but when that fundamental belief in the US's greatness statement comes along with another post on this forum that says "F 22 can fly without one wing" alarm bells start ringing in my mind. Alarm bells for my country and my countrymen.

Here we have one statement that is a white lie - that the US is "the best in the business" with no attempt to explain it. And that appears simultaneously on BRF with an obvious lie that one can expect started from Discovery channel or some fanboy forum - that the f 22 can fly on one wing.

Excuse me. The F 15 has actually flown on one wing. But not the F 22. The statement that the F 22 can fly without one wing has to be a glossy brochure claim. A plain lie that people want to believe just like we want to believe that the US is "the best in the business"

I believe Indians admire the US so deeply that we will never be able to oppose the US if the US should take a worse anti India stance than i has historically taken. This goes to the extent that criticism of the US by an Indian gets translated to "hatred of the US"

God If you exist, please stop acting like a silly twit and save my country.

+1 to that Shiv garu...

Actually what many people do not try to think of is WHY is the US in this state of power currently???

If you look back to the first and second world wars, the answer is somewhere there...
The first affected almost everyone to a GREAT extent but the US mainland was almost unharmed...instead they supplied weapons (COLT for example) to the Great powers and Earned a lot of money!!!

In the Second world war, again they HELPED the Allies to fight by SUPPLYING arms (Tanks, aircraft, guns etc) on loan, which was supposed to be repaid by war spoils.

Even today, most major industries in the US (Boeing, LM, Raytheon, GE, honeywell, to name a few) are more military oriented than comparative companies across the world. The ancilliaries that supply to these companies are also indirectly military dependent.

War anywhere in the world ultimately helps fill the coffers of the US feds...someway or the other.

The US advertises the RCS reductions that they got into the F117, which penetrated the air defence radars of Baghdad and bombed the locations...but no one ever told you, that the radars were a generation old and most air defence was controlled from the ground because the IRQs lacked night fighting capability.

The US is good at one thing though, PROPOGANDA through mass media!

Example - Would you buy an Intel chip or an AMD chip and why?

Most would say intel, but actually AMD makes better processors (they were the first to the Quad core and 64 bit tech's)

Taking cover under my SDRE roof!

(taking cover under

Pratik_S · Post by **Pratik_S** » 20 May 2010 19:52

Can anyone tell why the negotiations to transfer the F-20 to India were broken off in 1990 ?

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 20 May 2010 20:19

smpratik wrote:Can anyone tell why the negotiations to transfer the F-20 to India were broken off in 1990 ?

What a useless aircraft. The US was giving F 16s to Pakckeestan and trying to palm off a Vietnam era F-5 with a single engine to India. They must have believed the Pakis and taken us for suckers.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 20 May 2010 22:28

it was offered as an AJT with the condition that we scrap the LCA project.

Ron · Post by **Ron** » 20 May 2010 23:26

Hi,

The news channels over the last few days have been giving "real time updates" on cyclone Lila.. I haven't seen so much hype and such accurate time analysis like cyclone about to hit AP coast in 1hr etc..

can any one tell me if this is the effect of latest weather/surveillance satellites launched by ISRO or was this info availiabe earlier also and media is just hyping this time around??

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 21 May 2010 04:59

Gaur wrote: I was going through the LCA thread and I saw Kartik's post regarding Diverterless Supersonic Intake (DSI). However, the question that comes to mind is what advantage does DSI provide over intake splitter plate and how? Does it increase simplicity by reducing the no of moving parts required in the intake or does it also have any performance benefit? Can Kartik or someone else educate us regarding this?

On the Tejas, the splitter plate and the bleed channel leading onto the top of the wing near the wing root does the same job as the DSI. The method used on the Tejas is not a complicated mechanical boundary layer control method. That splitter plate doesn't move forward or backward depending on the speed and altitude of operation. It is fixed, which means that it is uncomplicated and light weight but it also means that it puts a restriction on just how fast the LCA can go- in this case the top speed being set at Mach 1.6.

Some previous generation aircraft used a more complicated, and heavier system called a variable inlet- for instance the Mirage-2000 with its "mouse" cone that can move in or out of the air intake depending on speed and altitude. By moderating the size of the intake through which the air would get inside the intake, the "mouse" would control the pressure inside the air channel near the compressor. If the air velocity was too high (supersonic) the "mouse" would come out, narrowing down the air intake and that way compress the air entering the intake, and in that way increase pressure at the cost of velocity. So there were two benefits- the air pressure in the air channel was higher (a higher Coefficient of Pressure is beneficial) and the air velocity was sub-sonic. Now why is it that you need sub-sonic velocity in the channel ? Because supersonic waves would create havoc with the compressor blades due to the shock waves that are associated with them. They could cause a compressor stall.

And the reason that previous generation aircraft featured such intakes is because there was a time when Mach 2 and Mach 2+ performance was considered important. So aircraft that needed to fly that fast needed this complicated inlet system to ensure that they could safely fly to Mach 2 or beyond without the engine compressor blades stalling. Another aircraft that would illustrate the inlet and the diverter is the MiG-23. The MiG-23s had this complicated inlet geometry. This is one of the essential differences between the MiG-23 and 27 which you can verify by a simple visual comparison since the fixed inlet diverter is smaller- the variable inlet was removed on the MiG-27 and in its place a fixed inlet was put. This restricted the MiG-27's max speed to below that of the MiG-23, but since the primary job of the MiG-27 was Strike, CAS and Interdiction it's top speed was not that important.

On the Tejas, the ASR would have specified a top speed in the range of Mach 1.6-8 or so. That would've meant that if the inlet was designed well then you could get to that speed without the variable geometry, which is why they don't have a variable inlet. But the problem with the design that they chose, of an intake that is shielded by the wing is that it restricts or "jams" the airflow between the splitter plate and the wing. In this region, they created a veritable "pocket" into which the boundary layer air would get jammed. Now, you cannot have air trapped in that pocket without giving it a path to flow down or up with a channel- so the bleed channel was provided onto the top of the wing. And it turned out to be a blessing as it now directed turbulent flow onto the top of the wing and generated vortices that helped keep the air boundary layer stay attached even at high alpha angles. This concept is quite unique amongst fighters (similar things are done on leading and even trailing edges, but not near the intake) and how successful it has been can be gauged by the fact that even the newest AMCA design (whose wind-tunnel model was shown in AI-09) had a similar bleed channel.

What DSI does is to reduce the RCS as the vanes and doors of variable inlets are a source of RCS. They tend to be at angles that can reflect radar waves back to the emitter. By eliminating those variable inlets and even the splitter plate, the DSI basically reduces the RCS a bit. Its not a big deal for the Tejas anyway since it has a fixed inlet and already has a very small RCS. It also is claimed to help improve power available to the pilot in the subsonic range a bit..but its not an improvement that warranted a complete change from the existing inlet on the F-16 (on which it was first tested) to the new inlet..otherwise we'd have seen the F-16 Block 60 and the F-16IN sporting the DSI if it was such a whiz-bang improvement.

I am also quite sure that this idea as well as design and CFD data was in some way or the other stolen by the Chinese through industrial and academic espionage at Lockheed Martin and the research labs that worked on DSI, since it was their IP. It was no coincidence that they were able to suddenly jump from the regular splitter plate intake on the initial FC-1 prototype to the DSI style intake on the FC-1 after it went through a re-design. LM had been working on this concept since the early 1990s and the Chinese were all of a sudden able to come up with a productionised DSI intake on the FC-1 in the early 2000s when no other manufacturer in the world had even attempted this..to their credit they copy ideas and steal IP but productionise it and they hardly care what impression that gives to other people. Although what that does is to make OEMs very wary about letting them get their hands on top-notch technology, knowing that these guys will reverse engineer it.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 21 May 2010 06:37

cross posted from LCA thread -

Kartik wrote: this is hilarious CM ! are you implying that the guys involved in the decision making are somehow managing to send their children to the US (that is an F1 visa) or that their children are getting H1 visas to work in the US on the basis of their parent's decision to support a US product ?! I'm afraid nothing can be further than the truth in this regard..the US consulate that gets visas done doesn't quite take this into account I'm afraid..

I knew you'd reply to this one Kartik!

The type of visa is not important here; and you may be right of course, but what is important is why do the decision makers keep going to US suppliers despite being burnt time and again?

Theek hai; originally it was perhaps a R. Gandhi - Reagan bonhomie type of thing (political angle). But what about after POKII? Most LCA fans will tell us that the sanctions that followed were pretty painful. But then 2 years later there you are back at GE's door!

Then there were other situations - the interference in LCA exports for example (for consultancy in flight testing was it?). Now this thing about the NLCA.

The bottom-line is quite simple - everyone knows that the law in the US requires certain things that India might consider obstructive in its goals (whether in terms of Technology, end user rights, or even foreign policy / security policy). So long as this does not change, such issues will always crop up. So why knock on that door?

Some suggest it is a political thing - could be - but this is a peanut deal in terms of value involved - and far less glamorous than say a $ 5 billion worth C-17 deal. More importantly, by doing this, India puts it's core technological programs at risk. Others have suggested US tech superiority, but it remains that the euros and russkis have experience in the requisite areas; at least experience enough to make the bird operationally effective (operational needs angle), even if not perhaps a circa 2050 alienware type techno wonder.

Or what is it that they truly want to do with this program? Get the IAF something it can use ASAP? Or play with technology?

Is the Tejas just some sort of tech demo type program and has no real - war fighting purpose? Something for India's technological self edification with limited uses in a variety of applications such as the MKI, Jaguar etc, which no doubt is great, but I thought this was about developing indigenous weapons platforms in toto.

But then I can now understand the IAF's hesitation and ACM Naik's recent comments. The IAF will rightfully perhaps go ahead and buy a couple of sqds or may be even 6, which imho is a pittance considering that it has a stated reqt. of 45 sqds and has produced as many as 6-700 a/c that the LCA can easily replace (MIG-21, MiG-23, MiG-27). IMVVHO, the LCA should find at least 500 orders if they are truly serious. No bloody country starts off on an indigenous program seriously only to produce some 150 odd planes. Not when its AF is as large as the IAF. Unless of course, the program is not really driven by operational requirements.

Under the circumstances, while I am sorry to suggest underhanded dealings, the question does beg asking, as Philip has in a previous post. What gives? What makes India run to the US door time and time again despite all the complaints?

Politics? Considering the above reasons, I really don't think so. Operational needs - Certainly not the AF's op requirements it seems - otherwise they'd have settled to go with Dassault for the FBW instead of wanting to have a completely 4 X digital channel FBW; something that some of the best operational birds today don't have. Similarly, they might look at non US consultants, but that never seems to happen, the first choice is always the US.

The only and last reason I can think of is - ultra uber technology - something that has little operational requirement, but is purely based on fulfilling the desires of the scientific community. I dare say a luxury India can ill afford - and time will perhaps bear this out.

I am sorry but increasingly I see the Tejas as a technocrat driven program and NOT one geared towards getting the requisite h/w for the nation's fighting forces. This explains much of the delays. A pity truly.

Of course this also means that extraneous benefits (such as visas et al), if any, will automatically be fattening the the kitty of said technocrats. If no such skulduggery is present, and said tech community is all about technology for the sake of it, then too, I dare say, it is time for them to get their head out of the sand - weapons programs are foremost designed for war and to achieve political/strategic needs, not for developing, "the world's smallest, and lightest aircraft". Some sort of psychological need to be appreciated by the "west" it seems still drives certain wills in India.

Sorry for the rant but alas I understand somewhat the need for an MRCA even if it is so late in the offing!

CM.

@ Rahul - I really dunno where to take this discussion - go ahead and post it where you think it is more appropriate - but please not in the "hot air" forum!

Pratik_S · Post by **Pratik_S** » 21 May 2010 08:47

@Shiv and Rahul M
Thanks

wilson_th · Post by **wilson_th** » 21 May 2010 10:52

sometimes back In some thread (I dont remember which one) , there was a mention of hacking the command network, ie during the Operation Parakram‎ a warship deployed along the Arabian coast got a message to return back to base, after reaching onshore it realised the message recieved was wrong.

Now when I read the below news , just wondering if there is any relation to it?;

Navy war-room leak kingpin held in London
http://www.healthcarendiet.com/2010/05/ ... in-london/

The CBI’s investigations a few years ago had showed that defence leaks had taken place including details of a top secret naval project titled the Network Centric Operation (NCO).

“This crucial information can give an enemy country an advantage of knowing what are the command networks, network topography, pattern of data flow from command centres (both onshore and offshore) to battleships and topography of the computer network on the battlefield itself. With this information, an enemy power can use information warfare to block data flow (flow of orders) from command centres to warships/submarines at crucial moments or cause wrong orders to be communicated, by interfering with the network data flow by way of launching hacking attacks ,” the CBI had stated in its chargesheet submitted in 2006 before a special court.

Kailash · Post by **Kailash** » 21 May 2010 12:54

shiv wrote:I have an objection to this statement (Is anyone surprised? )

I mean - I would be at the front of the crowd pointing out that the US is a military and technological leader in this world. I would similarly be willing to have the words "The US is the wealthiest nation in the world" tattooed on my forehead.

But what bothers me is how the US manages to insidiously gives out "invisible rays" that make people believe that it is greater than it actually is.

Shiv ji, that is true. But what is so bad about accepting their lead in areas where they are do have a genuine lead? I see them like rope ladder hanging just above our head - grab it, then step on it, then climb ahead as fast as you can and leave them dangling.

The US is not necessarily the best in every business.

Best are not, they are ahead in many areas that we lack. Just because it is USA, lets not say "No Thanks". We will evaluate their help on a case by case basis and reject it if it is detrimental to our national interests. There is nothing for or agains USA here. This will be common for any country which is trying to help us..

nikhil_p wrote:The US is good at one thing though, PROPOGANDA through mass media!

See thats one thing we can learn from them!

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 21 May 2010 14:23

Kailash wrote:
Shiv ji, that is true. But what is so bad about accepting their lead in areas where they are do have a genuine lead? I see them like rope ladder hanging just above our head - grab it, then step on it, then climb

nikhil_p wrote:The US is good at one thing though, PROPOGANDA through mass media!
See thats one thing we can learn from them!

Look at your own post minus the other stuff.

What does that tell you?

Let me explain what you have said, but not realised.

First you said: " what is so bad about accepting their lead in areas where they are do have a genuine lead"

Then you acknowledged that they are propaganda leaders.

Do you realise that the areas where we think they have a genuine lead often have a propaganda aspect to that. We often think they lead based on propaganda. That propaganda is spread by Indians to other Indians. Examples abound.

1) India should get the F 35. But the F 35 is less capable than the F 22. The F 22 is not for export. So is anyone going to get the best?

2) F 22 can fly without one wing - bullshit

3) F 18: quoting Discovery channel: "Many planes are fast. This one is ballistic"

4) "We're gonna bomb the Taliban back to the stone age by carpet bombing 'em with our B 52s and other mud movers" Excuse me? but the Taliban are already in the stone age. Nobody says that when they hear a US fanboy bullshitting this way.

5) The US is the best in the business

6) Pre 9-11 relative of shiv: "Why cain't we Injuns lerrrn how to manage an airrporrt? You don't have to reporrt 2 hours before a flight. In America i arrive five minutes before my flight and just check in my baggage at the entrance"

7) Why can't we attack the training camps like the US did with cruise misiles? We must learrn to copy from the best there is.

When a person is a propaganda leader anything that he says could be propaganda. So how many people are able to differentiate a genuine lead from a propaganda ploy?

That is the problem. On BRF you inform one BRFite when your bullshit meter detects US propaganda, and 3 newbies crop up who are puking US propaganda all over the place.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 21 May 2010 14:51

Cain Marko wrote:cross posted from LCA thread -
Kartik wrote: this is hilarious CM ! are you implying that the guys involved in the decision making are somehow managing to send their children to the US (that is an F1 visa) or that their children are getting H1 visas to work in the US on the basis of their parent's decision to support a US product ?! I'm afraid nothing can be further than the truth in this regard..the US consulate that gets visas done doesn't quite take this into account I'm afraid..
I knew you'd reply to this one Kartik!

The type of visa is not important here; and you may be right of course, but what is important is why do the decision makers keep going to US suppliers despite being burnt time and again?

There is absolutely no doubt that the amrekis use every repeat every trick in the book to get their way.

Issuing some visas to expedite or influence matters subtly and not so subtly is routinely done. Even if the concerned person has no direct requirement he will always find some mama or chacha's kid to send to vilayat. Once there, seat in university + assistantships or jobs are easily arranged with obliging companies or untraceable subsidiaries of the vast military industrial complex, thereafter quickly leading to green card status and onwards.

Whose father what goes???

The amrekis are already bringing in tons of illiterate afghans, iraqi and somali refugees and what not. Slip in some more of the presentable ones and who really cares?

Guys and their families all over the world are ready to kill to get into the US. Visa are actually their trump cards that the favor seekers from the US use.

Remember that Naval Commander chap who spied or something for the US and wound up with a really cushy job with microsoft before the Indian intel agencies caught up with him and roasted his family jewels during a expeditiously arranged and salubrious sojourn to the Red Fort ? His case officer was a lady diplomat from the amreki embassy in Delhi.

http://www.managementparadise.com/forum ... -6956.html

All it took was an offer of plum portfolios in United States multinational companies like Microsoft for two senior staffers of National Security Council Secretariat to leak top secret documents (http://in.rediff.com/news/2006/jun/30sheela.htm) to elusive American 'diplomat' Rosanna Minchew, a Delhi police probe has revealed.

Security agencies are still taking stock of the extent to which classified files have been accessed by the two accused NSCS employees.

Classified documents seized from the accused persons, include Nuclear Doctrine draft report, the foreign policy on the Thai KAR Canal and futuristic NSCS plans for data sharing network among security agencies, police said.

Retired NSCS employee Mukesh Saini, at the time of his arrest in June 2006, was nurturing a 'promising' career with US-based software giant, Microsoft -- courtesy Minchew.

His co-accused, Shib Shanker Paul, a senior computer analyst with the NSCS, even disclosed that he worked for Minchew as she had 'assured him of a good job in any of the US IT multinationals,' police said.

Both Saini and Paul have been accused of criminal conspiracy and offences under the Official Secrets Act in a chargesheet filed by the Delhi Police Special Cell before Delhi Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Seema Maini recently.

Minchew was introduced to Saini, then a naval commander posted at NSCS, in August 2005 by US diplomat Howard Madnick as the new 'political officer' in charge of the Indo-US Cyber Security Forum. The duo allegedly met several times during training sessions and seminars at his NSCS office in Patel Bhawan.

"On one such occasion, he (Saini) told Minchew that he is going to retire soon and needs a suitable job... She referred his name to Microsoft and Saini gave her all information relating to NSCS," police said.

Saini went on to voluntarily retire from the Indian Navy on April two this year and joined Microsoft eight days later. Police also claim that Saini made frequent calls on his cell phone to US State Department officials and also wrote e-mails asking them to do him a 'favour' by getting him a 'good job' in any US MNC. Investigators have also seized a laptop allegedly provided to him by Microsoft.

"Accused Saini gave information to Minchew and in return she arranged a job for him just after voluntary retirement," police said in the chargesheet.

Analysis of a pen drive recovered from Paul's NSCS office showed 67 files containing over 1,000 pages of data marked 'secret' relating to national security. It involved data on monthly intelligence reviews, strategic analysis and documents of strategy with foreign nations, police said.

Saini was in the US attending a meeting of Microsoft when the police allegedly raided his Arjun Vihar home in New Delhi and seized a CPU, two hard disks, four CDs and sensitive documents on 'KRA Canal of Thailand and its impact on India and draft report of the Indian Nuclear Doctrine.'

"If the seized documents were passed on to any foreign agent, they can be used for purpose prejudicial to the safety or interest of the State," police said.

Are you seriously suggesting that the amrekis will not make use of such a ready and much in demand channel channel to further their interests by barter?

Take a look at the pakis, any and every afsar saab and his sidekick have already sent their useless wards to the US.
Examples include the last sob who almost managed to light up Times Square. Father? Afsar of PAF.

Kailash · Post by **Kailash** » 21 May 2010 15:39

shiv wrote:First you said: " what is so bad about accepting their lead in areas where they are do have a genuine lead"

Then you acknowledged that they are propaganda leaders.

Those two points can both be true. IMHO, we need to have the brains to figure out what is BS and what is not. Lead in a certain technology area must be verifyiable. In the case of US, knowing their level of propaganda and PR, they are known variables in assessing their claims. The point that they talk too much and exaggerate, does add a certain risk for anyone who buys products/technology assistance from them.

shiv wrote:When a person is a propaganda leader anything that he says could be propaganda. So how many people are able to differentiate a genuine lead from a propaganda ploy?

Agreed. Propoganda like what was mentioned above, can be dismissed easily when it outrageous and not based on facts - may be not that easy for every BRFite, but certainly for the chiefs of research houses and armed forces in India.

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 21 May 2010 16:04

shiv wrote:2) F 22 can fly without one wing - bullshit

Actually, it may not be a wrong statement. With modern a/cs incorporating fbw and fuselage providing significant lift, it may not be a totally fantastic scenario.
Eg: Isreali F-15 flying with one wing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LveSc8Lp0ZE
Look at the pics towards the end of the video. Its pretty amazing.

neerajb · Post by **neerajb** » 21 May 2010 17:03

Kartik wrote:Some previous generation aircraft used a more complicated, and heavier system called a variable inlet- for instance the Mirage-2000 with its "mouse" cone that can move in or out of the air intake depending on speed and altitude. By moderating the size of the intake through which the air would get inside the intake, the "mouse" would control the pressure inside the air channel near the compressor. If the air velocity was too high (supersonic) the "mouse" would come out, narrowing down the air intake and that way compress the air entering the intake, and in that way increase pressure at the cost of velocity. So there were two benefits- the air pressure in the air channel was higher (a higher Coefficient of Pressure is beneficial) and the air velocity was sub-sonic. Now why is it that you need sub-sonic velocity in the channel ? Because supersonic waves would create havoc with the compressor blades due to the shock waves that are associated with them. They could cause a compressor stall.

Kartik, the cone intake (as in Mig-21 or half cones in Mirage 2000) uses shock waves to slow down the flow to subsonic flow and not by increasing/decreasing throat area. Whenever air flow passes through a shock wave, it's velocity decreses. Normal shock wave formed at intake at low supersonic speeds ( air flow banging a wall of air up front) reduces the flow to subsonic flow. Oblique shock waves are formed at higher supersonic speeds and which are like walls to the incoming airflow but at an angle which is a function of airflow velocity. In case of oblique shock waves the velocity loss is lesser than normal shock waves.

The shock wave formed by the intake cone spans from the tip of the cone to air inlet cowling. Now the cone's responsibility is to keep the shock wave exactly at the lip of inlet, neither the shock wave, which is being used to slow down airflow, should enter the inlet (destruction of compressor blades/compressor stall) nor it should form outside the intake lip (leakage of airflow). As the velocity of aircraft changes so does the mach cone, which means the shock wave is dancing back and forth of the intake lip as the aircraft accelerates/deaccelerates in supersonic regime. By moving the cone forward and backword, the shock wave position is fixed at the lip.

Cheers....