What's new

DRDO to be build next Generation Phalcons AEW&C for IAF

Again, VERY TRUE, the only problem is that it's not a moment of pride for the nation after it was officially de-linked from LCA and has no operational use. If this would have been done some years ago, it would have been a good step during the development and there still would be hope for it in LCA, but at the current stage it's only good to make DRDO happy.




Don't you see how you prove yourself to be wrong?

Shivalik class frigates as well as IAC1 will have GE LM2500 engines, not to mention that because Kaveri failed, LCA will be powered by GE 404 and 414 engines. So after all we ARE still dependent on foreign engines and still have no operational alternative, that is the key issue I am trying to point out here. I already stated that indigenous engine development is one of the most important fields for India and that DRDO has to go for it, but he problems are the bad planning and low results!

Just answer this for yourself please!

If DRDO wouldn't have linked Kaveri engine development to LCA and had seen it as an independent tech demonstrator project as a base for future Indian engines, while LCA would have been developed with a foreign engine from the begining...

...would we see LCA in operational service today?
...wouldn't Kaveri K9 have been tested on an IL 76 way earlier, because neither weight, nor thrust limits had to be met?
...wouldn't both projects be way easier for DRDO, because they were doing it for the first time and had less pressure like this?


Btw, what about the questions I had wrt to LCA MK1s MMR (puls doppler)?

a slotted planar array for LCA is complete but that is NOT cutting edge by today's standards...so DRDO will integrate an AESA into it...
and as far as KAVERI is concerned,yes it is a failure in the minds of desperate pessimists like you who havent designed a single 6 DOF arm and doesnt know what it takes to design and develop a GT/turbofan engine from scratch...
however,i fully agree,that LCA project could have been accelerated by delinking the kaveri project with LCA project...
but ,the end result depends on how you perceive it,
you can perceive it in a way,like-it is a failure because now it wont get to power the LCA,or it can be percieved in a different way,like this-
that it has given the country a distinct capability to design and develop gas turbines on our own,and thnkfully it will help power india's UAVs,ACAVs,lighter ships with tonnage lesser than 6000tonnes , railway locomotives,process industries,refineries and even private/govt power plants!!..
now the reason why LM2500 was choosen was,
1)in early 2000s when the shivaliks or kolkatas were laid down/or on drawing boards,the KMGT wasnt developed enough,
2)LM2500 is rated at 25MW power output significantly higher than KMGT's 15mW...
so to propel ships with tonnage equal to or greater than 6000tonnes,it becomes necessary to use a bigger powerplant...

lemme ask you a question,are you in industry of gas turbines?or remotely related to BHEL?or if you get the chance to visit BHEL trichy or BHEL bhopal,PLEASE FOR GOD SAKE GO AND ASK THOSE MECHANICAL ENGINEERS,
about the true complexities involved in designing and developing a gas turbine/turbofan from scratch...
i am saying so coz i have done that and i know it...
what have you got other than pessimistic remarks based on sheer media criticism?
 
.
a slotted planar array for LCA is complete but that is NOT cutting edge by today's standards...so DRDO will integrate an AESA into it...
and as far as KAVERI is concerned,yes it is a failure in the minds of desperate pessimists like you who havent designed a single 6 DOF arm and doesnt know what it takes to design and develop a GT/turbofan engine from scratch...
however,i fully agree,that LCA project could have been accelerated by delinking the kaveri project with LCA project...
but ,the end result depends on how you perceive it,
you can perceive it in a way,like-it is a failure because now it wont get to power the LCA,or it can be percieved in a different way,like this-
that it has given the country a distinct capability to design and develop gas turbines on our own,and thnkfully it will help power india's UAVs,ACAVs,lighter ships with tonnage lesser than 6000tonnes , railway locomotives,process industries,refineries and even private/govt power plants!!..
now the reason why LM2500 was choosen was,
1)in early 2000s when the shivaliks or kolkatas were laid down/or on drawing boards,the KMGT wasnt developed enough,
2)LM2500 is rated at 25MW power output significantly higher than KMGT's 15mW...
so to propel ships with tonnage equal to or greater than 6000tonnes,it becomes necessary to use a bigger powerplant...

lemme ask you a question,are you in industry of gas turbines?or remotely related to BHEL?or if you get the chance to visit BHEL trichy or BHEL bhopal,PLEASE FOR GOD SAKE GO AND ASK THOSE MECHANICAL ENGINEERS,
about the true complexities involved in designing and developing a gas turbine/turbofan from scratch...
i am saying so coz i have done that and i know it...
what have you got other than pessimistic remarks based on sheer media criticism?

You don't have to believe media criticism to understand that a major reason for LCA delay is because of the failure of Kaveri.
Look at any kind of vehicle, engine is the most critical and difficult part to make. It's obvious that DRDO grossly underestimated the complexity of making turbo-jet engine. Linking kaveri with LCA was one of the stupidest thing DRDO ever did. I agree with Sancho there.
 
.
a slotted planar array for LCA is complete but that is NOT cutting edge by today's standards...so DRDO will integrate an AESA into it..

Not on the MK1, that will get the puls doppler MMR and that's why I'm asking for infos on that.


however,i fully agree,that LCA project could have been accelerated by delinking the kaveri project with LCA project...
but ,the end result depends on how you perceive it

Wrong, the result depends on what the aim of the project was! That's why I asked you, if it would be better if Kaveri would have been just a tech demonstrator project. A TD project would had the aim to develop new techs that later can be used in different ways, so if that would have been the aim of Kaveri, it would be a successful project now. However, that wasn't the case and now DRDO is using this to distract from the fact that this project failed.


i am saying so coz i have done that and i know it...
what have you got other than pessimistic remarks based on sheer media criticism?

It's a no brainer that developing something from the scratch without experience and the necessary know how is difficult, but if so, why did DRDO thought they still can do it? Why didn't they asked for a foreign JV or co-development partner?
Why don't they admit the failure today and take action against those who were responsible? Why are they doing the same mistakes now with AMCA again?

All this has nothing to do with beeing pessimistic, or the media, but is important to improve DRDO and our indigenous industry!
Ignoring the mistakes that were made and searching for excuses won't help DRDO, won't help our indigenous industy and most of all, it won't help our forces and that's what's important for me!
 
.
what I think is. We have done a lot of JVs in the past. But I do not understand, when will we be 100% capable to build every part at home irrespective of funding.
 
.
what I think is. We have done a lot of JVs in the past. But I do not understand, when will we be 100% capable to build every part at home irrespective of funding.

Actually we didn't and that's exactly the problem! In case of LCA for example we only opted for foreign help when things already got worse. EADS for weight reduction and navalising, Elta to fix MMR issues and now Snecma is aimed to co-develop K10, to fix the issues of K9. If we had done at least the radar and engine developments as JV/co-developments from the start, things would have been pretty different now.
Today however, we are increasing JV and co-developments whereever we can and especially our privat companies are using this way to improve themselfs, offer our forces better arms and to get a chance to produce foreign products too. India is becoming a production hub for foreign defence manufacturers and that will help us a lot in future.
Wrt the 100%, why do we need it? Look around and tell me a single defence development in any country that produces every nut and bolt indigenously? Even the US are using parts made in China or India, while China uses Russian, European and US techs in return as well. We really should get rid of the idea that indigenous means 100% build in India, just to brag about it. More important is, that we develop the arms and techs on our own and according to our requirements, just like that we learn to develop the core parts like radar or engines indigenously too. LCA showed us where the limits are and when we look at IJT, Saras, or other examples, we still have a long way to go and any JV or co-development should be more than welcomed!
 
.
Not on the MK1, that will get the puls doppler MMR and that's why I'm asking for infos on that.




Wrong, the result depends on what the aim of the project was! That's why I asked you, if it would be better if Kaveri would have been just a tech demonstrator project. A TD project would had the aim to develop new techs that later can be used in different ways, so if that would have been the aim of Kaveri, it would be a successful project now. However, that wasn't the case and now DRDO is using this to distract from the fact that this project failed.




It's a no brainer that developing something from the scratch without experience and the necessary know how is difficult, but if so, why did DRDO thought they still can do it? Why didn't they asked for a foreign JV or co-development partner?
Why don't they admit the failure today and take action against those who were responsible? Why are they doing the same mistakes now with AMCA again?

All this has nothing to do with beeing pessimistic, or the media, but is important to improve DRDO and our indigenous industry!
Ignoring the mistakes that were made and searching for excuses won't help DRDO, won't help our indigenous industy and most of all, it won't help our forces and that's what's important for me!

what crap!
a pulse doppler is basically a type of radar which can process the change in frequency due to the relative motion of radar and target...
a slotted planar array has this mode/function...infact all present day radars obtain the velocity information due to pulse doppler technique,
and slotted planar antennae is basically a type of radar with horizontal wave guides with vertical lines cut across every wave guide...
i'm still quite confident that you havent been to BHEL BHOPAL or BHEL trichy....please first go there and see,and then comment...
as far as work culture is concerned,it has changed a lot starting from 2000s,i am unfortunately NOT at the liberty to discuss things and our projects here on public forum,but planning and structuring of DRDO has improved a lot in 2000s
 
.
Back
Top Bottom