What's new

HAL Tejas | Updates, News & Discussions-[Thread 2]

.
Appears to be some elements that limit the design, which maybe why the IAF Originally rejected it, and only accepted for political reasons
are you a stealth indian? trying to worry us by the induction of the greatest flying machine ever?
 
.
are you a stealth indian? trying to worry us by the induction of the greatest flying machine ever?

HELL NO

Just sharing a video to highlight the weakness of the current Tejas design from an objective third party source

stealth Indian, lol
 
.
HELL NO

Just sharing a video to highlight the weakness of the current Tejas design from an objective third party source

stealth Indian, lol
shudder the day it takes off to sortie!the reason why indians didn't pitch this fighter against Pakistan was for only one reason. that is to give Pakistan a level playing field! now that Pakistan got lucky after 27 Feb they are going to unleash it upon us! F22/35 cower before this machine.

we are doomed :cry:
 
.
shudder the day it takes off to sortie!the reason why indians didn't pitch this fighter against Pakistan was for only one reason. that is to give Pakistan a level playing field! now that Pakistan got lucky after 27 Feb they are going to unleash it upon us! F22/35 cower before this machine.

we are doomed :cry:

:lol:

You are funny @Path-Finder Sahab.

I have been following the Tejas project for over a decade now - and these 'patriot' Indians still don't get that the Tejas project is one big vacuum sucker for Indian politicians to skim 15% off of every foreign part bought for the project. Then they launched the Kauvery engine project in 1986 - where did that go? Failed after 30 some odd years. Net cost more than half a Billion dollars, legit percentages went to various politicians' pockets though.

It started in the 1950's with Nehru calling over Willi Messerschmitt to design their first fighter - the Marut. That was another project Indian politicians could get rich over, in the name of 'indigenous design'. And they did.

Meanwhile - the Chinese have developed all manner of jet aviation engines, starting with cruise missile sizes to those that power their heavy helicopters and heavy lifters.

More than two dozen Chinese cities boast per capita gdp of over $20,000/year. India is still stuck in the 'Hindu' rate of growth.

Gullibility - thy name is India...

are you a stealth indian? trying to worry us by the induction of the greatest flying machine ever?

Frenchie looks like he has a day job at the Rafale programme...
 
.
:lol:

You are funny @Path-Finder Sahab.

I have been following the Tejas project for over a decade now - and these 'patriot' Indians still don't get that the Tejas project is one big vacuum sucker for Indian politicians to skim 15% off of every foreign part bought for the project. Then they launched the Kauvery engine project in 1986 - where did that go? Failed after 30 some odd years. Net cost more than half a Billion dollars, legit percentages went to various politicians' pockets though.

It started in the 1950's with Nehru calling over Willi Messerschmitt to design their first fighter - the Marut. That was another project Indian politicians could get rich over, in the name of 'indigenous design'. And they did.

Meanwhile - the Chinese have developed all manner of jet aviation engines, starting with cruise missile sizes to those that power their heavy helicopters and heavy lifters.

More than two dozen Chinese cities boast per capita gdp of over $20,000/year. India is still stuck in the 'Hindu' rate of growth.

Gullibility - thy name is India...
no no no, there are no failures. these are masterstrokes!
 
.
Appears to be some elements that limit the design, which maybe why the IAF Originally rejected it, and only accepted for political reasons

This is actually an excellent summary of what I have discussed with other members when I first joined the forum (iirc).

i.e there was an overall weight + volume penalty on aerodynamics by going this small (compared to the normal size of a light fighter delta).

Thank you for bringing this channel to my attention, I have subbed to it now and will be checking out some of his other analysis.

The part where he finally talks about the wing actually was something I proposed to look into further for PDF using CFD analysis to show the effects of effectively "attaching a canard" to the wing profile w.r.t favourable vortex generation on a small constrained platform.... the threads themselves were fairly interesting context to this:

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/roun...than-jf17-to-go-up.419030/page-7#post-8104860

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/discussion-thunder-and-tejas.437724/page-6#post-8437215

@Joe Shearer @Socra @JamD @gambit some old convo resurfacing :-)

@Signalian @Vergennes @That Guy might also find this interesting.

I never got around to doing it, but looks like this YTuber has...I will be looking at that bit later.
 
.
:lol:

You are funny @Path-Finder Sahab.

I have been following the Tejas project for over a decade now - and these 'patriot' Indians still don't get that the Tejas project is one big vacuum sucker for Indian politicians to skim 15% off of every foreign part bought for the project. Then they launched the Kauvery engine project in 1986 - where did that go? Failed after 30 some odd years. Net cost more than half a Billion dollars, legit percentages went to various politicians' pockets though.

It started in the 1950's with Nehru calling over Willi Messerschmitt to design their first fighter - the Marut. That was another project Indian politicians could get rich over, in the name of 'indigenous design'. And they did.

Meanwhile - the Chinese have developed all manner of jet aviation engines, starting with cruise missile sizes to those that power their heavy helicopters and heavy lifters.

More than two dozen Chinese cities boast per capita gdp of over $20,000/year. India is still stuck in the 'Hindu' rate of growth.

Gullibility - thy name is India...



Frenchie looks like he has a day job at the Rafale programme...

<sigh!> Experts, experts everywhere, and not a one that thinks.
With sincere apologies to Coleridge.

I'm not even going to dissect this note, except to remind our excited young enthusiast that it was Kurt Tank, not Willi Messerschmitt, who was invited to design the the Marut. Think FW 190, not Me 109; yes, I know, just changing the numerals around is no big deal.

Nobody benefited from it, as far as anyone knows.


Appears to be some elements that limit the design, which maybe why the IAF Originally rejected it, and only accepted for political reasons

The IAF 'rejected' it not because of design flaws - after all, Philip Rajkumar was closely associated with it right through the final days of the programme, and everything that went into the finalisation was known to the IAF - but because of abysmal build quality. I won't go into detail, but there was a huge gap between the design documents and blueprints and the production documents; in short, the 'productionising' was mishandled, and that was a gap in communications between HAL and ADE. Part of it was due to the use of composites; for the first 3 or 4 prototypes, almost every piece was uniquely configured. What was known about converting drawings of metallic parts to parts that could be engineered was not useful in producing these composite parts.

Without going into detail, there were also difficulties with LRUs, and with the integration of weapons systems with the pilot's controls. That is why the IAF objected to giving the aircraft an IOC and then an FOC. They had no problems with the flying characteristics. None whatever. HAL is still not the right place to manufacture the aircraft, and the sooner it is released to private sector partners to build, the better.

@Nilgiri

It is true that they are looking at canards for the Mk2 (possibly) and the AMCA (definitely). Why they are doing so has already been discussed to death.
 
.
Kurt Tank

Was a professor at Madras inst. of tech for a certain student .....Mr. Kalam I believe.

Part of it was due to the use of composites; for the first 3 or 4 prototypes, almost every piece was uniquely configured.

Very similar happened with more conventional materials w.r.t USSR with the Tu-160 (and some other notable catch-up-quickly projects).

All the test originals are pretty different from one another....I've heard some of the series production as well since they wanted to learn on the fly somewhat on what they wanted to settle on for the larger production run (which never happened since the USSR itself ran out of money and collapsed)
 
.
I do not trust the guy in the video, every fighter jet has its flaws. LCA is based on a doctrine which suits for India perfectly as a point defense fighter, this can also be exported to smaller nations which do not need multi role.
International arms lobby coupled with leftist media outlets are against LCA.
 
.
<sigh!> Experts, experts everywhere, and not a one that thinks.
With sincere apologies to Coleridge.

I'm not even going to dissect this note, except to remind our excited young enthusiast that it was Kurt Tank, not Willi Messerschmitt, who was invited to design the the Marut. Think FW 190, not Me 109; yes, I know, just changing the numerals around is no big deal.

Nobody benefited from it, as far as anyone knows.

Dada - sincere apologies. Admittedly, a grave faux pas. It is an honor conversing with you. I mean that.

Don't know why I started talking about Messerschmitt. You are absolutely right, and I am wrong. When I spoke about the Marut before I had always quoted Kurt Tank. The Marut held such high hopes for Indian aviation, it was truly sad when funding dried up.

Yes I do know the difference between FW 190 and ME 109 (purists would still call it BF109 - especially up to Emil versions, before Bavarian Flugzeugwerke was sold to Messerschmitt's firm). To most - the FW 190 was the better fighter of the two, being of later origin.

I meant no disrespect by my comments. But it is glaringly obvious that the Chinese have achieved so much aviation wise in such a short time period.
 
.
I do not trust the guy in the video, every fighter jet has its flaws. LCA is based on a doctrine which suits for India perfectly as a point defense fighter, this can also be exported to smaller nations which do not need multi role.
International arms lobby coupled with leftist media outlets are against LCA.

I personally would have done the project differently, rather than be wedded too much to the size of aircraft, which I believe was frozen quite early in Tejas case (and thus other things evolved/conformed around that with trade-offs).

I would rather have started with an (intended range of) engine class and worked outwards. This would have given more flexbility downstream to achieve final tier performance parameters more readily.

Doing such sensitivity analysis actually is an interesting exercise altogether.

You are right every platform is essentially a balance of trade offs (and hence flaws).

Also I wouldn't speak so harshly of the content creator here. A certain slant on what hes actually saying/critiquing has been put by some members (and I have nothing to add to how @Joe Shearer fact checked that bit)

They strangely didnt realise context of his earlier video:

 
.
Tejas is a MiG 21 Bison replacement in the modern world.No need to overthink it.
The fact that the FOC fighters are equipping the most decorated squadron of the IAF speaks for the jet in volumes.
It is also the safest fighter in the IAF.Has brought back every son safely since 2001.
Win in most books.
 
.
Dada - sincere apologies. Admittedly, a grave faux pas. It is an honor conversing with you. I mean that.

Don't know why I started talking about Messerschmitt. You are absolutely right, and I am wrong. When I spoke about the Marut before I had always quoted Kurt Tank. The Marut held such high hopes for Indian aviation, it was truly sad when funding dried up.

Yes I do know the difference between FW 190 and ME 109 (purists would still call it BF109 - especially up to Emil versions, before Bavarian Flugzeugwerke was sold to Messerschmitt's firm). To most - the FW 190 was the better fighter of the two, being of later origin.

I meant no disrespect by my comments. But it is glaringly obvious that the Chinese have achieved so much aviation wise in such a short time period.

Aare, eto serious kyan? Ektu aadhtu thatta korle dukkho paite hoy

Hope everyone at home is safe.

Ramzan kareem. mubarak.

I personally would have done the project differently, rather than be wedded too much to the size of aircraft, which I believe was frozen quite early in Tejas case (and thus other things evolved/conformed around that with trade-offs).

I would rather have started with an (intended range of) engine class and worked outwards. This would have given more flexbility downstream to achieve final tier performance parameters more readily.

Doing such sensitivity analysis actually is an interesting exercise altogether.

You are right every platform is essentially a balance of trade offs (and hence flaws).

How I wish our boffins had done that! I can only speculate that the earliest design pulse was driven by a desire to get a Gnat-like creature good enough to match the MiG 21 up and flying. A grave error; they should have started without these preconceived notions. Our coarser-grained north Indian friends (and other friends of similar latitudes and different longitudes) call it gaand masti.

By the time Kota took over, it was too far advanced.

Also I wouldn't speak so harshly of the content creator here. A certain slant on what hes actually saying/critiquing has been put by some members (and I have nothing to add to how @Joe Shearer fact checked that bit)

They strangely didnt realise context of his earlier video:


In fact, I thought he'd done a reasonably good job. I'd just seen the video before it was posted in PDF, because I've grown to like this presenter for his sound technical foundation, and was a little taken aback at the way people twisted his presentation, each to his own ends.

I do not trust the guy in the video, every fighter jet has its flaws. LCA is based on a doctrine which suits for India perfectly as a point defense fighter, this can also be exported to smaller nations which do not need multi role.
International arms lobby coupled with leftist media outlets are against LCA.

True, but look at his other videos. He is very insightful. His not being in sync with my views or with your views or with the views of X, Y or Z is not relevant; somebody, somewhere will be upset.
 
Last edited:
.
True, but look at his other videos. He is very insightful. His not being in sync with my views or with your views or with the views of X, Y or Z is not relevant; somebody, somewhere will be upset.

I am only stressing the point that India is doing sales pitch, LCA fits the doctrine of smaller countries.
 
.

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom