What's new

HAL Tejas | Updates, News & Discussions

Status
Not open for further replies.
GTRE achived what was it asked for , 75-80 kn...
LRDE achived what it was asked for( nobody knows the AESA stuff till 2000 , how can DRDO could plan it in 1985.....
GTRE had no experience with engine developments and still they developed what they were asked for ..
f404 was the only proven at that time and today kaveri is good as f404 , this f414 stuff cames much later and maked the IAF mouth watering to make their specifications changed...
 
.
GTRE achived what was it asked for , 75-80 kn...
LRDE achived what it was asked for( nobody knows the AESA stuff till 2000 , how can DRDO could plan it in 1985.....

GTRE had no experience with engine developments and still they developed what they were asked for ..

f404 was the only proven at that time and today kaveri is good as f404 , this f414 stuff cames much later and maked the IAF mouth watering to make their specifications changed...

Wanted to add..

GTRE did achieved only 78KN with 150kg overweight... so they where not able to achieve the target of 85KN -150kg... yes they did this in first try... it was a very good accomplishment

LRDE didnt develope all... they didnt complete the heart which is running on 2032...
 
.
No, we build LCH exactly because we did it the right way with Dhruv! Dhruv might be an indigenous project, but heavily dependent on foreing input (mainly German and French) and we used it as a base to learn and get experience, which now makes us able to redesign Dhruv to LCH, or develop LUH alone.

If we had gone the same succesful way with LCA, we would have gone for co-developments as I mentioned earlier, or even teamed up with a foreign nation that has more experience (Sweden for example), had it operational by now like Dhruv and would be able to redesign LCA alone (NLCA required help from EADS and they searched for US help as well).

valid... we did it Dhruv with JV.. and who said we didnt do with LCA?? we tried for FBW with dassault who was adamant to give us analog we rejected it .... because we dont want that.. we went with support from BAe and LM ... BAe gave us the facts but no know-how and LM initially helped us but ditched us due to US pressure...

And in 1990's who where ready to do JV or help us?? we are not super power or we are not that close to NATO.... the situation now is India has money so people are coming here to help us

First of all, AMCA is aimed to be ready by 2022/25 and FGFA will already be in production by then. Secondly the only fighters that could be replaced in that time by AMCA are Jaguars, which are purly ground attack fighters, meant for deep penetration strikes. AURA UCAV can be available at least at that time as well and would be the way better replacement for Jags then AMCA.
There is nor operational necessity for AMCA, when you have a 5th gen air superioirty fighter, as well a 5th gen UCAV for strikes, on top of huge numbers of 4.5 gen LCA, MMRCA, MKI. We could simply increase FGFA and AURA numbers and by 2035/40 we need an even more capable fighter than AMCA to replace MKIs. AMCA by then will be as late as LCA is today!

First of ALL AURA will take 2030 to fly i bet.. even US NGTA will come in service only in 2025 and you expecing AURA to come in 2030 is totaly over confidence.. AURA will be in service in 2040.

so is FGFA is alone enough?.... and total induction will complete by 2025... and they are not going to replace anything but will push MKI and MRCA in the same role ... so when AMCA comes in 2025... Mig -29 and Mirages will retire.. and MMRCA and MKI will be there.. so AMCA is a nice stealth aircraft which can replace Mig-29 and Mirages... and even the MKI inducted in 2005 on wards will retire by 2035 where AMCA can be used...

and As per knowledge UCAV cant replace the role performed by humans.. they cant do effective defending ... they can be used in aggressive place like the Drones used today...
 
.
LRDE didnt develope all... they didnt complete the heart which is running on 2032...

first it was initially planned by IAF to have as Pulse Doppler Radar on LCA , then phased-array electronic scanning radar and now active array electronic scanning radar ...
but LRDE is lessioning...good , isn't it !!
they did using the isreali micochip 2032 , but i might not be a achivment in the views of few for desine a entire system around that chip..
 
.
R & D does work on deadlines. We are not building a spaceship to Neptune. No country has infinite resources and unlimited time. ISRO also had the same problems as DRDO, ADA. The only differnce being ISRO is associated with success 9 on 10 times.

Wrong. There are no deadlines in R&D. There are goals and estimated deadlines. R&D is always expected to slip estimated deadlines.

F-35 IOC has been further delayed into 2018. That's why USAF keeps design engineers with 2-3 decades of work experience, in its management team to keep/project their future roadmaps in line with the technology profile available in industry. They don't miscalculate and then whine like IAF does.

IAF management is not technically fit for laying out timelines on aircraft R&D projects or for that matter, even to talk about it. They should learn better management practices from USAF and hire some ex-DRDO people in their top team, to keep their toes on earth. Or, better take up aeronautics course as passtime rather than roaming around in weapon shows and making silly comments about LCA on which they have no clue. :lol:

Secondly, ISRO is working on Civilian space technologies. They easily get foreign components and use them. This is not to say they are fools, but their goals are different and far more easier than DRDO. As an small example, check when ISRO made its first flight mission computer and who provided them help. Its DR... ;)
 
.
Sancho Aka Biggest troll of LCA thread,

- which country was offering JV to India when India began its first 4th Gen. aircraft R&D(LCA) initiative? (provide links for claims)
- do you think Russia will allow India to join 5th Generation FGFA as JV partner, if we didn't have 4th generation design experience that LCA gave us? If yes, why wouldn't DRDO reduce to a minority partner in that situation, since it won't even have a design experience?

Answer these two questions. This is homework for you today. :coffee:
 
.
Sancho Aka Biggest troll of LCA thread,

- which country was offering JV to India when India began its first 4th Gen. aircraft R&D(LCA) initiative? (provide links for claims)
- do you think Russia will allow India to join 5th Generation FGFA as JV partner, if we didn't have 4th generation design experience that LCA gave us? If yes, why wouldn't DRDO reduce to a minority partner in that situation, since it won't even have a design experience?

Answer these two questions. This is homework for you today. :coffee:


I would like to add one more thing... if members here are in impression that our guys are working on PAK-FA, they are in illusion... Indian participation in designing airframe is negligible... This deal is like brahmos, but the Work is not like Brahmos...

I doubt if indian can get good hands-on on design part, Therefor to excel the ability of Craft design, AMCA is needed...
 
.
@Mumbai indian

Chill off dude... why getting irritated?? Sancho is not a troll... just debate normally... there is no need to get personal... neither you have seen Sancho nor you both are going to live together for years.. why take personal..
 
.
first it was initially planned by IAF to have as Pulse Doppler Radar on LCA , then phased-array electronic scanning radar and now active array electronic scanning radar ...
but LRDE is lessioning...good , isn't it !!
they did using the isreali micochip 2032 , but i might not be a achivment in the views of few for desine a entire system around that chip..

Still LRDE has developed only pulse doppler Radar.. not even PESA... they are jumping to AESA without doing PESA.... This radar was conceptualized long back...
 
.
Still LRDE has developed only pulse doppler Radar.. not even PESA... they are jumping to AESA without doing PESA.... This radar was conceptualized long back...

Firstly, DRDO has already made AESA and qualified it for flights(AEWACS project). Its primary Radar is AESA and secondary is PESA.

Second, conceptualization and funding are two different things. Conceptualization might be in 1980 but real work starts when funding is approved(1989-LCA).

Work on 'AESA for LCA' project began in August' 2009 and first phase estimate is 2013. This is faster than even western standards.
 
.
@Mumbai indian

Chill off dude... why getting irritated?? Sancho is not a troll... just debate normally... there is no need to get personal... neither you have seen Sancho nor you both are going to live together for years.. why take personal..

Does Sancho need your help? Let him defend his arguments. So far, he is running from my questions. :lol:
 
.
do you think Russia will allow India to join 5th Generation FGFA as JV partner, if we didn't have 4th generation design experience that LCA gave us? If yes, why wouldn't DRDO reduce to a minority partner in that situation, since it won't even have a design experience?

So you think russia included india in the pakfa project because of our experience designing aircraft? :lol: Russia couldn't fund the entire program by themselves. So they were looking for a partner who could share the development costs.
 
.
Firstly, DRDO has already made PESA and qualified it for flights(AEWACS project).

Second, conceptualization and funding are two different things. Conceptualization might be in 1980 but real work starts when funding is approved(1989-LCA).

Work on 'AESA for LCA' project began in August' 2009 and first phase estimate is 2013. This is faster than even western standards.

We are talking about PESA on LCA.. i dont think we have miniaturized PESA... do we have so? can you give me a link...

You are right conceptualization and starting are two different work... when you conceptualize we have whole lot of work to see.. do we have the infra? do we have the man power and skill? and work will start after that provided funding is done .....

so LRDE has been working from 1990's on the radar and in 2005 they where struggling and they have completed only two modules.. so when Israel came work has taken in pace... so we lack the knowledge clearly....

yes in 1990 we didnt have much help.. but we should have brought equipment and latter develope our own to avoid LCA into so much of speculations...
 
.
First of ALL AURA will take 2030 to fly i bet.. even US NGTA will come in service only in 2025 and you expecing AURA to come in 2030 is totaly over confidence.. AURA will be in service in 2040.

As per knowledge UCAV cant replace the role performed by humans.. they cant do effective defending ... they can be used in aggressive place like the Drones used today...

As far as i know ucavs have a lower development cost and unit cost than conventional fighters. They take much less time to develop too. That is why many countries are now developing uavs. So i think the aura is a much better option than the amca. The amca project is just too late. By the time it will be fully developed, it will already be obsolete.

And i think a ucav/uav will be as effective as a conventional fighter. Just because the pilot is on the ground doesn't mean it won't be effective in a particular role. In fact they are imo safer as they don't put the pilot in danger.
 
.
@mumbaiindian

you really need to look up the meaning of the word troll in the dictionary. It does not mean someone who does not agree with your views.
 
.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom