Contrarian
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2006
- Messages
- 11,571
- Reaction score
- 4
Nope, the policy is present in case of helping in validating and refining the test benchmarks as well. Not just for export of technology.US policy kicks in when they have to export technology. Its obvious your claim of 'only testing' is false as there is no export of technology there. Anyway, I proved it otherwise with a reference also.
Like i said, i had not known about involving EADS for consultancy as well. Initially it was planned that they would be hired only for the testing and evaluation phase and minor corrections as there practically cannot be major structural changes.
Maybe, maybe not. I cant give a definitive answer on that. The director of ADA has said that the foreign company was being hired for evaluation and minor refinement process only. For practical reasons, major changes are not possible as it would only lead to more delay.Foreign assistance is not a bad thing. indians should have asked for it way before, and maybe LCA project would have been in a better shape now. It does however, signal that there is a problem that they can't solve themselves right now.
LCA and JF-17 cannot be compared for one reason. JF-17 is soon going to be operational and LCA is not. When LCA does enter operational service, that will be the day to start comparing.I never said its a bad thing...but the point is that this thread is LCA vs JF-17 as of now.
To start with, what you 'design' is not necessarily what you get. Tejas were also design to fly around 1995. They were also 'designed' to be light weight (they are currently overweight by a massive 1.5 tons). They were designed to have more G's,
AoA is short by only by 2 degrees of what was wanted.They were designed to have more AoA.
The engineers working on the project and the project director have said that AoA of one degre short of what is required can be achieved, beyond that would require changes. Currently it is two degrees short.You didn't read my post, did you? It clearly says "there is no further room for improvement" and it will carry " a reduced weapons load" and it CANNOT add to its maneuverability - angle of attack - unless a new engine is fitted and there is NO CHANCE of that happening in the first batch.
I dont think its about face saving. An immense amount of money and research has gone in the LCA project. Over 500 labs are working on the LCA project all over the country. The technologies developed for the LCA project have already started giving spin-offs. It is but obvious, that the LCA would get built in certain numbers so that the users use the product in actual field conditions and evaluate it. The suggestions for changes, improvements and a lot of stuff would get passed on back to ADA so that the next phase or the next plane can rectify these problems. However If it turns out adequate for its needs, then all the better.Whether you like it or not, the first batch of LCAs are nothing more than face-saving, testing and pilot training...but they are far from being combat worthy.
Its not face saving. I hope you understood what im trying to convey here.