Tejas(LCA)- Setting the record straight

[Storm Force]

Firstly the indians have found out the hard way (just like the Israelis with the lavi project) that without massive already aero nautical engineering base and huge $$$ budget its near impossible to build a near 100% indengious fighter esp a 4 generation war plane.

India should have gone with the russians on a joint project just like pakistan has with JF17 thunder.

Its believed the russians did offer to develope a single engined baby SU30 CALLED su50 which india declined 10 years ago.

On the plus side failure or no failure india now has a real fighter development
infrastructure having set up all the workshops technology from the tejas programme.

Pakistan despite their chest pumping have none of this set up as yet.

JF17 has started a decade later and nearly achieved FOC.. In contrast LCA tejas is 4 years away from FOC.

IN THE LONG RUN THOUGH ,,,,,,india will catch up and go past the PAC and the pakistanis by virtue of $$$ budget and far more overseas cooperation in the near future both FGFA programme and the MMRCA will benefit indians greatly in next 10 years.

 

[Adios Amigo]

IN THE LONG RUN THOUGH ,,,,,,india will catch up and go past the PAC and the pakistanis by virtue of $$$ budget and far more overseas cooperation in the near future both FGFA programme and the MMRCA will benefit indians greatly in next 10 years.

the only words in your post which make some sense

 

[Novice09]

What have u tested for LCA, One Astra ,One R-73, Under powered Kaveri,
& 1000 Tests Flights, thats it

JF-17 is junk according to Indians but Still Indians cried so much over RD-93 tsk tsk Sad na

Oh Yes that's it and still under trials... Happy. can you provide such list for JF 17 and please don't include dumb bombs in that list.

@emo_girl

I'm Still waiting for your help to get the list of ammunition tested on JF17 FJ. This will surly help me to increase my knowledge about this FJ. Your cooperation and under standing is highly appreciated.

 

[mrwarrior006]

originally posted bi adeos amigos
the only words in your post which make some sense

na every thing makes sense otherwise u wouldn have been able to understand and to reply to post

On the plus side failure or no failure india now has a real fighter development
infrastructure having set up all the workshops technology from the tejas programme

any one can say tat tis does makes sense as india has benifited from this a lot in infrastructure and technology after all nothing can be made perfect in one instance have u heard about upgradation adeos

 

[unicorn148]

one thing is sure in the future India will make its own planes because its has gained a vast experience by developing the LCA and pakisthan has depend on china or other countries for its fighters where as india will develops its own systems

 

[Join]

one thing is sure in the future India will make its own planes because its has gained a vast experience by developing the LCA and pakisthan has depend on china or other countries for its fighters where as india will develops its own systems

hey lets just wait and take those insults which are presented to us by our neighbours, well we are trying to get one done and still improving our defense 100 times better than them, they are not working out anything and still lagging behind us..... They started comparing JF-17 to LCA as if they built it, well can they compare it with Sukhoi MKI? never can they..... J-10 too is no where near sukhoi 30 MKI

 

[ejaz007]

Liten if u read my post and didn't jump to conclusions.

I made no mention of the JF-17 being a reinvention of an older project.

ALL i have said was that, The Chinese who had just built a plane of their own, were on hand to ensure that the JF-17 would be completed with as less problems as possible.

And i attributed that this was the reason why the JF-17 had no delays.

The amount of R&D done for the JF-17 was significantly lower than that of the LCA which involved starting from scratch to design every aspect of the craft, With technologies That India never had. Sure it did not go according to plan but we still did most of it.

We have an Indigenous system for every aspect of the plane.

Your argument is flawed.

If one looks closely and observes the changes in JF-17 has gone through one realizes that it was a new project and has gone through changes during the testing phase. One can not say that since China had prior experience of R&D on fighter projects it managed to complete the project in time.

Have a look at the US F-22 and F-35 projects both have huge cost escalations associated with them. US has the most experience in R&D related to fighters. Why they failed to complete the projects within budgeted amounts. Even India has prior experience of R&D on Maruts. Why they failed?

The bottom line is that JF-17 is a well managed project and should be appreciated.

 

[gogbot]

Your argument is flawed.

If one looks closely and observes the changes in JF-17 has gone through one realizes that it was a new project and has gone through changes during the testing phase. One can not say that since China had prior experience of R&D on fighter projects it managed to complete the project in time.

Have a look at the US F-22 and F-35 projects both have huge cost escalations associated with them. US has the most experience in R&D related to fighters. Why they failed to complete the projects within budgeted amounts. Even India has prior experience of R&D on Maruts. Why they failed?

The bottom line is that JF-17 is a well managed project and should be appreciated.

one crucial difference

The American stealth fighters were all new technology.
That means huge amounts of R&D

The JF-17 is not cutting edge.
Its development did not require huge amounts of new technology
Its capabilities are tailored to be Pakistan's J-10.

You didn't develop a new engine
you went with an existing model.

In fact what major technology had to be newly developed specifically for the JF-17.
Most of its R&D was developing variant's of existing technology the Chinese already had.

Correct me if i am mistaken but, other than the avionics suit, was there any R&D for new tech.

 

[TaimiKhan]

you went with an existing model.

I am highly intrigued to know which existing model did the JF-17 got copied from ?? Plz enlighten me and us as which aircraft in active service has DSI intakes and JF-17 copied that from, don't mention F-35 as its in testing phase and for Pakistan or China getting DSI information from somewhere else.

 

[wangrong]

one crucial difference

The American stealth fighters were all new technology.
That means huge amounts of R&D

The JF-17 is not cutting edge.
Its development did not require huge amounts of new technology
Its capabilities are tailored to be Pakistan's J-10.

You didn't develop a new engine
you went with an existing model.

In fact what major technology had to be newly developed specifically for the JF-17.
Most of its R&D was developing variant's of existing technology the Chinese already had.

Correct me if i am mistaken but, other than the avionics suit, was there any R&D for new tech.

In fact,J10B's DSI intakes technology come from JF17

 

[ssheppard]

I am highly intrigued to know which existing model did the JF-17 got copied from ?? Plz enlighten me and us as which aircraft in active service has DSI intakes and JF-17 copied that from, don't mention F-35 as its in testing phase and for Pakistan or China getting DSI information from somewhere else.

Divertless Supersonic Intakes (DSI) is an air intake that was designed for supersonic flight regime, so the plane doesn´t need to have any variable-geometry airintake, that´s why it is called DSI. In supersoniv flight regime, it is hard for an airplane to turn, especially kulbit. In order to gain airflow to the engine, most fighters uses variable-geometry air intakes, or moving air intakes that we could found in F-22, or Su-27, or MiG-29, or any other fighters. Fighter such like F-35 doesn´t need any moving parts because it uses DSI. DSI automatically gain airflow to the engine in supersonic flight regime. The DSI traces its roots to work done by Lockheed Martin engineers in the early 1990s as part of an independent research and development project called the Advanced Propulsion Integration project. The concept was developed and refined with Lockheed Martin-proprietary computer modeling tools made possible by advances in Computational Fluid Dynamics, or CFD. CFD is the science of determining a numerical solution to the governing equations of fluid flow and advancing this solution through space or time to describe a complete flow field of interest—in this case, the flow field of a fighter forebody, inlet, and inlet duct.

CFD, considered a branch of fluid dynamics, provides a cost-effective means of simulating airflow. The development of more powerful computers has furthered CFD advances to the point that it has become the preferred means of evaluating aerodynamic designs.

Basic research of the inlet concept continued through the mid-1990s. Traditional wind tunnel testing of small plastic inlet models built with stereolithographic techniques augmented a CFD-based development process for the DSI. Engineers made enough technical advances during this period that two US patent applications were filed, one dealing with the overall design and the second dealing with the integration process of the new technology. (Both patents were granted in 1998.) The diverterless inlet designs built and tested with this combination of CFD and small-scale wind tunnel models formed a database of inlet configurations that would subsequently prove valuable to the Lockheed Martin JSF desi.

I hope it helps, have a nice day!

 

[TaimiKhan]

Divertless Supersonic Intakes (DSI) is an air intake that was designed for supersonic flight regime, so the plane doesn´t need to have any variable-geometry airintake, that´s why it is called DSI. In supersoniv flight regime, it is hard for an airplane to turn, especially kulbit. In order to gain airflow to the engine, most fighters uses variable-geometry air intakes, or moving air intakes that we could found in F-22, or Su-27, or MiG-29, or any other fighters. Fighter such like F-35 doesn´t need any moving parts because it uses DSI. DSI automatically gain airflow to the engine in supersonic flight regime. The DSI traces its roots to work done by Lockheed Martin engineers in the early 1990s as part of an independent research and development project called the Advanced Propulsion Integration project. The concept was developed and refined with Lockheed Martin-proprietary computer modeling tools made possible by advances in Computational Fluid Dynamics, or CFD. CFD is the science of determining a numerical solution to the governing equations of fluid flow and advancing this solution through space or time to describe a complete flow field of interest—in this case, the flow field of a fighter forebody, inlet, and inlet duct.

CFD, considered a branch of fluid dynamics, provides a cost-effective means of simulating airflow. The development of more powerful computers has furthered CFD advances to the point that it has become the preferred means of evaluating aerodynamic designs.

Basic research of the inlet concept continued through the mid-1990s. Traditional wind tunnel testing of small plastic inlet models built with stereolithographic techniques augmented a CFD-based development process for the DSI. Engineers made enough technical advances during this period that two US patent applications were filed, one dealing with the overall design and the second dealing with the integration process of the new technology. (Both patents were granted in 1998.) The diverterless inlet designs built and tested with this combination of CFD and small-scale wind tunnel models formed a database of inlet configurations that would subsequently prove valuable to the Lockheed Martin JSF desi.

I hope it helps, have a nice day!

Thx dear, this i and many know long before but still thx for a refresher.

By the way kindly read my post, i did not asked what DSI is, i meant for gogbot that while replying plzz don't say that Pakistan or China got the DSI ready made information from someone and applied it in JF-17.

 

[Chanakyaa]

Well Well, I jumped here to see if whats going on with LCA but all the way i can see only JF17 Detailed Discussions!!!
Amazing.
Any shepeherd giving some real Info here.. Nice.

 

[gogbot]

I am highly intrigued to know which existing model did the JF-17 got copied from ?? Plz enlighten me and us as which aircraft in active service has DSI intakes and JF-17 copied that from, don't mention F-35 as its in testing phase and for Pakistan or China getting DSI information from somewhere else.

You are using a Russian Engine aren't you.
That's all meant. By existing model.
If you would read the post, you would see that was only referring to the Engine.

Stop Paraphrasing all your quotes, to better make the point.

And frankly, why is it so hard for you to believe that since the Chinese had just made a plane of their own.
All that experience and problem solving came into effect. when creating the JF-17.
And that had positive gains.

 

[Kuuba]

Good job. Wish those little problems could be resolved smoothly so no more MRCA needed.