Can you go into details about this. I remember the original talk was we'd get the 36 flyaway Rafales and then negotiate a deal for 150+ Rafales to be made in India for IAF and IN, but then all that stuff ran into plenty of complications. So what sort of deal is Macron hoping to reach this time, and what's the status of the grand MII agreement/order?
IAF Chronicles - A side view of whats going on behind the closed doors in New Delhi
- Thread starter Aashish
- Start date
- Status
Can you go into details about this. I remember the original talk was we'd get the 36 flyaway Rafales and then negotiate a deal for 150+ Rafales to be made in India for IAF and IN, but then all that stuff ran into plenty of complications. So what sort of deal is Macron hoping to reach this time, and what's the status of the grand MII agreement/order?
Agreed. But, Indian programme got funds only of 400 million dollars since 1994 to 2014 for Kaveri engine. This is too little considering that India had no engine before and everything had to be developed from scratch.
In Aero India 2009, Mohan Rao, head of GTRE had told that the problem with Kaveri engine is that the government is not releasing funds for infrastructure and test beds. In 2011, he was arrested for some completely trivial personal matter and shifted out of GTRE giving this excuse.
The bigger issues in the core is not as big as you want it to be. The real problem comes with funding itself. Acoustic instability and many other issues can be resolved by reiterating again and again if there is enough access to funds.
India can definitely acquire samples but to make an engine using rhenium alloy when mass production is not possible due to its availability will make no sense. It is important to have prototype which is mass producible once matured. Without rhenium and CMC, TWR with after burner can't exceed 8. CMC technology has not matured yet and hence rhenium alloy is the only way to get high TWR. There is a difficult alternative as in F135 whereby counter-rotating turbines are used to remove weight of stator but that has its own disadvantages and is very difficult to make.
I always knew that with very small changes we can hit upto 150KN on Kaveri as it is a very leaky engine by design and also very compact with just 3.5m length. It is variable cycle and this means that if you remove flat rating, it can easily be certified to much higher thrust like contemporary engines.
Imagine the foolishness of IAF. They created MMRCA category to remove SU-35 from competition and now want Rafale-XL which will hit over 30tons in MTOW with a nearly new aircraft. jai Ho Bhartiya vayu Sena kee. All stinking air with no force.
100kn engine for Mk1A is good ,
About the fuel consumption, will be at par with Ge414 or better ?
French say No to 1xx Kn engine integration in Rafale
Or the engine itself , cause we can install in Su30 earlier .
Fuel consumption will be superior to even EJ-200 for the upgraded Kaveri. The bypass ratio is likely to remain 0.5 so expect an SFC in the region of 0.72lbs/lbs/hr.
Bypass ratio of 0.5 will make it a big engine - something like the commercial ones. The jet engines are specifically designed to be low bypass ones
commercial engines have bypass ratio of 6-12. Most russian fighter engines have a bypass ratio of 0.5.
Dear Sir
How will the Recent Rafale Controversy initiated By Congress Party affect the MII
Deal
If DRAL Gets the Contract as it is most Likely then the whole Controversy only gets Bigger
Whereby It will be Questioned that Why HAL and DA could not enter into a JV and that
Modi is Favouring Ambani
What is Realistically possible before 2019 is what we should be really looking at
Is there a reason why Mk1A needs a 95KN engine when even the 90KN engine will give it a very high TWR even if the empty weight comes down to 6T, let alone if the aircraft achieves a much better empty weight?
DRAL will start MII in some form or the other in case they win MRCBF or even a second tranche of 36 from the IAF. Congress can't do anything while being in the opposition.
Officially, they will have to wait for TE MII tender.
TWR is a comparative thing. The TWR as applicable to F-16 can't be a benchmark for LCA which has a very low wing loading and a very high wetted area. Drag of an aircraft is also associated with its wetted area. Most tailless Delta planforms have high ITR but very poor STR as the drag rises rapidly with Alpha. They need very low thrust for high speed cruise but need very high energy for sustained fight. I stated 95KN for LCA to give it same TWR as Typhoon at combat weight after undergoing reduction in weight of 7-800kgs. My equation is= 5750kgs empty weight+1200 kgs as fuel weight+900kgs for 4xIDerbyER+2xASRAAM with pylons and rails making it a total of 7850kgs. The TWR with 95KN engine will be (95000/9.81)/7850=1.23.
In the present empty weight of 6500kgs and 90KN thrust, the TWR will be just 1.06 and with 95KN it will be marginally higher at 1.126.
The engine for Mk2 and Mk1 (including MK1A) are to be the same. So, it is unnecessary to make 2 engines for 90 and 100kN ones. Moreover, larger engines will enable higher payloads and MToWs
My point is do we really need Typhoon class TWR?
With the same calculations as above, LCA Mk1A with 90KN engines will have a considerable TWR advantage compared to M-2000C. And LCA is only restricted to the same flight envelope as the M-2000C. So can you explain how the LCA will have an advantage with a higher TWR than that?
Higher TWR for LCA will give it the most formidable STR and sustained fight capability in combat. This will also help in shortening the take off run as tailless delta designs are known for very poor field performance.
The present shape and size of LCA itself can be upgraded and strengthened or the present over engineered airframe retained to allow for higher take off weights with improved engine. Many options will open up with higher thrust engine.
Interesting article there. It is highly possible for it to be true. But the problem is the author is a very old F-35 fanboy. Here's proof:
Ajai Shukla: Scrap the MMRCA, buy US F-35s
So we need to wait for other news agencies to pick it up and obviously we need to see actual movement from official channels, like an Expression of Interest or something similar.
But, if true, what this shows is the govt has changed their target from the F-16 to the F-35 because both govts have been looking at doing something very big to cement a strategic partnership. Considering the recent bon homie between the two countries under Trump and Modi (both right wingers), it is a really good move and is definitely a better option compared to F-16 and Gripen.
The FGFA/F-35 combo is going to be really beautiful.
- Status