KAI KF-21 Boramae (Project KF-X)

[AbRaj]

reminds me of conspiracy theories that come from another country

Amerika Serikat Tak Terima dan Diduga Ingin Gagalkan Indonesia yang Ingin Ciptakan KF-21 Boramae

Indonesia lakukan kerjasama dengan Korea Selatan untuk menciptakan KF-21 Boramae, Namun AS disebut iri dengan hal tersebut

lingkarkediri.pikiran-rakyat.com

The United States does not accept and is suspected of wanting to thwart Indonesia, which wants to create the KF-21 Boramae​

Donna Lia Suhervina
- January 3, 2022, 10:38 WIB

The KF-21 Boramae fighter jet is scheduled to arrive in 2026 /Asian Military Review


LINGKAR KEDIRI – As previously reported, Indonesia wants to develop its own fighter jet, the KF-21 Boramae .
Even in creating the KF-21 Boramae , Indonesia cooperated with South Korea .
However, it seems that Indonesia's desire to create the KF-21 Boramae fighter jet is not easy, because it requires a very big struggle.
Read also: Indonesia is increasingly admired, KF-21 Boramae made by Indonesia is said to be able to defeat the Rafale and F-16
But if the KF-21 Boramae can be created by Indonesia , then Indonesia can become a country capable of developing its own fighter jet.

However, as information has circulated that in the manufacture of the KF-Boramare, the Indonesian engineers were set aside by the United States .
This is because the United States does not want its fighter jet technology to be under Indonesian control .
"Frankly, the Indonesian delegation was prohibited from accessing many parts of the KF-X technology and studies, especially those related to the US ," said an engineer from Korea Aerospace Industries (KAI) who did not want to be named, quoted from Defense News in 2018.
In this case, Washington even deployed its engineers to South Korea , aiming to secure its key technology.
The Korean Aerospace Industries engineer also said that the US engineers deployed to the KAI headquarters tend to be very sensitive about the possibility of leaking US technology to Indonesian workers .

Also read: Russia does not want to send the J-20 engine that China wants to buy, apparently this is the reason

With what the United States has done, it makes Indonesia feel insecure about the capabilities of the KF-21 Boramae that will be created in the future.

“Given that Indonesia provided one-fifth of the cost of developing the KF-X, it would make sense in some ways that Indonesian engineers could feel cramped about engineering excellence through a joint program,” he said.

The act of the United States, apparently, Uncle Sam's country did not accept it and envied Indonesia, which would independently create the KF-21 Boramae .

The US is worried that the KF-21 Boramae will sell well in the market because the price of this Indonesian-made fighter jet is reportedly priced relatively cheaper than the US -made F-35 , so that it will automatically turn off the F-35 market.


Thus, the US very selfishly decided to do everything possible to thwart the creation of the KF-21 Boramae Indonesia .

Disclaimer : This article was originally published on zonajakarta.tangan-rakyat.com under the title " AS is Envy Seeing Indonesia Able To Independently Produce KF-21 Boramae ".

Visit our official website directly at Circlekediri. Mind-rakyat.com to get other interesting and latest information.***

 

[randomradio]

My intention was to show what it took South Korea which is a new entrant in Combat Aviation like India (although they are far ahead in terms of Industrialisation and automation), to develop a Good 4.5+ Gen fighter aircraft.
Just looking at the amount of hand holding done by US companies and the research,prototyping, testing and manufacturing infrastructure, it seems quite a lot.

I highly doubt ADA and HAL in India have such sophisticated testing and manufacturing facilities to build a 4.5 gen plane, let alone their claims of making a true 5th gen fighter jet in the category of F22 or F35.
@Gautam @randomradio what do you think where we stand right now compared to SoKo. And let’s leave the extensive involvement of US companies here.

IMO I’ve never seen such level of airframe testing being done by ADA or HAL during LCA prototype testing.

And have a look at their manufacturing assembly line video and notice the level of automation and use of industrial robots, tools used and their management. Very similar to what we seen in a Hyundai and Kia assembly plants.
There Airframe and Composite manufacturing is much more sophisticated.
Even the rivets they are using is different than what we use @Comrade Bhartiya

Compared to that HAL assembly line looks like a sweat shop with all manual work. Explains why there is so much inconsistency in built quality of LCA.

Great work on the thread. Need sometime to go through it.

HAL's LCA production is also automated. What you are looking at is the final assembly line, which is still the tried and tested manual work due to their manpower heavy structure. Subcontractors are producing the core parts of the jet.

IAF hopes to bring in new tech for AMCA through the private industry, with a non-HAL owned assembly line in Sulur, although HAL has done their best to scuttle that.

 

[suryakiran]

My point was do we have proper testing and validation tools like shown in the KAI and other Korean research labs ? Because I’ve never seen such a sophisticated tools of airframe testing. or that indoor electromagnetic signature testing site and those radar testing tools etc.

Yes we do. Most probably, better than the Koreans. HAL and DRDO have their own labs for the same. In fact, we are now at a stage where private sector is being called in to setup facilities for testing which will be made available for production units and users. A total of 8 different testing categories were identified and of this if I am not mistaken majority are towards aerospace and everything 'E'.

@Milspec

P.S : Nice thread!

 

[AbRaj]

Yes we do. Most probably, better than the Koreans. HAL and DRDO have their own labs for the same. In fact, we are now at a stage where private sector is being called in to setup facilities for testing which will be made available for production units and users. A total of 8 different testing categories were identified and of this if I am not mistaken majority are towards aerospace and everything 'E'.

@Milspec

P.S : Nice thread!

I believe those facilities have been set up with the help of and the toolings are sourced from several US and European companies like (also mentioned on the first page itself)
Curtiss-Wright

Triumph Group

Meggitt

Calspan - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

General Electric

Elbit Systems

Even the AESA radar testing is being done by some South African Company.(HANSOLDT or Reutech Group perhaps)
PS: Interestingly Calspan wind tunnel test facility was where LCA testing was done during the initial design phase.

 

[Sathya]

Great effort!!
And i fully agree with your views.
Probably because of budget.
In case we increase the budget, we can also focus on all aspects I think.

 

[suryakiran]

I believe those facilities have been set up with the help of and the toolings are sourced from several US and European companies like (also mentioned on the first page itself)
Curtiss-Wright

Triumph Group

Meggitt

Calspan - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

General Electric

Elbit Systems

Even the AESA radar testing is being done by some South African Company.(HANSOLDT or Reutech Group perhaps)
PS: Interestingly Calspan wind tunnel test facility was where LCA testing was done during the initial design phase.

Very much possible. In fact, the flight control laws that we speak of today were tested on the F-16 VISTA platform and on the NT-33 simulator. Before this it was tested on a simulator of BAe.

 

[AbRaj]

Very much possible. In fact, the flight control laws that we speak of today were tested on the F-16 VISTA platform and on the NT-33 simulator. Before this it was tested on a simulator of BAe.

We need something like VISTA FTB too apart from our already existing static test facility at ADA. It still is extensively used by LM for testing new control laws.

VISTA gives TPS clearer view of new flight control system

TPS students use F-16 VISTA to test L1 adaptive control system

www.edwards.af.mil

Students at the U.S. Air Force Test Pilot School recently completed testing of an innovative aircraft control system that is intended to add a margin of safety to aviation.



The L1 Adaptive Control System is a software system that, when installed as a backup system in any fly-by-wire aircraft, can quickly learn the aircraft’s flying characteristics and then assist the aircraft in case of a control surface or system failure.



It was designed and built by a professor and two graduate students from the University of Illinois, Urbana Champaign and tested here by a team of TPS students from class 16A.



The TPS team consists of staff advisor Dr. Chris Cotting and five students – test pilots Capt. Daniel Edelstein, Italian Air Force Capt. Raffaele Odesco, French Air Force Maj. Nicolas Langevin and flight test engineers Capt. Craig Porter and Capt. Clark McGehee.



Test Pilot School students earn a master of science degree in flight testing after completing the one-year course.



“In order to get a master's, you need to do a project of some sort,” Cotting said. “Typically you do a master’s thesis. We have our students do a group project. The idea is we want them to take the lessons they’ve learned in how to plan and execute a flight test and actually go do that.”



Since the controller is adaptive, and designed to function on any fly-by-wire aircraft, the traditional flight test process could have been expensive and time consuming. So the class opted to test the system using the NF-16 Variable-stability In-flight Simulator Test Aircraft, known as VISTA.



VISTA is a highly modified F-16 that can simulate the flight characteristics of many other aircraft.



For example, if the aircraft is configured as a C-17, when the pilot operates the flight controls, the aircraft will respond like a C-17, not an F-16.



“We can make the aircraft fly like anything we want within its performance envelope. We have safety trips on it so if the aircraft goes to an attitude we’re uncomfortable with it will trip off and a safety pilot will have the original aircraft to fly safely,” Cotting said.



"This allows us to put research flight control laws on there without having to go through the normal flight test process so we can literally go from basic design, test in a simulator and go fly all in the same day, as opposed to the months it would take to go through normal process," Cotting said. "From a researcher’s point of view, you can see where that could be very advantageous.”



According to Cotting, the L1 controller is a somewhat novel idea in that it doesn’t have to know what the airplane is like that you’re putting it on.



“You give it some basic information about the airplane and the adaptive controller should be able to configure itself to make the aircraft fly like anything I tell it I want to fly like,” he said.



"So in our case we use something called a reference model which is a set of dynamics we would like the airplane to fly," he said. "We tell it some information about the aircraft, but not a lot, and then it goes and sorts out how to make the aircraft fly like the reference set of dynamics.”



Part of the process was to install the controller on VISTA and see if the team's performance predictions were accurate. “We also wanted to test some different configurations of VISTA that are normally unsafe to fly and see how well this controller can recover the aircraft back to a reference set of dynamics that we do think is safe to fly,” Cotting said.



The adaptive control system is designed to work on any fly-by-wire aircraft. Some of the fly-by-wire aircraft at Edwards include the C-17 Globemaster II, the F-16 Falcon, the F-22 Raptor and the F-35 Lightning II. Many aircraft companies, including Boeing and Airbus, are building fly-by-wire aircraft for commercial use as well.



(This article is part two of a series about the L1 Adaptive Control System.)

 

[AbRaj]

Milling Mac

Additive manufacturing/3D printing
GE

TRUMPH

 

[AbRaj]

Milling Mac

Additive manufacturing/3D printing

GE

TRUMPH

Inspection
UT C-Scan equipment

 

[AbRaj]

Composite manufacturing using AFP (Automated Fiber Placement) technology

CRD (Composite Routing Drill)

 

[AbRaj]

FASS (Fuselage Automated Splice System)

LRDS (Large Robot Drilling System)

CAR (Countersink Auto Riveter)

HOW IT WORKS: Aircraft Flush Riveting
Setting Up the Countersink Cutter

 

[AbRaj]

Right now HAL uses manual method of composite manufacturing like GROB
which is highly time consuming and prone to defects

Nowadays the Aerospace industry has moved on to automated AFP technology

like LM it is using KUKA industrial robots.

just look at the gigantic autoclaves used by Airbus for composite manufacturing.

This is the exact same KAI is using for KF21

PS: All of the above tools are available commercially in open markets and can be easily purchased by agencies like HAL

 

[AbRaj]

mTorres AFP Machine by MTorres Spain

Automated fiber placement machine | Torresfiberlayup

Automatic Fiber placement machine specially designed for extremely high speed and high productivity fully automatic process to fabricate high contour or flat carbon fiber parts.

www.mtorres.es

Real-time inspection of AFP

 

[AbRaj]

Some other interesting stuff

Neptune’s propellant tank

 

[Chain Smoker]

We need something like VISTA FTB too apart from our already existing static test facility at ADA. It still is extensively used by LM for testing new control laws.

VISTA gives TPS clearer view of new flight control system

TPS students use F-16 VISTA to test L1 adaptive control system

www.edwards.af.mil

Students at the U.S. Air Force Test Pilot School recently completed testing of an innovative aircraft control system that is intended to add a margin of safety to aviation.



The L1 Adaptive Control System is a software system that, when installed as a backup system in any fly-by-wire aircraft, can quickly learn the aircraft’s flying characteristics and then assist the aircraft in case of a control surface or system failure.



It was designed and built by a professor and two graduate students from the University of Illinois, Urbana Champaign and tested here by a team of TPS students from class 16A.



The TPS team consists of staff advisor Dr. Chris Cotting and five students – test pilots Capt. Daniel Edelstein, Italian Air Force Capt. Raffaele Odesco, French Air Force Maj. Nicolas Langevin and flight test engineers Capt. Craig Porter and Capt. Clark McGehee.



Test Pilot School students earn a master of science degree in flight testing after completing the one-year course.



“In order to get a master's, you need to do a project of some sort,” Cotting said. “Typically you do a master’s thesis. We have our students do a group project. The idea is we want them to take the lessons they’ve learned in how to plan and execute a flight test and actually go do that.”



Since the controller is adaptive, and designed to function on any fly-by-wire aircraft, the traditional flight test process could have been expensive and time consuming. So the class opted to test the system using the NF-16 Variable-stability In-flight Simulator Test Aircraft, known as VISTA.



VISTA is a highly modified F-16 that can simulate the flight characteristics of many other aircraft.



For example, if the aircraft is configured as a C-17, when the pilot operates the flight controls, the aircraft will respond like a C-17, not an F-16.



“We can make the aircraft fly like anything we want within its performance envelope. We have safety trips on it so if the aircraft goes to an attitude we’re uncomfortable with it will trip off and a safety pilot will have the original aircraft to fly safely,” Cotting said.



"This allows us to put research flight control laws on there without having to go through the normal flight test process so we can literally go from basic design, test in a simulator and go fly all in the same day, as opposed to the months it would take to go through normal process," Cotting said. "From a researcher’s point of view, you can see where that could be very advantageous.”



According to Cotting, the L1 controller is a somewhat novel idea in that it doesn’t have to know what the airplane is like that you’re putting it on.



“You give it some basic information about the airplane and the adaptive controller should be able to configure itself to make the aircraft fly like anything I tell it I want to fly like,” he said.



"So in our case we use something called a reference model which is a set of dynamics we would like the airplane to fly," he said. "We tell it some information about the aircraft, but not a lot, and then it goes and sorts out how to make the aircraft fly like the reference set of dynamics.”



Part of the process was to install the controller on VISTA and see if the team's performance predictions were accurate. “We also wanted to test some different configurations of VISTA that are normally unsafe to fly and see how well this controller can recover the aircraft back to a reference set of dynamics that we do think is safe to fly,” Cotting said.



The adaptive control system is designed to work on any fly-by-wire aircraft. Some of the fly-by-wire aircraft at Edwards include the C-17 Globemaster II, the F-16 Falcon, the F-22 Raptor and the F-35 Lightning II. Many aircraft companies, including Boeing and Airbus, are building fly-by-wire aircraft for commercial use as well.



(This article is part two of a series about the L1 Adaptive Control System.)

Such adaptive flight control has been developed for AMCA.

 

[Tatvamasi]

Perhaps you misunderstood but I never said that

There’s nothing fancy about their looks. It’s how proper testing facilities and tools look like. It’s same argument INSAS loving Army fanboys say for anything remotely modern like M4,HK416,Sig 716, and even for modern AK rifles that can use proper aiming and magnification sights and other essential accessories, and for other modern infantry gears like Head protection,NVDs, comms and eye and ear protection, knee pads and sides arms etc etc.

Aviation and Military industry is not a labour intensive industry where you can substitute precision tools with cheap manual labour. Otherwise you will keep importing Ultra expensive Mirages and Rafale and all those expensive US origin military weapons for eternity.
A micrometer level error can cost you a war.

In Precision Manufacturing, excessive labour availability is useless beyond a certain level.

You keep wandering off from the subject and keep extrapolating from unrelated examples.

Aircraft are not built by OFB and there is zero correlation between manufacturing automation and importing rafales.

 

[AbRaj]

You keep wandering off from the subject and keep extrapolating from unrelated examples.

Aircraft are not built by OFB and there is zero correlation between manufacturing automation and importing rafales.

Ok Comrade. It must be true if you are saying so.

 

[AbRaj]

Such adaptive flight control has been developed for AMCA.

Any link to read about that ?

 

[Chain Smoker]

Any link to read about that ?

There is no open source paper but a program was sanctioned.

Non-linear reconfigurable control of aircraft operating at high angles-of-attack (ADA,
Phase I & Phase II).

Now same Algorithms are being developed for ghatak and supersonic UCAV.

 

[AbRaj]

As the KF-21 Boramae awaits its maiden flight, its AESA Radar Performs well during airborne testings - The Aviation Geek Club

As the KF-21 Boramae awaits its maiden flight, its AESA Radar Performs well during airborne testings

theaviationgeekclub.com