LCA Tejas Mk1 & Mk1A - News and discussions

STEPHEN COHEN said:
What is the Ideal speed for Dog Fighting
Click to expand...

The corner speed which allows the fighter to aircraft to retain its full flight envelope is the best speed for dog fighting. All rates and performance including alpha limits and G-limits are calculated from this corner speed. As long as you are close to this speed, you will get best perf from the aircraft. Above and below this speed perf drops.

STEPHEN COHEN said:
Secondly is it Better for A pilot to fire his
Air to Air Missile on the enemy fighter
from a A position of Higher altitude Or
A lower Altitude , that is Relative to the Enemy's s location
Click to expand...
from the point of view of seeker performance, its better to fire missile upwards for an IR seeker but from the point of view of best kill perf and end game energy of the missile, top to below is better. But in real combat, you can never chose this aspect as the situation is extremely fluid and the only aim of a pilot is to get a lock on and fire asap.
 
  • Informative
  • Like
Reactions: Sathya, Pundrick, _Anonymous_ and 1 other person
Bharath said:
the answer is to bring in private players
Click to expand...

The same old simplistic view that is spread in India, that bringing in privat players is the solution, but it's not!

Privat players are profit driven and don't engage into projects, that might be necessary for the forces, but not profitable enough for companies and shareholders as you mentioned.
A good example for this is the Avro replacement, that under the former government was opened up to private players and that the NDA government even further opened, by taking HAL out of the tender. But the result for both governments was, that except of TATA, not a single privat player showed interest and even TATA kept complaining, that the order size wouldn't make a production line profitable. So that requirementent till date, remains stuck.

For privat players, it is easier to simply take over offset works, or production diverted to India, but not related to MoD orders, than investing money into proper R&D. That's why only very few companies so far, are fully committing themselves into the defence field.
You mentioned the Kalyani group and ATAGS. They are a prime example how it should be done, if the industry would be serious on Indian defence!
Kalyani went abroad and bought a whole gun manufacturer, including manufacturing and R&D know how. That is the base of the ATAGS, which is just a modernised varient of the older howitzer.

Mahindra did it in a similar manner, in the aviation field and took over foreign companies to gain know how. That's why they are one of the main prospects for Indian aviation and why the team up with HAL and Boeing, could have major potential.

L&T is investing in own R&D in the naval field, which takes more time to show results, but that's a good move too, just as TATAs investments for the IFV field, Adani looks promising for aviation too.

So there is no simple way and we still see far too little interest and commitment of the privat industry, especially in the aviation sector and that's why we remain reliant on PSUs like HAL and sadly ADA/DRDO. There is no either or for India, we have to improve PSUs und get the privat industry fully committed as well.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: Ashwin, Itachi, suryakiran and 2 others
Sancho said:
The same old simplistic view that is spread in India, that bringing in privat players is the solution, but it's not!

Privat players are profit driven and don't engage into projects, that might be necessary for the forces, but not profitable enough for companies and shareholders as you mentioned.
A good example for this is the Avro replacement, that under the former government was opened up to private players and that the NDA government even further opened, by taking HAL out of the tender. But the result for both governments was, that except of TATA, not a single privat player showed interest and even TATA kept complaining, that the order size wouldn't make a production line profitable. So that requirementent till date, remains stuck.

For privat players, it is easier to simply take over offset works, or production diverted to India, but not related to MoD orders, than investing money into proper R&D. That's why only very few companies so far, are fully committing themselves into the defence field.
You mentioned the Kalyani group and ATAGS. They are a prime example how it should be done, if the industry would be serious on Indian defence!
Kalyani went abroad and bought a whole gun manufacturer, including manufacturing and R&D know how. That is the base of the ATAGS, which is just a modernised varient of the older howitzer.

Mahindra did it in a similar manner, in the aviation field and took over foreign companies to gain know how. That's why they are one of the main prospects for Indian aviation and why the team up with HAL and Boeing, could have major potential.

L&T is investing in own R&D in the naval field, which takes more time to show results, but that's a good move too, just as TATAs investments for the IFV field, Adani looks promising for aviation too.

So there is no simple way and we still see far too little interest and commitment of the privat industry, especially in the aviation sector and that's why we remain reliant on PSUs like HAL and sadly ADA/DRDO. There is no either or for India, we have to improve PSUs und get the privat industry fully committed as well.
Click to expand...

P.S.

Apart of privat players, the Chinese solution with pumping billions into R&D is often given too. But here as well, the truth is, that know how and experience doesn't simply come up, unless you gain it from external sources! Chinas copying policy is well known, but as important than that, they invested heavily in taking over foreign tech companies and their know how! Just as they paid a lot of money for foreign techs, systems and consultancy (fighters, carriers, consultancy to redesign the carrier and nd naval fighters...).

We need to follow that example, but by using our advantage on access to foreign partners and joint developments. Brahmos, Barak 8, FGFA, MTA, or even the Russian input on Arihant shows how important that is and that's where HAL could benefit the most.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Guynextdoor
Sancho said:
P.S.

Apart of privat players, the Chinese solution with pumping billions into R&D is often given too. But here as well, the truth is, that know how and experience doesn't simply come up, unless you gain it from external sources! Chinas copying policy is well known, but as important than that, they invested heavily in taking over foreign tech companies and their know how! Just as they paid a lot of money for foreign techs, systems and consultancy (fighters, carriers, consultancy to redesign the carrier and nd naval fighters...).

We need to follow that example, but by using our advantage on access to foreign partners and joint developments. Brahmos, Barak 8, FGFA, MTA, or even the Russian input on Arihant shows how important that is and that's where HAL could benefit the most.
Click to expand...

@STEPHEN COHEN has clearly said India should aim high and take over Danone.
 
STEPHEN COHEN said:
@random radio @Milspec

Recently. There was a news about Tejas
Auto Low Speed Recovery Trial to happen soon

I wanted to know

What is the Ideal speed for Dog Fighting
In which a Fighter pilot can get in the Best position to fire his AAM

Secondly is it Better for A pilot to fire his
Air to Air Missile on the enemy fighter
from a A position of Higher altitude Or
A lower Altitude , that is Relative to the Enemy's s location
Click to expand...

For Close combat dogfighting, it is all about relative position, and recovery to evade a lock while trying to get a lock on the bogey. So imo it depends on your enemy trajectory speed for you to adjust your own flight characteristics such that you can exploit the most out of your platform. You do not wan't to sacrifice speed for maneuverability, or maneuverability for speed. You want to stay close to your platforms peak performance and deviation from that would be relative to your targets relative position and flight characteristics.

That said, lowering speed to get into a firing position can back fire, as you lose energy and lose altitude, and then there is question of formation and load out, how many airctafts are in play, weather it's hunter killer type formation, and also knowing flight strengths of your enemy's platform. Speed can be an ally, which you can modulate for a lag pursuit, or a pure pursuit as basic fighter maneuvers , or Lag displacement rolls in combination with out of plane maneuvers. Many of basic fighter maneuvers in the day and age of hobs ccm makes traditional maneuvers like immelmann, types of scissors and pure rolls obsolete, but off plane, High Yo Yo and Low yo yo mechanics may help get confident firing position imo, but that again brings in relative speed vs target and optimal speed for getting best aerodynamic characteristics pertinent to the maneuver.
 
  • Like
Reactions: STEPHEN COHEN and Shekhar Singh
Screenshot_20181128-161256_Facebook.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sancho, TARGET, randomradio and 3 others
vstol Jockey said:
For a pure delta, it is still very high. This shows how badly the aircraft is under powered.
Click to expand...
why dont you put a comparative analysis of tejas features
like
excellent ,good,average ,poor
so that we all can get benefit of your wisdom
my source of info usually comes from vayu magazine which present it as utterly incompetent aircraft
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom