What's new

HAL Tejas | Updates, News & Discussions

Status
Not open for further replies.
Personally for me except for the absence of IRST, this is on expected lines (though I was hoping against hope that they would some how integrate wingtip pylons, thus taking up the number of hardpoints).

And there is no use in simply adding so many capabilities to your second line of defence. Let them iron out the chinks in the Mk1 and give a well rounded product as a Mk2, a true 4 th Gen fighter, and mass produce them as a worthy replacement to the Migs.

Having done that, let DRDO/ADE/HAL concentrate their energies on the real game --- AMCA.

No use in spending too much money/time/energy on Mk2 , IMHO.
 
.
we can't make 25+ years go to waste, first we need to make visibly appealing by broadening the design, and changing the Air intakes making them larger can do that, as for the internal components there are top of the line stuff...

I say we export them to smaller countries like sri lanka, ecuador, and little markets that would love these compact fighters.... we do business better than Chinese because all our components are accountable, unlike the chinese they have stolen technology... they sell that stuff countries like Russia and U.S. are get on there @$$ abou that
 
.
we can't make 25+ years go to waste, first we need to make visibly appealing by broadening the design, and changing the Air intakes making them larger can do that, as for the internal components there are top of the line stuff...

I say we export them to smaller countries like sri lanka, ecuador, and little markets that would love these compact fighters.... we do business better than Chinese because all our components are accountable, unlike the chinese they have stolen technology... they sell that stuff countries like Russia and U.S. are get on there @$$ abou that
Personally for me except for the absence of IRST, this is on expected lines (though I was hoping against hope that they would some how integrate wingtip pylons, thus taking up the number of hardpoints).

And there is no use in simply adding so many capabilities to your second line of defence. Let them iron out the chinks in the Mk1 and give a well rounded product as a Mk2, a true 4 th Gen fighter, and mass produce them as a worthy replacement to the Migs.

Having done that, let DRDO/ADE/HAL concentrate their energies on the real game --- AMCA.

No use in spending too much money/time/energy on Mk2 , IMHO.
 
.
we can't make 25+ years go to waste, first we need to make visibly appealing by broadening the design, and changing the Air intakes making them larger can do that, as for the internal components there are top of the line stuff...

First let me start by saying this is not a 25+ year project. The funding for the project started well into the 90s.

Secondly, by any stretch of imagination, LCA are not going to the frontline fighter of the IAF. We have the MKIs, FGFA,MRCA and in the future AMCA for the job. They will be he second line of defence and IMHO no need to waste your precious funds/time/energy on such aircraft.

Instead concentrate fully on the real prize with the lessons learnt in developing Tejas - AMCA.

I say we export them to smaller countries like sri lanka, ecuador, and little markets that would love these compact fighters.... we do business better than Chinese because all our components are accountable, unlike the chinese they have stolen technology... they sell that stuff countries like Russia and U.S. are get on there @$$ abou that

With an initial production rate of 8 per annum which will be augumented to about 13 per annum , HAL has barely the capacity to satisfy our own requirements and you are talking about exports. And that too when the market is saturated with cheap yet good fighters from Russia, China etc.

And frankly no one gives a dip$hit if the fighter has some stlen technology as long as it shoots down enemy planes and is within their budget.

India has a long way to go and you cant expect your first figter to be the top of the shelf,yet economical to satisfy all your own requirements in time and export them too.

No one has managed it yet --not US,not Russia and not China. They are there where they are after decades and decades of aircraft manufacturing and refining existing fighters.
 
.
And frankly no one gives a dip$hit if the fighter has some stlen technology as long as it shoots down enemy planes and is within their budget.

India has a long way to go and you cant expect your first figter to be the top of the shelf,yet economical to satisfy all your own requirements in time and export them too.

No one has managed it yet --not US,not Russia and not China. They are there where they are after decades and decades of aircraft manufacturing and refining existing fighters.



regardless of your pessimism, how do you think India supplied Hal Dhruv's and other heli's... hey man you don't think the U.S. can sell there choppers to sri lanka or Ecuador... the reason they don't see them is because there market is too small for U.S. and Russia... China hasn't proven anything with there j-17 or j-10.... I don't think theres has been any combat proven results, licenses agreements called TOT is all it's about, the dip $hit you referred to why do you think we are going around begging for TOT we can be just like China and copy .... but our goal is export and i believe Hal Dhruv and Bramhos are succesfull products. Let HAL expand it's infrastructure, and we will incorporate and expand our export sector based on supply and demand, not an impossible task...

Mk-2 will be a solid fighter, we can't just skip ahead to AMCA, we need experience we are Acheaving that through experimenting LCA and MK-2 will feature composite material which is the same material that AMCA will be using... so slowly we build our capability, don't rule our selves out
 
.
Personally for me except for the absence of IRST, this is on expected lines (though I was hoping against hope that they would some how integrate wingtip pylons, thus taking up the number of hardpoints).

And there is no use in simply adding so many capabilities to your second line of defence. Let them iron out the chinks in the Mk1 and give a well rounded product as a Mk2, a true 4 th Gen fighter, and mass produce them as a worthy replacement to the Migs.

Having done that, let DRDO/ADE/HAL concentrate their energies on the real game --- AMCA.

No use in spending too much money/time/energy on Mk2 , IMHO.


See and that is the problem! We didn't finished the first and jump into the next anybody how really believe that we can now develop AMCA, because LCA got IOC and we have some very basic models of AMCA is simply dreaming (I mean it in general Karthic, just because I see many of such comments now) !
Lets see the facts:

- LCA still design issues
- no knowledge in stealth design
- Kaveri has not even enough power for LCA, let alone AMCA
- No AESA radar and no co-development fixed
- No own advanced avionics
- Lack of advanced testing facilities (we have to send Kaveri to Russia to test them, how do we expect to develop and test TVC for example? What about facilities to test RCS?)

Bottom line is, so far we lack in all neccesary point to for 4.5 gen features, let alone 5. gen. All these issues must be solved first, we have to understand what went wrong in the planing and development stage, let alone all the issues we will meet during the operational stage. Developing LCA alone is not everything, we have to operate and maintain it. Have to place the supply routes and even improve it, because no matter of the delays, LCA will stay in service for 3, or 4 decades as well.

Also don't forget that before AMCA, there is FGFA we need to develop and that is way more important!
 
.
See and that is the problem! We didn't finished the first and jump into the next anybody how really believe that we can now develop AMCA, because LCA got IOC and we have some very basic models of AMCA is simply dreaming (I mean it in general Karthic, just because I see many of such comments now) !
Lets see the facts:

- LCA still design issues
- no knowledge in stealth design
- Kaveri has not even enough power for LCA, let alone AMCA
- No AESA radar and no co-development fixed
- No own advanced avionics
- Lack of advanced testing facilities (we have to send Kaveri to Russia to test them, how do we expect to develop and test TVC for example? What about facilities to test RCS?)

Bottom line is, so far we lack in all neccesary point to for 4.5 gen features, let alone 5. gen. All these issues must be solved first, we have to understand what went wrong in the planing and development stage, let alone all the issues we will meet during the operational stage. Developing LCA alone is not everything, we have to operate and maintain it. Have to place the supply routes and even improve it, because no matter of the delays, LCA will stay in service for 3, or 4 decades as well.

Also don't forget that before AMCA, there is FGFA we need to develop and that is way more important!

Give them the benefit of doubt, you don't think we can't borrow vital design , basic functions, and other valuable information from the T-50/FGFA project.... we hold 50% stake in the project, that being said we WILL learn some very important stealth feature when we closely work Sukhoi on developing our version!!!!!

on top of that LCA our engineers will have a clean slate to work with, no more back tracking that they did....

hey reverse engineering IS EASYYYYYY, like the J-xx, i bet you anything asides from looks that J-xx has no 5th gen components whats so ever
our AMCA will built from ground up with the best and brightest!
 
.
Give them the benefit of doubt, you don't think we can't borrow vital design , basic functions, and other valuable information from the T-50/FGFA project.... we hold 50% stake in the project, that being said we WILL learn some very important stealth feature when we closely work Sukhoi on developing our version!!!!

First of all, we own 50%, but can contribute only 25 to 30%, exactly because of the lack of knowledge, but yes we will gain much of that project. However to gain from it, we have to be fully involved in it first and that is just happening now. How should we gain from FGFA, that is said to be ready in 2017 and at the same time integrate the knowledge into AMCA? Such an early start of AMCA says just one thing, they already see LCA MK2 as a stop gap for AMCA only and won't develop it to full potential. Bad idea imo and for the wrong reasons anyway!
 
.
First of all, we own 50%, but can contribute only 25 to 30%, exactly because of the lack of knowledge, but yes we will gain much of that project. However to gain from it, we have to be fully involved in it first and that is just happening now. How should we gain from FGFA, that is said to be ready in 2017 and at the same time integrate the knowledge into AMCA? Such an early start of AMCA says just one thing, they already see LCA MK2 as a stop gap for AMCA only and won't develop it to full potential. Bad idea imo and for the wrong reasons anyway!

Wake up, yesterday isn't the same thing as today, today wont be the same as tommorow... our economy touched 1.5 trillion, by the end of this year we will be 1.71.... by end of 2014 or 2015 we will be a 2 trillion dollar economy... our singh has invested 1 trillion dollars in infrastrcuture ,,,, we ARE MAKING PROGERESS....
Like wise, i am sure HAL , DRDO, ADA and TATA, Mahindra, and other major roles private and non-private are taking defence seriously with expansion from MMRCA and TOT's , massive experience and funding!!!!

2 trillion dollars economy can crank out an AMCA, and BJP party will make SURE WE WILL!!!!! We will get back the black money stashed in foreign banks, be more agressive against china and pak on kashmir...
We are slowly but surely creating a power house

LONG LIVE INDIA:):cool:
 
.
From Pandoras post:
http://www.defence.pk/forums/india-defence/79898-aero-india-2011-a-34.html#post1479516


KrishG wrote:
Spoke with Mr. Vinod Kumar, Navy Mk-2 Program director.

* There is 5% increase in the intake in the Mk-2. I cannot remember whether he said it was increase in area or diameter. There will be no major changes in the intake shapes for the Mk-2.

* The empty weight of Mk-1 is 6550 kg. He said he expects the Mk-2 empty weight to be
around 125-150 kg more than that of Mk-1. That gives a figure of ~6700 kg

* AESA is NOT included in the Mk-2. He said that LRDE is working on a AESA and was optmistic that they could put it on Mk-2 as a future upgrade. He expects the Mk-2 to have the MMR during the initial batches.

* On the design optimization on Mk-2, he told me to take pictures of the Mk-1 model undercarriage and Mk-2 model's undecarriage and compare them. I'll post the picture I took.

The two bulges on the M-2 undercarriage are indeed MLG housings. He was saying something about the MLG being moved further back in Mk-2 to increase stability (This one point I can't remember properly)

* He did say that the Mk-2 would have additional fuel capacity but didn't mention the exact number of litres.

* I asked why weren't any wingtip pylons added on Mk-2 to which he said that that would require strengthening the wing structure, which has it's own set of complications, and reiterated that the focus of Mk-2 is to optimize the design.

* I thought I noticed an increase in the tail canting. I didn't ask him about this.


IF these points are true, there are several questions!

No major changes at the air intakes and just a 5% increase needed. If so how will they do it?

Secondly MK1 was reported to have issues at speed, AoA and if I remember correctly turn rates, but it already had a good TWR. So now with no major changes at MK2s airframe and just increased thrust, is that the solution for all these problems?

AESA radar, very big blow imo and if they keep counting on LRDE alone it is ridiculous, because they are one of the main reason for the delays. They had little experience with MMRs and also have now with AESAs, so how will they do it alone?

And the point that I don't understand at all is, why the he... do they need 3 to 5 years to get these few changes ready? The only real change is the fuselage, that will house the engine and air intakes, but why does it need 3 years till it can make the first flight?
AESA co-development was aimed on 3 - 4 years, so why can't it be integrated into MK2?

Very strange decisions and not fitting to several of the earlier official statements!
 
.
From Pandoras post:
http://www.defence.pk/forums/india-defence/79898-aero-india-2011-a-34.html#post1479516





IF these points are true, there are several questions!

1.No major changes at the air intakes and just a 5% increase needed. If so how will they do it?

2.Secondly MK1 was reported to have issues at speed, AoA and if I remember correctly turn rates, but it already had a good TWR. So now with no major changes at MK2s airframe and just increased thrust, is that the solution for all these problems?

3.AESA radar, very big blow imo and if they keep counting on LRDE alone it is ridiculous, because they are one of the main reason for the delays. They had little experience with MMRs and also have now with AESAs, so how will they do it alone?

4.And the point that I don't understand at all is, why the he... do they need 3 to 5 years to get these few changes ready? The only real change is the fuselage, that will house the engine and air intakes, but why does it need 3 years till it can make the first flight?
AESA co-development was aimed on 3 - 4 years, so why can't it be integrated into MK2?

Very strange decisions and not fitting to several of the earlier official statements!


Nice to see some corroboration to my Post no. 44 (here).


1. They are going to retain the shape of the inlets while increasing the radius.

2. There will be some tweaking of the airframe for improving aerodynamic performance, I've been assured of that.

3. LRDE is now the nodal centre for AESA tech in India. Given their recent success with the AESA radars in aew and BMD programs, they have been entrusted with X band too.

Also, they will not be going alone, EADS or Elta is supposed to help.

This project will take four years and until they get some emphatic results the progress will not be declared, nor it will be integrated with the LCA program. This has been done to maintain the timelines for the LCA mk 2.

4. This question along with the IRST has been an enigma to me too. I will try to find some source who can clarify.

No chance for info on IRST, though. I was stonewalled in my attempts to get any info about it.
 
.
Great article by Mr. Shukla of Broadsword!

Men and their flying machine: a day at the National Flight Test Centre with the pilots who test fly the Tejas



IMGA0025_4.jpg




The headphone crackles in his ears as Wing Commander Pranjal Singh looks out from the cockpit of his Tejas Light Combat Aircraft, codenamed LSP-3, at the sun-baked runway stretching ahead. Once again he blesses the Indian designers who built the Tejas cockpit: in the Sukhoi-30MKI that he flew before test pilot school, he would have been dripping sweat.

“Trims neutral, brakes okay, all systems go from telemetry,” says Group Captain Toffeen’s calm voice.

Toffeen and his flight test engineers in the telemetry room of the National Flight Test Centre will monitor every system in Pranjal’s aircraft right through the flight, poring over radio data transmitted from LSP-3’s vitals. No patient in intensive care is watched so closely. Any serious glitch means aborting the mission.

“Confirm, monitored,” Pranjal acknowledges.

Toffeen clears him to go: “Take off with max AB, rotation at two-four-zero.” In test pilot jargon, that means take off at full throttle (maximum afterburner), rotating the joystick to get airborne at 240 kilometres per hour.

“LSP-3, ready for take-off,” says Pranjal to Air Traffic Control, which clears every aircraft.

The ATC is prompt: “LSP-3, cleared for take-off, wind 270, ten knots.”

Pranjal guns his engine to full power and the Tejas hurtles forward, the acceleration driving him backwards into his seat. In seconds he is at 200 kmph… 220… 240… and, as he pulls the stick, LSP-3 is sweetly airborne and climbing fast. This is the moment that every fighter pilot lives for.

But Pranjal is more than a combat fighter pilot, operating within tested and certified performance limits. As a test pilot for the Tejas LCA programme, his job is to push the performance envelope of India’s new fighter, checking how it reacts as he nudges it into uncharted territory.

“Each flight is a mission into the unknown,” explains Air Commodore Rohit Varma, Project Director, Flight Testing. Rohit, a tall, greying veteran who has spent a lifetime flying the unforgiving MiG-21 fighter, explains how each test flight deliberately takes the Tejas faster, slower or higher than it has ever been before, or on a mission like firing rockets or missiles, which could shut down the fighter’s engine by sucking up all available oxygen.

Business Standard is at the National Flight Test Centre (NFTC) in Bangalore to spend time with the pilots who test the Tejas, India’s first attempt to build a modern “fourth-generation” fighter aircraft. Since the first fledgling Tejas lurched into the sky in 2001, they have flown it to the limits of its flight envelope, but without rashly endangering the aircraft. While there are disasters in almost every fighter development programme, the Indian MoD’s zero-risk approach would make a Tejas crash a programme-threatening disaster.

Finely honed judgement is the first hallmark of a test pilot. Chatting with these men in the briefing room, I am struck by their maturity. This is no bunch of swaggering top guns, but experienced professionals in whom brash youth has given way to an impressive calm that must prevail in a life-threatening flight emergency.



IMGA0013_5.jpg


Group Captain George Thomas, built like a bull, has commanded a squadron of Su-30MKIs. Group Captain Ritu Raj Tyagi, the most experienced of the group and a former Jaguar combat commander, ran the last Mumbai marathon as a diversion from flight testing. Captain Jaideep Maolankar, who cut his teeth flying Sea Harrier fighters off naval aircraft carriers, commanded warship INS Ganga as it chased pirates off the Somali coast. Group Captain Venugopal, like Varma, has commanded a MiG-21 squadron on the Pakistani border.

Even Pranjal, the baby of the team, is by conventional standards a veteran pilot, having commanded a Sukhoi-30MKI squadron. Now learning the ropes at the NTFC, he will extensively test the first two Tejas fighters that Hindustan Aeronautics Limited delivers to the IAF this year.

The LSP-3 streaks into the sky. Pranjal’s mission is to test a new smoke winder--an under-wing pod that trails smoke. The device will help the NFTC test the Tejas’ reaction when it flies into a jet wake, a deadly 250-kmph blast of air emitted by a jet engine flying ahead.

Jet streams confuse fly-by-wire fighters like the Tejas, which are kept stable by on-board computers. Swedish company Saab crashed one of their Gripen fighters during testing when it flew into one. But these NFTC pilots seem to believe that flying the Tejas into a jet stream is just another day at the office. This matter-of-fact approach to the unknown leads NASA to choose most of its astronauts from the test pilot community.

“Test flying only seems glamorous from the outside,” says Thomas, dismissing my suggestion that every young IAF fighter jockey must idolise him. “Our daily routine involves a great deal of what any fighter pilot would consider drudgery. There is plenty of daily paperwork, and loads of study across the aerospace domain.”

But the passion for flying keeps these aces motivated. “We have all finished commanding our fighter squadrons and would normally be moving on to flying a desk,” says Jaideep. “This allows us to stay in the cockpit longer, connected with the business end of combat aviation. We are a few metres away from a fighter plane at all times.”

Varma explains exactly what a test pilot does. “An operational pilot in a combat squadron does not have the luxury of criticising his aircraft. Whether he dislikes the cockpit layout, whether he finds the controls sluggish… he just does the job with whatever the nation provides him. But when he becomes a test pilot, all those years of frontline experience go into improving the aircraft for the frontline pilots.”

“The test pilot is classically the bridge between designer and field. That is his role. He needs to be able to talk the language of the pilots in the field, and translate their requirements into language that the designers can understand. He must bridge the disconnect between design and operations,” elaborates Thomas.

In western air forces, like the US Air Force, test pilots do nothing but flight testing. But while specialisation allows them to stay in close touch with test programmes, pilots become disconnected from combat flying. The IAF’s philosophy is different. “Our tactics are evolving so quickly that we feel it is better to keep moving pilots between test flying and operational squadrons. That brings the latest operational doctrines into aircraft development,” explains Thomas.

In the telemetry room, Toffeen controls Pranjal’s mission. The atmosphere is charged; hawk-eyed technicians are glued to their monitors to detect the first sign of trouble. Toffeen has done this for 21 years. “It is a really interesting job,” he laughs, relaxed and confident. “Every day is a new day.”

Pranjal’s voice booms over the speakers that broadcast all communication between pilot and flight engineer. The smoke winder has been successfully tested. Toffeen tells him to head back to base. There is no cheering or clapping; this is business as usual.

“Do you guys ever party, get drunk, let your hair down?” I ask Rohit.

“Not this week, definitely. We will be doing Tejas aerobatics twice daily and, as an article of faith, we don’t drink for 48 hours before flying.” But then the professional mask slips just a fraction and there is a gleam in the air commodore’s eyes. “But don’t go away with the impression that these guys are loners. Test pilot school parties are famous in the air force.”
 
.
From Pandoras post:
http://www.defence.pk/forums/india-defence/79898-aero-india-2011-a-34.html#post1479516

IF these points are true, there are several questions!

No major changes at the air intakes and just a 5% increase needed. If so how will they do it?

Secondly MK1 was reported to have issues at speed, AoA and if I remember correctly turn rates, but it already had a good TWR. So now with no major changes at MK2s airframe and just increased thrust, is that the solution for all these problems?

AESA radar, very big blow imo and if they keep counting on LRDE alone it is ridiculous, because they are one of the main reason for the delays. They had little experience with MMRs and also have now with AESAs, so how will they do it alone?

And the point that I don't understand at all is, why the he... do they need 3 to 5 years to get these few changes ready? The only real change is the fuselage, that will house the engine and air intakes, but why does it need 3 years till it can make the first flight?
AESA co-development was aimed on 3 - 4 years, so why can't it be integrated into MK2?

Very strange decisions and not fitting to several of the earlier official statements!

We are reducing the redundancy like unnecessary structured hardening ... but still the empty weight is expected to increase(bug goal is there to reduce the weight a tough task you know).. Secondly if you look at the design and as per BR there is going to have a good estate management(which is very important for stability) at present it is jam packed (hopefully to increase the fuel may be for internal EW)... i also believe the air frame shown in AI will not be final while there will be changes for sure... There is a aerodynamic changes incorporated (as per BR) to solve the AoA and turn rates (Not sure about the speed i guess design is not optimized for super cruising)..

Finally AESA is not a child play let us first get expertize on AEW&CS.... we are yet to work on miniaturized version and LRDE has come out with good radars earlier and we will have to give some time to work on AESA.. they already raised RFI for industrial partner which should be finalized this year... At present none of our squad is having AESA and i doubt the Super 30 will host AESA.. and no good AESA is available in the market except the US and Israel(which has been blocked)... we have to acknowledge the reality also buddy..


For 3-5 yrs you are just seeing only frame .. but if you see the upgrades it is impacting in every big module.. so 3 yrs seems to be a nominal time taken...

Good thing is we are having IFR and more internal capacity which can free up the pylons for more weapon loads.. Yes we are missing IRST and AESA.. but it should come up with time..
 
.
Nice to see some corroboration to my Post no. 44 (here).


1. They are going to retain the shape of the inlets while increasing the radius.

2. There will be some tweaking of the airframe for improving aerodynamic performance, I've been assured of that.

3. LRDE is now the nodal centre for AESA tech in India. Given their recent success with the AESA radars in aew and BMD programs, they have been entrusted with X band too.

Also, they will not be going alone, EADS or Elta is supposed to help.

This project will take four years and until they get some emphatic results the progress will not be declared, nor it will be integrated with the LCA program. This has been done to maintain the timelines for the LCA mk 2.

4. This question along with the IRST has been an enigma to me too. I will try to find some source who can clarify.

No chance for info on IRST, though. I was stonewalled in my attempts to get any info about it.

Goes parallel with my opinion :)
 
.
Men and their flying machine: a day at the National Flight Test Centre with the pilots who test fly the Tejas.


IMGA0017_5.jpg

IMGA0019_5.jpg
IMGA0025_4.jpg



The headphone crackles in his ears as Wing Commander Pranjal Singh looks out from the cockpit of his Tejas Light Combat Aircraft, codenamed LSP-3, at the sun-baked runway stretching ahead. Once again he blesses the Indian designers who built the Tejas cockpit: in the Sukhoi-30MKI that he flew before test pilot school, he would have been dripping sweat.

“Trims neutral, brakes okay, all systems go from telemetry,” says Group Captain Toffeen’s calm voice.

IMGA0013_5.jpg


Toffeen and his flight test engineers in the telemetry room of the National Flight Test Centre will monitor every system in Pranjal’s aircraft right through the flight, poring over radio data transmitted from LSP-3’s vitals. No patient in intensive care is watched so closely. Any serious glitch means aborting the mission.

“Confirm, monitored,” Pranjal acknowledges.

Toffeen clears him to go: “Take off with max AB, rotation at two-four-zero.” In test pilot jargon, that means take off at full throttle (maximum afterburner), rotating the joystick to get airborne at 240 kilometres per hour.

“LSP-3, ready for take-off,” says Pranjal to Air Traffic Control, which clears every aircraft.

IMGA0027_4.jpg


The ATC is prompt: “LSP-3, cleared for take-off, wind 270, ten knots.”

Pranjal guns his engine to full power and the Tejas hurtles forward, the acceleration driving him backwards into his seat. In seconds he is at 200 kmph… 220… 240… and, as he pulls the stick, LSP-3 is sweetly airborne and climbing fast. This is the moment that every fighter pilot lives for.

But Pranjal is more than a combat fighter pilot, operating within tested and certified performance limits. As a test pilot for the Tejas LCA programme, his job is to push the performance envelope of India’s new fighter, checking how it reacts as he nudges it into uncharted territory.

IMGA0035_4.jpg


“Each flight is a mission into the unknown,” explains Air Commodore Rohit Varma, Project Director, Flight Testing. Rohit, a tall, greying veteran who has spent a lifetime flying the unforgiving MiG-21 fighter, explains how each test flight deliberately takes the Tejas faster, slower or higher than it has ever been before, or on a mission like firing rockets or missiles, which could shut down the fighter’s engine by sucking up all available oxygen.

IMGA0004_16.jpg


Business Standard is at the National Flight Test Centre (NFTC) in Bangalore to spend time with the pilots who test the Tejas, India’s first attempt to build a modern “fourth-generation” fighter aircraft. Since the first fledgling Tejas lurched into the sky in 2001, they have flown it to the limits of its flight envelope, but without rashly endangering the aircraft. While there are disasters in almost every fighter development programme, the Indian MoD’s zero-risk approach would make a Tejas crash a programme-threatening disaster.
 
.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom