What's new

HAL Tejas | Updates, News & Discussions

Status
Not open for further replies.
J-10s?I take the S as plural。Right?

Can you back up your wild claim with any concrete evidence?

As far as I know NOT a single J-10 has crashed so far。

Use your brain before make sweeping ramarks next time。Otherwise you wil be only making a fool of yourself!!

This proves your brain is just filled with CPC-fed nonsense.

J-10 crash, pilot dead
^^This one in 2010

J-10-1269423721_65328.jpg


J-10-1269423429_94991.jpg


J-10-1269422877_96170.jpg


^^ From here - J-10 2007 crash photos
^^This one from 2007

There go your multiple crashes, there were 2 more crashes other than this but china is trying its best
to hide them lolz:rofl:

China tries to hide J-10 crashes

Shameless peoples does not even have balls to face some humiliation. It seems you know only as far as
CPC wnats you to! Are your employers hiding something from you?:lol:
 
Both J-10s and JF-17s have crashed.
But China / Pak don't have an option to cancel either of these programs.

They don't have to, nor would LCA be cancelled just because of a crash, because you first have to figure out why the crash happend! If there was a pilot error or a bird strike, why would you cancel the fighter project? That's what I pointed out with the V22, it is technically way more advanced and also difficult to handle it, several crashes were caused by pilot error. That's tragic, but can't be a reason to cancel the whole project, if it's otherwise still reasonable.
Btw, if we would wanted to cancel LCA, there would be noumerus of other reasons, delays, costoveruns, the failure of engine and radar developments. But the fact is, MoD and even the forces sticked to it, they hoped (imo waaaay too long) that our engineers will get it done. They fixed the failures of the planing stage and got proven stopgap engines, as well as consultants for the radar development and navalising. All this would never be done, if MoD and the forces would not want LCA, infact it proves exactly the opposite!
And there are other examples too, our UAVs were crashing quiet often during development stage and still they wasn't cancelled, Saras crashed with a tragic loss of lifes, HALs IJT crashed too and still all these developments were continued by MoD and the forces.

Our problem is not MoD not supporting indigenous developments, nor threatening to cancel them, but that we always make them too complicated, although a simple approach would be more suitable to the current level of know how in our industry. Why had the Saras needs to be a pusher rotor concept and not a normal design? Why did we formed JVs with Israel on unmanned helicopters, but not on UAVs? And I have stated the issues in LCAs planing often enough, just like this over protection of the fighter and the induction is an issue as well.
 
^^^ The quoted reasons for J-10 crashes were

(1) poor fly-by-wire system (which led to crash and killed the pilot), and

(2) chinese claimed that AL-31 engine failed and it crashed, again killing the pilot.

(The other two known crashes had reasons like complete loss of avionics, but pilot managed to land the aircraft etc).

Neither of these is bird-hit or pilot error related.

Now imagine... if you have had an example of LCA crashing because of lacking fly-by-wire system.... you see the chorus, in the media, in the parliament --> "Heyyy...are our pilots lives cheap that they fly a poor quality aircraft", "DRDO is generations behind the west, it will never be able to build a fly-by-wire system", "India's defence put to risk by an inferior quality aircraft." ... bla ... bla..

The crash photos of LCA (like the ones of J-10 you see above) would have been on the cover pages of India Today and Outlook. And I say, people like yourself would have urged .... no point trying this... it's "rocket science" (for us). We just can't do it. Let's close the project. !! (I take the clue from your views about Kaveri engine.. you do believe it's rocket science for Indians. Damn close the project. It's a failure, already).

The JF-17 crash did relate to pilot error / bird-hit thing .... but you know, even if LCA had crashed due to pilot error.. the chorus ..... including possibly "IAF sources" would have started singing.... that "Ho.. that damn LCA has poor interfaces, and it's just too easy to crash such an unwieldly aircraft".

You see .... in India, how pilot error is easily translated into aircraft problem.

Hence the cautious attitude in defence development organizations is understandable. (I am not saying it's desirable or undesiable. It has a mixture of benefits and downsides.. IMO).
 
Now imagine... if you have had an example of LCA crashing because of lacking fly-by-wire system...

There would be no disccuission within the officials at all, because if we take the same example, we would talk about a fighter with more than 10000s flight hours and then possibly 4 crashes for what ever reasons. That is not bad, or unreliable at all. We have Su 30s in service for 10 years now, with high ammount of flying hours and 3 crashes, of which at least 1 was caused because of technical problem, but not a single official called it an unreliable fighter right? There was no outrage in the media when we ordered additional once or? Same goes for our Mirage and Mig 29s, or even the indigenous examples that I already gave.
You take the media speculations and sensational journalism way too serious, because the fact is, MoD and the forces keep going on with the developments, upgrades or even added more fighters without any concern about safty. LCA is no different here and even a crash (God forbid!) wouldn't change anything.


And I say, people like yourself would have urged .... no point trying this... it's "rocket science" (for us). We just can't do it. Let's close the project. !! (I take the clue from your views about Kaveri engine.. you do believe it's rocket science for Indians. Damn close the project. It's a failure, already).

If that is all you got from my posts, I am doing something wrong. I never criticized Kaveri or LCA as a project, but the project planning and management of them!
Yes, developing a fighter engine from the scratch without any knowledge base is rocket science for Indians, just like it is for China, or like it was for other countries at this level, but we had to go for the development, we just messed up the way to go for it, although we had good opportunities! That's why Kaveri turned out to be a failure and why we now do, what we should had done from the start:

- de-link Kaveri development from LCA development by using proven foreign stopgap engines (GE 404 and 414 today)
- teaming up with an experience foreign company (Snecma possibly for the K10)
- building tech demo versions and the necessary test facilities / aircrafts (high altitude tests were done in Russia)
- upgrading older LCA with fully developed and reliable Kaveri engine during later upgrades (GE 404IN20 => Kaveri K10)

As you can see, if we had done this in a more logical way and according to our capabilities, LCA AND Kaveri would be a success by now!
 
@ Sancho

Right, we have sought Snecma assistance since the beginning.
 
@ Sancho

Right, we have sought Snecma assistance since the beginning.

No, they offered us a co-development when Kaveri K9 for LCA didn't worked out, but MoD/IAF hoped that GTRE will get things done and that's why nothing was fixed yet.
 
This proves your brain is just filled with CPC-fed nonsense.

J-10 crash, pilot dead
^^This one in 2010

J-10-1269423721_65328.jpg


J-10-1269423429_94991.jpg


J-10-1269422877_96170.jpg


^^ From here - J-10 2007 crash photos
^^This one from 2007

There go your multiple crashes, there were 2 more crashes other than this but china is trying its best
to hide them lolz:rofl:

China tries to hide J-10 crashes

Shameless peoples does not even have balls to face some humiliation. It seems you know only as far as
CPC wnats you to! Are your employers hiding something from you?:lol:

All fake news,which have been proved wrong. Give me an official link not some internet bulletin SH1T.

Ok? Thanks. The plane that crashed HAS TO BE a J-10 and OFFICIALLY acknowledged!
 
All fake news,which have been proved wrong. Give me an official link not some internet bulletin SH1T.

Ok? Thanks. The plane that crashed HAS TO BE a J-10 and OFFICIALLY acknowledged!

Go and ask the family of Senior Col. Xie Fengliang how he died.
 
After three months on ground, combat aircraft Tejas resumes test flight

Ajai Shukla / New Delhi Nov 27, 2012, 00:53 IST

The Tejas Light Combat Aircraft (LCA), which has remained grounded for more than three months, finally resumed flight-testing last week. Seven flights of the Tejas have taken place since then without mishap.

The grounding of Tejas, which was kept secret, took place because of the new pilot’s helmets. Since these protruded above the ejection seats, the helmets could have prevented a smooth ejection by smashing into the fighter’s canopy before it was blown off. Since that constituted a serious safety issue for pilots, flight-testing was halted since August.(What kind of a joke is this? Indians are incapable of thinking ahead??:azn:)

The Defence R&D Organisation (DRDO) chief, V K Saraswat, confirmed to Business Standard that the problem had been resolved. The Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA), the DRDO agency that oversees the Tejas programme, has now provided a backup mechanism to blow off the canopy before the pilot’s head struck it.

“Yes, we had about three to three-and-a-half-months of gap (in flight testing). Now, that problem has been resolved. We have modified the Martin Baker ejection seats, making these more reliable and giving more confidence to our pilots. With that behind us, I think we are roaring now,” (Roaring back? His arse roaring more like it:woot:) said Saraswat.

For the Tejas’ flight-test programme, which is already behind schedule, this three month delay has been a blow. The Initial Operation Clearance (IOC), which was scheduled for end-2010, and which the Indian Air Force (IAF) accorded only provisionally in January 2011, is now expected only around mid-2013.

The Final Operational Clearance (FOC), which clears a fighter for combat operations, was scheduled for end-2012. This could be delayed by at least two years(2016 is an optimistic estimate for FOC. As a matter of fact, there is a far higher possibility that the LCA may never see induction into the Indian Airforce). An upbeat Saraswat says the three-month delay gave ADA an opportunity to resolve several other problems, which needed to be done on the ground.

“We have made use of this time by solving many of the problems which were part of the feedback that came from the flight test programme. I feel by middle of next year we should complete (the IOC),” (lolo...fine excuses. This guy is good at nothing but finding excuses for total dereliction of duty) said Saraswat.

The Rs 14,047-crore LCA project involves building an air force version of the fighter in two models — Tejas Mark I and Tejas Mark II — as well as a naval version that will operate from aircraft carriers.

The IAF has already placed orders on Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL) for two squadrons (42 fighters) of the Tejas Mark I aircraft. Defence Minister AK Antony told Parliament on May 21, that the IAF would be delivered six squadrons (126 fighters) by the end of the 13th Plan, i.e. by 2022. While this was not specified, the next four Tejas squadrons will be of the Mark II fighter, which will field the more power General Electric F-414 engine. The government has allocated Rs 4,353 crore for developing the Mark II fighter.

Meanwhile Pakistan’s light fighter, the JF-17 Thunder, which was developed in partnership with China, has achieved combat status. Three squadrons of the JF-17 are already in service in the Pakistan Air Force, which expects to eventually operate some 12-13 squadrons of the fighter.
 
After three months on ground, combat aircraft Tejas resumes test flight

Ajai Shukla / New Delhi Nov 27, 2012, 00:53 IST

The Tejas Light Combat Aircraft (LCA), which has remained grounded for more than three months, finally resumed flight-testing last week. Seven flights of the Tejas have taken place since then without mishap.

The grounding of Tejas, which was kept secret, took place because of the new pilot’s helmets. Since these protruded above the ejection seats, the helmets could have prevented a smooth ejection by smashing into the fighter’s canopy before it was blown off. Since that constituted a serious safety issue for pilots, flight-testing was halted since August.(What kind of a joke is this? Indians are incapable of thinking ahead??:azn:)

The Defence R&D Organisation (DRDO) chief, V K Saraswat, confirmed to Business Standard that the problem had been resolved. The Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA), the DRDO agency that oversees the Tejas programme, has now provided a backup mechanism to blow off the canopy before the pilot’s head struck it.

“Yes, we had about three to three-and-a-half-months of gap (in flight testing). Now, that problem has been resolved. We have modified the Martin Baker ejection seats, making these more reliable and giving more confidence to our pilots. With that behind us, I think we are roaring now,” (Roaring back? His arse roaring more like it:woot:) said Saraswat.

For the Tejas’ flight-test programme, which is already behind schedule, this three month delay has been a blow. The Initial Operation Clearance (IOC), which was scheduled for end-2010, and which the Indian Air Force (IAF) accorded only provisionally in January 2011, is now expected only around mid-2013.

The Final Operational Clearance (FOC), which clears a fighter for combat operations, was scheduled for end-2012. This could be delayed by at least two years(2016 is an optimistic estimate for FOC. As a matter of fact, there is a far higher possibility that the LCA may never see induction into the Indian Airforce). An upbeat Saraswat says the three-month delay gave ADA an opportunity to resolve several other problems, which needed to be done on the ground.

“We have made use of this time by solving many of the problems which were part of the feedback that came from the flight test programme. I feel by middle of next year we should complete (the IOC),” (lolo...fine excuses. This guy is good at nothing but finding excuses for total dereliction of duty) said Saraswat.

The Rs 14,047-crore LCA project involves building an air force version of the fighter in two models — Tejas Mark I and Tejas Mark II — as well as a naval version that will operate from aircraft carriers.

The IAF has already placed orders on Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL) for two squadrons (42 fighters) of the Tejas Mark I aircraft. Defence Minister AK Antony told Parliament on May 21, that the IAF would be delivered six squadrons (126 fighters) by the end of the 13th Plan, i.e. by 2022. While this was not specified, the next four Tejas squadrons will be of the Mark II fighter, which will field the more power General Electric F-414 engine. The government has allocated Rs 4,353 crore for developing the Mark II fighter.

Meanwhile Pakistan’s light fighter, the JF-17 Thunder, which was developed in partnership with China, has achieved combat status. Three squadrons of the JF-17 are already in service in the Pakistan Air Force, which expects to eventually operate some 12-13 squadrons of the fighter.

New Helmets? any guesses why new helmets? What was so special that couldnt have been done with old helmets?
 
From the pic it is clear that helmet extends beyond the MB seat. I think DASH is in use for a long time, then why did they choose last three months to make the necessary changes? May be they are preparing for high risk high AOA and spin tests
hal210110173c.jpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom