HAL Tejas | Updates, News & Discussions

[MumbaiIndians]

@mumbaiindian

you really need to look up the meaning of the word troll in the dictionary. It does not mean someone who does not agree with your views.

Constantly propogating false claims as facts, is trolling. That's what sancho is doing in this thread.

Now stop adding flames and focus on topic.

 

[MumbaiIndians]

And i think a ucav/uav will be as effective as a conventional fighter. Just because the pilot is on the ground doesn't mean it won't be effective in a particular role. In fact they are imo safer as they don't put the pilot in danger.

Disagree.

Even developed world doesn't believe in that. USAF has plans to induct F-22 planes even beyond 2020 and PLAF is yet to begin user trials of J-20.

What you just said, is a tall claim found only in science magazines. Seriously, are we discussing science fiction from magazines here?

 

[soaringphnx]

Disagree.

Even developed world doesn't believe in that. USAF has plans to induct F-22 planes even beyond 2020 and PLAF is yet to begin user trials of J-20.

What you just said, is a tall claim found only in science magazines. Seriously, are we discussing science fiction from magazines here?

For your information, the usaf won't be inducting any more f-22s. Of course the f-22s already in service will continue to be in service well beyond 2020. Perhaps you meant the f-35? And when did i say that no countries are developing and inducting 5th generation fighters? Even india is planning to induct the pakfa!

And why won't uavs be as effective as conventional aircraft? Because the pilot is on the ground and not inside the actual aircraft? If uavs are so ineffective, then why are the US, russians, israelis, french and others developing uavs?

 

[MumbaiIndians]

So you think russia included india in the pakfa project because of our experience designing aircraft? Russia couldn't fund the entire program by themselves. So they were looking for a partner who could share the development costs.

Do you really want India to reduce itself to just funding part of FGFA and be a sleeping partner?

Also, its obvious that they would prefer India being just a funding partner and not participate as equal JV partner. Its beneficial for them if India agrees to fund but not demand any bigger share of work in FGFA. That would have kept whole program within campuses of Russian design laboratories.

 

[kingdurgaking]

As far as i know ucavs have a lower development cost and unit cost than conventional fighters. They take much less time to develop too. That is why many countries are now developing uavs. So i think the aura is a much better option than the amca. The amca project is just too late. By the time it will be fully developed, it will already be obsolete.

And i think a ucav/uav will be as effective as a conventional fighter. Just because the pilot is on the ground doesn't mean it won't be effective in a particular role. In fact they are imo safer as they don't put the pilot in danger.

No dear... UCAVS are not that simple... you need AI to track the targets... and engage.. things UCAV that reduces are human support system.. but software will become more and more complex.. you need to escape the incoming missile all those softwares are going to be more tedious.. as per threat perception..

UCAVS will not be that good initially as you for see.... Drones nowerdays are going only if there is no enemy fighters.. UCAVS if they are jammed then you will loose them.. so manned fighter will be there.. even boeing UCAV will have manned option... peace time UCAV are more good .. in war it will be different.. you will force human operation...

 

[MumbaiIndians]

And when did i say that no countries are developing and inducting 5th generation fighters? Even india is planning to induct the pakfa!

PAK-FA is Russian project, meant for Russian airforce(RuAF). India has no plans to buy it.

 

[soaringphnx]

PAK-FA is Russian project, meant for Russian airforce(RuAF). India has no plans to buy it.

Actually india plans to buy 50 single seat russian version (pakfa) and 200 twin seat (fgfa) fighters.

 

[MumbaiIndians]

Actually india plans to buy 50 single seat russian version (pakfa) and 200 twin seat (fgfa) fighters.

That's not signed yet. IAF is still confused about it, like a baby in candyshop, not sure which color to pick.

 

[kish]

And i think a ucav/uav will be as effective as a conventional fighter. Just because the pilot is on the ground doesn't mean it won't be effective in a particular role. In fact they are imo safer as they don't put the pilot in danger.

The pilot on the ground get incoming data some time later (may be 1 sec) and again send data it may again take another 1 sec .. delay of 1-2 sec is very crucial in actual war case ...

conventional fighter pilot's response does not have this transmission delay so as far as now conventional are imp too (not saying that ucav are not imp)

ucav will be more potent for fighting when no pilot will needed even on ground ... till then conventional fighter will have equal importance

 

[sancho]

@ sancho:

You are a respected member of this forum (at least among Indian). your posts are most of the time useful and informative. Its not crime to accept others view during discussion if you feel its valid, even though its contradicting ur view...

Adamant behavior doesn't pay...

Not sure to which views you are refering to, kingdurgaking for example is arguing, instead of simply reposting the same points again and again and I take his thought seriously, but we still can disagree on certain points. It's not about convincing the other, but about sharing informations, views, so everybody can make up his, or her own mind.
I do think LCA was a very good project for India, but I also point out the parts that failed, instead of blindly celebrating every minor achievement. I do think that it adds immensely to our indigenous industrial capabilities, but we would have achieved even more by now, if we planed it more realistically and used our advantages with foreign options. I am for more indigenous developments, but against limiting our forces with them only for pride reasons (NLCA, AMCA) and I have valid reasons as well I showed.

valid... we did it Dhruv with JV.. and who said we didnt do with LCA??

I didn't either, but those were mainly for minor parts of the development, while we wanted to do the main parts alone. A good example from Dhruv was the engine development, where the first were proven foreign versions, while the Shakti engine were a co-development (although also with much French input).
If that was a successful way for Dhruv, why didn't we went the same way for LCA?

And in 1990's who where ready to do JV or help us?? we are not super power or we are not that close to NATO.... the situation now is India has money so people are coming here to help us

Russians, French, as I said single engine RD33 and M53 engines were logical options in that time.

First of ALL AURA will take 2030 to fly i bet.. even US NGTA will come in service only in 2025 and you expecing AURA to come in 2030 is totaly over confidence..

Look at it this way, what is more difficult to design, the airframe of a stealthy fighter, or a stealthy UCAV?
Does AURA need a very capable engine and features like SC, or TVC?
Does it need NG cockpit and radar developments?

So when we start the developments of both pretty much at the same time, what is more difficult to develop for our industry, AMCA, or AURA?

All important developments that can lead to AURA are already started by our own UAV developments, FGFA, as well as co-developments with Israeli, or European companies. There is already a base and even plans for unmanned Dhruv and possibly LCAs. Why is AURA ready for production in 2025, which is still 14 years away, less realistic than AMCA then?

so is FGFA is alone enough?.... and total induction will complete by 2025...

Not possible, buddy! Even if we take 2017 as the start for production, we plan 250 fighters at least. We needed 9 years to induct around 130 MKIs, of which only 80 were produced in India. Around 100 MMRCAs are expected to be in production in India for 10 years as well, so why should 250 FGFA be fully inducted in just 8 years?

Realistically, the early MKIs might be even replaced by the late FGFAs and that's why I said, by that time (2030), 5th gen fighters won't be enough anymore and we need even more capable than AMCA. Personally I think that by that time UCAVs will be the main fighter aircraft anyway, but that's a different matter.
And who said FGFA is alone? 270 MKIs, at least 126 MMRCAs and 140 LCAs = roughly 600 x 4.5/5 gen multi role fighters by 2025, nearly 200 more than we have now, while UCAVs and hunter killer can take over the strike roles of dedicated ground attack fightes in addition.

 

[sancho]

No dear... UCAVS are not that simple... you need AI to track the targets... and engage.. things UCAV that reduces are human support system.. but software will become more and more complex.. you need to escape the incoming missile all those softwares are going to be more tedious.. as per threat perception..

Exactly, while the hardware development is way easier, esepcially if your industry has limited capabilities in developing such hardware. For the software we will need Israeli, or European partners for sure.

 

[kingdurgaking]

Exactly, while the hardware development is way easier, esepcially if your industry has limited capabilities in developing such hardware. For the software we will need Israeli, or European partners for sure.

... in future secret will lie in software .... not in hardware... and secondly having less hardware makes life easy for testing with simulations and less maintenance.. for example take SPECTRA it employs a software based technology ... which has enabled it to be very effective...

Further using hardware also need software to do calculations... while complex algorithm if developed in software is always better than give hardware based solution...

 

[luckyyy]

Not sure to which views you are refering to, kingdurgaking for example is arguing, instead of simply reposting the same points again and again and I take his thought seriously, but we still can disagree on certain points. It's not about convincing the other, but about sharing informations, views, so everybody can make up his, or her own mind.

i think it was you only simply reposting the same points again and again ..

I do think LCA was a very good project for India, but I also point out the parts that failed, instead of blindly celebrating every minor achievement.

no body planned a failure ....it you only who think that LCA is just a minor achivment , and if a member taking it as a troll , he has his views , might be not 100% correct but to a extent , yes...

 

[kingdurgaking]

I didn't either, but those were mainly for minor parts of the development, while we wanted to do the main parts alone. A good example from Dhruv was the engine development, where the first were proven foreign versions, while the Shakti engine were a co-development (although also with much French input).
If that was a successful way for Dhruv, why didn't we went the same way for LCA?

True but .. you didnt understand even Shakti engine struggled during sanction... and we have to pay the royalty for every engine back to France.. because France didnt part the technology of some critical components...

Russians, French, as I said single engine RD33 and M53 engines were logical options in that time.

Are you sure they are ready to part the technology?? even today SNECMA is crying to share the IP of its core to GTRE for eco core.. and no way Russia gives the technology... Russia never sold current technology to any one.. we cant dream of doing JV Turbo fan in 1990 as it is a very hot technology... even today for MKI engine we get raw materials from Russia directly.. we dont know what the composisition of those raw material to break the code...

For example take Brahmos.. Russia contributes the propulsion and India guidance and software.. you think Russia gave the Propulsion technology to India.. no it didnt.. even FGFA they are not going to part some complex technologies like AESA and avionics.. they will help India in Stealth characteristics of the body.. and DRDO will develop our own version with CFC..even i doubt they gave some valid input for Arihant...

Look at it this way, what is more difficult to design, the airframe of a stealthy fighter, or a stealthy UCAV?
Does AURA need a very capable engine and features like SC, or TVC?
Does it need NG cockpit and radar developments?

Not needed... you are just taking of cockpit and human substem which are not needed... but it needs sufficient technology to interact and think on its own incase a missile approaches and target the enemy with precession and decision support system or human interaction system... it is more complex than developing a NG cockpit.. because cockpit just gives data and human reacts... but UCAV has to react on its own.. for UCAV super cruise and TVC is a bless advantage.. if it is there.. Super cruise enables to go longer distance with less fuel is absolute need.... yes we dont need the power of engine of what is needed for manned craft.. even powerful engine will enable to carry more load and more fuel.... we are not talking like Drones in the form of UCAV???... Drones cant defend on its own.. and the jamming of drone is probable... UCAV even Jammed will have a inbuilt brain to execute tasks..

So when we start the developments of both pretty much at the same time, what is more difficult to develop for our industry, AMCA, or AURA?

All important developments that can lead to AURA are already started by our own UAV developments, FGFA, as well as co-developments with Israeli, or European companies. There is already a base and even plans for unmanned Dhruv and possibly LCAs. Why is AURA ready for production in 2025, which is still 14 years away, less realistic than AMCA then?

First of all UCAV will be employed more in peace time and they cant replace manner fighters because UCAV has to have series of upgrade based on threat perception.. and threat perception is more of dynamic... UCAV can be used more of peace time or for proxy... in case of emergency it will be humans who will be sent first followed by UCAV to do more damange... and UCAV technologies are not matured enough to defend a country like India...

so AMCA is very much a needed fighter.. even US NTGA has called for manned option in case of emergency where Boeing had given the option...

Not possible, buddy! Even if we take 2017 as the start for production, we plan 250 fighters at least. We needed 9 years to induct around 130 MKIs, of which only 80 were produced in India. Around 100 MMRCAs are expected to be in production in India for 10 years as well, so why should 250 FGFA be fully inducted in just 8 years?

MKI has a strict time line to finish the current order by 2015 and all the future order by 2017... MMRCA will exist till 2060 ... but all those lost in peace or war will not be replaced but will be opted by AMCA.. it is better to go for a stealth developed by India than to buy MMRCA....

Realistically, the early MKIs might be even replaced by the late FGFAs and that's why I said, by that time (2030), 5th gen fighters won't be enough anymore and we need even more capable than AMCA. Personally I think that by that time UCAVs will be the main fighter aircraft anyway, but that's a different matter.
And who said FGFA is alone? 270 MKIs, at least 126 MMRCAs and 140 LCAs = roughly 600 x 4.5/5 gen multi role fighters by 2025, nearly 200 more than we have now, while UCAVs and hunter killer can take over the strike roles of dedicated ground attack fightes in addition.

FGFA will not replace MKI.. all of FGFA and MKI is need to have squad of 48... and it will be a bad decision to replace whole of Manned with UCAV... At any point there will be manned fighters to prevent disaster..... and those manned fighters will come in the form of AMCA...

and we have to be realistic to think that UCAV will come in 2030... US NGTA will come in 2025 only as F-35 is further postponed to 2018.. and 2030 is the realistic time for US itself to have 10 squad of UCAV.... for India it is going to be 2040 to have UCAV....

and i again i repeat it will be dangerous to send UCAV in strike and deep attack roles...

 

[MumbaiIndians]

True but .. you didnt understand even Shakti engine struggled during sanction... and we have to pay the royalty for every engine back to France.. because France didnt part the technology of some critical components...

Good point.

Even the Snecma-GTRE joint venture has no technology transfer. French have refused to transfer cryogenic engine technology.