Search results

I quit this forum sometime back...now I was notified that I am being remembered here :-) @charlie Since you don't seem to have understood any of my posts nor what the articles and the DRDO phamplets are claiming, you indeed wasted your time ogling over posts and claiming outrage! Technically...

Every plane has the same essential parts....similarly every stealth drone will have some essential characteristics! That doesn't mean everyone is in one big orgy.....

Hope so.............but not how it is being reported

http://www.sps-aviation.com/story/?id=2482&h=Air-Chief-Marshal-Dhanoa-lifts-veil-off-Indiaandrsquo;s-UCAVs "IAF is progressing the case of upgrading the existing UAV fleet. Also, the Medium Altitude Low Endurance Remotely Piloted Aircraft (TAPAS, earlier called Rustom-II) is being developed by...

Dude. You need to stop contorting science and concocting info! The ass end of a missile is spewing fire/smoke - even if it 'just misses' the pod what will be the state of the sensor pod, especially the lenses? Also, EO pod swivels all directions and has a great field-of-view. peep hole! LOL

Nope. The pusher config is not part of the 10 prototypes. He said that MoD wanted them to finish the twin-engine project first before taking on the pusher config UAV. This is something that Parrikar started doing - enforcing project discipline, as DRDO was randomly starting and abandoning...

We went over this adequately before; I don't want to rehash the argument! As an exercise, think how the belly stacked missiles will fire with the EO pod in front. (an attack helo is good choice, but an unmanned UAV with same speed and similar missiles is useless?? Hah!)

Yes. That’s the lecture I am referring to; and Prasad is no longer project director. During the lecture he made it pretty clear that the twin engined config was only for testing avionics and controls. The final config will be pusher. Somehow no one reads/listens to details - fan boys everywhere...

The configuration was deemed faulty long back. The twin-engines on the wings is not ideal for long endurance and higher payloads. Worldover ALL successful long endurance UAVs have rear engines (providing lower drag and higher lift). DRDOs tech demonstrator (Rustom 1) was of similar config; but I...

https://salute.co.in/military-modernisation-indian-air-force/ Per this article (by Air Marshall Nambiar) Rustom/Tapas will take another 5-7 years to be ready!!!!

The EO pod has been there for a while. Not sure what the aft attachments are.

If a pilot sitting in the cockpit can maneuver, then an auto-pilot can do it better!!! Turbulence (fluctuating winds?) are best handled by auto-pilot than a pilot. That's why aircraft like Tejas are superior! Also, a remote operator doesn't need to 'fly' the aircraft every millisecond! He gives...

Mig21 in India and elsewhere is in the end of life. India doesn't need any more 'service contract' or guarantees from Russia. Russia won't really care what the junk gets turned into. FYI: BMP-2 is also a Russian design that's been successfully made autonomous by DRDO.

Once you remove pilot seat and all the displays & other life support stuff, then there's adequate room to put in auto-pilot mechanism and data links! FBW not required. Automation of controls can be achieved by mechanical control of the 'Controls'. Jaguar is being upgraded with auto-pilot & no...

Here's a crazy idea: How about implement auto-pilot on Mig21, use embed Rustom's datalink etc and turn Mig21s into unmanned bombers ??? (can easily do this out to a range of 400kms combat radius) Worst case they be sent on a one-way trip with 1000 kg explosive out to 1500kms!! There're nearly...

@ezsasa But then this pamphlet is from 2015. The 3 tonne config for Rustom-II came about later. If CVRDE just completed/fitted the old design onto Rustom, then no cheers at all - it's just an interim product. But it might still be good enough for them to carry out tests without all payload (or...

@ezsasa Here's a pamphlet on Rustom-II landing gear. It appears that the RLG is designed to take the shock of 2.4 tonnes. Which probably might mean that Rustom (post sortie) with much of the fuel burnt up (before landing) could weigh as much as 2.4 tonnes. Rustom-II's MTOW would still be 3...

I've never heard of this "Def_PRO_Chennai" twitter handle. "writetake" (Anantha Krishnan) is definitely more reliable (even though I feel he might have made an error). I could be wrong, if CVRDE has initially only come up with 2 tonne retractable-landing-gear as a precusor to the final 3 tonne...

No it's not the same landing gear. The initial attempt was to develop a landing gear for a 2 tonne UAV. But then it became clear that the heavier (more powerful) engines and the extra fuel (for the required endurance & the extra weight) will take the all-up weight to 3 tonnes Rustom/Tapas was...

Some folks are posting nonsense like Rustom-1 is UCAV! Rustom-1 was photo op'd with two Helina canisters slung under Rustom-1 just to taxi around. It never flew then nor is there any effort to make it fly with Helinas. Fanboys always have premature ejaculations!!!