Search results

In layman terms, ADE is doing insurance for the manufacturer of the UAV in case of a crash or accident of the system.

Yes. The last line is what it is. They planned 10+ prototypes for Kaveri with 90kN version to be used for Tejas.

There is no simple calculation to calculate the power generated by engine as most of it goes waste in form of heat. Moreover its the onboard generator and alternators who produce bulk of the power in any flying platform. Al-31 engine does produce somewhere in between 125 to 130kW power. F-414...

Let me quote myself here again... Now I am sorry if anyhow my statement implied that IAF asked for 90kN engine in there ASQR. I tried to imply that, ADA proposed 90kN engine based on ASQR. Another myth is that F-414 with 90kN came for Mk2. While saying that, we categorically sideline the...

As per the report, its speed is Mach 5.5. https://www.aajtak.in/defence-news/story/rudram-2-hypersonic-air-to-surface-missile-revealed-test-fired-1873240-2024-02-05

Along with foldable rotor blades.

In that case we could have produced Oniks under license agreement rather then going for a JV where we have to share nearly half of the profit. Sharing 20% under license agreement was always better then sharing 49.5% in JV. Isn't it?

Our stake is 50.5% and Russian stake is 49.5%. It means, whatever we are making constitutes of 50.5% from cost point of view. We might make 90% of BRAHMOS components. But from cost evaluation, what is the value of those 90% material is the whole product?

That's why I imply. Our media made it sound like DRDO has made the product. In truth, DRDO developed the tech and its upto SMPP, Armasen or any other industry partner, who would be developing the final product based on given requirement.

If we use 100% indigenous content in BRAHMOS, why should we give 49.5% stake in the company to Russia?

Be assured of our media to screw up a good news into a joke. Now if its effective against 6nos of 54 caliber API round fired at it from 10 mtr distance, its really impressive. Now its upto production partners to design the final product.

Ok. Is it mentioned anywhere in the ASQR that a delta winged tailless design is required? Or is it ADA who has proposed the design?

You are mixing up too many aspects here. Lets get things done in a chronological order. In 1983 DRDO obtained permission to work on Tejas program. In 1985 ASQR for the same has been submitted by IAF. Based on the ASQR requirement, in 1986 Kaveri program was initiated. During this time, GTRE...

?? I am asking about some link where GTRE was planning for a 78kNish engine and its IAF, who asked for 90 kN. You are citing what we have discussed here. As for my part, http://www.tejas.gov.in/history/milestones.html this link was treasure trove. Don't know why its not working. There were...

GTRE actually did corroborated with Safran in Kaveri project even before the technical assistance part in MMRCA came up. We did used Safran made DSB in the initial Kaveri prototype.

Could you please point me to the news where it has been said that its IAF who wanted 80 to 90 kN and not what ADA wanted to power Tejas with?

Margins are always there. But when you are talking of maximum weight, you want to keep it lower then your margin. Moreover this is the first time we are trying to build one and to tell the truth, our metallurgy is improving only now and we need to keep on working on it to come upto the western...

1200+ kg weight against the planned 1100kg. It means with increased engine weight, gross weight of the implemented platform also increase.

https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/transportation/airlines-/-aviation/kaveri-engine-to-power-fifth-generation-fighter-aircraft/articleshow/7369129.cms?from=mdr Now who is the other stake holder apart from IAF?