ADA Tejas (LCA) News and Discussions

[Godless-Kafir]

If the aircraft crashes due to major structural deficiencies like our first AEW project then it will be cancelled. Glitches and human error does not justify cancelling the program. Tejas has already undergone 1500 flight tests, so aerodynamics won't be a reason for cancellation.

The project is beyond cancellation now because Tejas is meeting most of the criteria set by the Air Staff. Moreover what other aircraft's are in the global market that can fill the Mig-21 shoes? Even if we did have an tender out in the global arms market for an LRCA to replace the Mig-21 we would not have much choice and the Tejas would win over the competition because they are either too heavy, expensive or will not meet ToT requirements at that price.

Every way you look at it the Tejas is the perfect bet for the IAF. As far as i know they should cancel the GE-engines and strap on the Kaveri which produces 49Kn to 51Kn. Some how the scientists at GTRE think that the GE-404 produces more than 52Kn and they did not believe me when i said it produces the same thrust.

 

[SuperCommandoDhruv]

Every way you look at it the Tejas is the perfect bet for the IAF. As far as i know they should cancel the GE-engines and strap on the Kaveri which produces 49Kn to 51Kn. Some how the scientists at GTRE think that the GE-404 produces more than 52Kn and they did not believe me when i said it produces the same thrust.

Not just GTRE but IAF, Army and Indians in general are naive and believe anything goras say.

Indians still believe that Armstrong walked on moon. LOL.

If that was so, why americans are so clueless even after 40 years about Moon's minerology. If they had technology to land so easily on moon 40 years back, why they are wasting so many billions on sending robotic probes to Moon to find its chemical structure? Just send a team of 8 and get the drilling done. Simple!

But guess what, USA forgot all science to land on moon in last 40 years. lol

I think ISRO knows all this moon landing was fake. Anyone who works in space agency can easily question why USA is not landing on Moon today to study it, if they did so easily 4 decades back.

When India and China announced moon missions, USA felt that they are loosing the soft-power influence so to catch the media hype, they announced to re-launch Moon missions. But soon they backed off because eventually people will start asking, "Hey, you americans landed on moon 40 years back. So why don't you do it again so we can get some drilling done there to study soil?" Obama knew that they can't take risk of landing on moon because they can fail, since they never did it so he called off moon mission, giving excuse of lack of fundings and weak economy. LOL.

 

[maomao]

^^^^ OT

However, Moon is hollow and has a thin crust, therefore it's useless to spend billions on knowing what lies beneath, when there is nothing!

 

[SuperCommandoDhruv]

^^^^ OT

However, Moon is hollow and has a thin crust, therefore it's useless to spend billions on knowing what lies beneath, when there is nothing!

Yes, just like USA said there were WMD's in Iraq?
Or like it wasn't USA who created Jehadis to fight against Soviets and it turned all bad when they bit back americans(9/11)? LOL.

Dude, seriously, come out of your small coconut. If there is nothing on moon, you don't need to be so insecure. Otherwise, you sound like a jackas* to suggest that all countries on earth are fools to send probes to Moon, while your obama-fobama is smarter to back-off from Moon, fearing rising demand of Moon-landing missions from Asia, since that will expose your belly to the world.

It was a comment from one Chinese Space command officer that USA should repeat Moon landing, so we can get more accurate information on moon's minerology as well as rock samples. The very next day, NASA issued statement, that there won't be any moon landing repeat. LMAO!

And subsequently, in next week, Obama declared USA is cutting off from Moon mission due to shortage of funds.

Americans are no different from Pakistanis when it comes to keeping themselves in delusions, for the sake of hollow-pride.

And, this is not off-topic. I am talking about common mentality of Indians, who accept anything Gora sells, as gospel truth. Even GE engines don't produce thrusts which they claim in brochures.

 

[p2prada]

There were no structural deficiencies in AEW RADAR payload. Problem was with the aircraft. And guess what, they cancelled AEW project.

And, I don't agree with your suggestion that NLCA should be cancelled if it crashes due to structural problems. Why cancel it dude? Why not fix the bugs and get next bird in air ASAP?

This is like saying, NASA should have closed shuttle program because shuttle exploded on launchpad and killed 7 american astronauts.

Why we are so weak and always looking to shiver in dhotis?

You missed the point I was making. If there are structural deficiencies the project is always cancelled and a new project will take it's place. The Airavat was a structurally deficient aircraft. It couldn't handle the radar system while the Emb-145 is structurally efficient in handling a radar.

If the N-LCA crashes due to structural deficiencies then the entire project is taken back to the drawing board and a new prototype is made.

Sukhoi did the same. The first Flanker was not a good aircraft. The T-10 was cancelled and a new T-10 project was started and that is what we see today.

The project is beyond cancellation now because Tejas is meeting most of the criteria set by the Air Staff. Moreover what other aircraft's are in the global market that can fill the Mig-21 shoes? Even if we did have an tender out in the global arms market for an LRCA to replace the Mig-21 we would not have much choice and the Tejas would win over the competition because they are either too heavy, expensive or will not meet ToT requirements at that price.

Every way you look at it the Tejas is the perfect bet for the IAF.

The aircraft currently filling Mig-21 shoes are the MKIs. Tejas has crossed it's shelf life and would obviously be seeing token inductions. In the late 90s scientists actually expected Tejas orders to cross 500 and that was the level of requirement as replacement for the Mig-21s.

Right now only 200 Mig-21s are left for phasing out. 80 or so (which will be phased out next year) will be replaced by MKIs and the remaining 120 Bison types will have LCA replacements.

As far as i know they should cancel the GE-engines and strap on the Kaveri which produces 49Kn to 51Kn. Some how the scientists at GTRE think that the GE-404 produces more than 52Kn and they did not believe me when i said it produces the same thrust.

The Kaveri produces 75Kn wet thrust compared to F-404s 85KN. At a bypass ratio of 0.34 we have a highly efficient engine in our kitty. The Kaveri produces 81KN of military thrust but guzzles more fuel than the AL-31FP and produces lesser power than GE F404. Efficiency matters and Kaveri is the least efficient of the engines we know about.

Requirements for LCA has crossed 60KN dry thrust too. So neither the K-9 nor the F404 fulfill requirements. Hence the need for F414. Once the K-10 (Snecma-GTRE engine) is ready it will replace the F414s after the decade. The LCA Mk1s will have the K-9 only after they come for upgrades and that is after this decade.

 

[SuperCommandoDhruv]

If the N-LCA crashes due to structural deficiencies then the entire project is taken back to the drawing board and a new prototype is made.

LCA has already completed 1500 flight tests. Its a solid design now. NLCA is same, with a stronger landing-gear. So, you don't need to cancel project and design a new plane even if NLCA crashes. At most, landing gear will be given some touches.

But NLCA faces different issues here. If NLCA crashed and Navy lost a pilot, then Indian people will react in stupid and emotional way. That will surely force Govt. to cancel NLCA project, like it happened in past with AWACS project, which set it behind by a decade otherwise, we won't need to waste money on Phalcons.

The aircraft currently filling Mig-21 shoes are the MKIs. Tejas has crossed it's shelf life and would obviously be seeing token inductions. In the late 90s scientists actually expected Tejas orders to cross 500 and that was the level of requirement as replacement for the Mig-21s.

Wrong.

First, Su-30MKI are not for replacing Mig-21.
Second, what is a token induction? Sounds like you are not happy with LCA's induction. I wouldn't call 52 Mirage as token induction. And, LCA's figures are much higher. 50 LCA-Mk1 + 120 LCA-Mk2. And, I didn't count NLCA yet.

So, can you explain what exactly you mean by TOKEN INDUCTION, Mr. Smart_Troll?

 

[SuperCommandoDhruv]

The aircraft currently filling Mig-21 shoes are the MKIs. Tejas has crossed it's shelf life and would obviously be seeing token inductions.

Post reported for trolling. Be careful when you pass such sweeping remarks. This is not Pak-defence forum.

Thanks.

 

[SATISH]

Tejas MK1 has crossed it's shelf-life. Hope Tejas MK2 fares well. A light point defence fighter is not in existence in today's scenario. We need more multi-mission air crafts.

 

[SuperCommandoDhruv]

The Kaveri produces 75Kn wet thrust compared to F-404s 85KN. At a bypass ratio of 0.34 we have a highly efficient engine in our kitty. The Kaveri produces 81KN of military thrust but guzzles more fuel than the AL-31FP and produces lesser power than GE F404. Efficiency matters and Kaveri is the least efficient of the engines we know about.

Reliability of supply chain is higher priority during war. Efficiency doesn't come in picture.

 

[SuperCommandoDhruv]

Tejas MK1 has crossed it's shelf-life. Hope Tejas MK2 fares well. A light point defence fighter is not in existence in today's scenario. We need more multi-mission air crafts.

LOL!! Do you even understand Indian scenario?

India is not USA or Britain, with no land borders with enemies. LCA is needed and very crucial for IAF. Stop reading too much of science fiction, baby. Stick to basics.

Firstly, You have no idea what you are talking. LCA's low flying abilities with LRO are wonders for taking out enemy defences across border.
Secondly, do you understand economics of war, baby? Check out how much one sortie of Su-30MKI costs and why Su-30 can't do a mission for which LCA is required. Su-30MKI has a Huge RCS. It can't do low-flying missions which LCA is capable of. Study these three aspects. Some fool above said that Su-30MKI is for replacing LCA. LMAO! He doesn't even know basic difference in roles of LCA and Su-30MKI, and started blabbering about LCA after reading some stupid media report on LCA.

Looks like this forum is reducing to troll forum just like Porkistan defence forum(PDF).

I am outta here.

 

[SATISH]

LOL!! Do you even understand Indian scenario?

India is not USA or Britain, with no land borders with enemies. LCA is needed and very crucial for IAF. Stop reading too much of science fiction, baby. Stick to basics.

Firstly, You have no idea what you are talking. LCA's low flying abilities with LRO are wonders for taking out enemy defences across border.
Secondly, do you understand economics of war, baby? Check out how much one sortie of Su-30MKI costs and why Su-30 can't do a mission for which LCA is required. Su-30MKI has a Huge RCS. It can't do low-flying missions which LCA is capable of. Study these three aspects. Some fool above said that Su-30MKI is for replacing LCA. LMAO! He doesn't even know basic difference in roles of LCA and Su-30MKI, and started blabbering about LCA after reading some stupid media report on LCA.

Looks like this forum is reducing to troll forum just like Porkistan defence forum(PDF).

I am outta here.

Oh...please...Do you even know the modern RoE? It is still 50% BVR and 50% WVR. It wont be 100% BVR at any stage. In olden days technology was not that advanced, so they had a specialized fighter for every role. Today technology has made it possible to increase the MMI levels. You soud like a kid from Orkut/youtube. And if you say the cost of sortie rate of Su 30 MKI is hight...check out the efficiency rae of SU 30 MKI. It has more time on station and can do multiple roles at the same time, which LCA can only dream of doing....you are comparing apples to Oranges.

And what is RCS having to do with 'low flying' of Su 30 MKI? are u smoking something?

If you cant accept the opinions of the members here and have a sane debate...you are free to walk out...and no one is holding your hand and asking you to stay here.

LCA is required and I dont deny it...but it is just to fill the numbers...the whole idea of a point defence fighter for a huge country like India is an outdated concept.

 

[p2prada]

I am outta here.

Thank You.

...................................

 

[maomao]

Yes, just like USA said there were WMD's in Iraq?
Or like it wasn't USA who created Jehadis to fight against Soviets and it turned all bad when they bit back americans(9/11)? LOL.

Dude, seriously, come out of your small coconut. If there is nothing on moon, you don't need to be so insecure. Otherwise, you sound like a jackas* to suggest that all countries on earth are fools to send probes to Moon, while your obama-fobama is smarter to back-off from Moon, fearing rising demand of Moon-landing missions from Asia, since that will expose your belly to the world.

It was a comment from one Chinese Space command officer that USA should repeat Moon landing, so we can get more accurate information on moon's minerology as well as rock samples. The very next day, NASA issued statement, that there won't be any moon landing repeat. LMAO!

And subsequently, in next week, Obama declared USA is cutting off from Moon mission due to shortage of funds.

Americans are no different from Pakistanis when it comes to keeping themselves in delusions, for the sake of hollow-pride.

And, this is not off-topic. I am talking about common mentality of Indians, who accept anything Gora sells, as gospel truth. Even GE engines don't produce thrusts which they claim in brochures.

Yeah sure kid, I will the day you hatch out of your "egg"!

It does not take a genius to research and find out that moon is hollow and has a very thin crust, which is a scientific fact! Moreover, if you have been reading/hearing those conspiracy theory nutjobs i.e. "dark side of the moon" conspiracy theorists, than get a check done of ur brain!
However, if you are hell bent on believing that US is going to get you, then you belong to the category of deluded people next door across the border!

All the best!!!!!!

 

[p2prada]

The moon is not hollow or it wouldn't be affecting tides on earth. The hollow hypothesis is increasingly seen as pseudo science.

The moon is rich in minerals and there are good chances of having some minerals that are not present on earth.

The near Zero G can help the semiconductor industry in making crystals that are near perfect for high technology research.

Then there is an abundance of Helium-3 which is probably one of the best types of fuel known to man.

Conquering the moon would mean we can think beyond the Earth. Perhaps a time will come when large parts of our race may populate other planets in our search for newer resources. The study of moon's geography and atmosphere will also allow us to think about terraforming planets to suit our needs.

There is no end to the advantages a moon mission can bring to us. After all, our space technology is only at it's infancy. Once we make Nuclear Pulse propulsion a reality and move on to newer types of engines Space may not be the final frontier.

 

[maomao]

^^^^^ What I have read is that the moon is hollow (by hollow it does not mean that it's a balloon), may be I have read wrong research; nevertheless, there is still a lot of things we don't know, and let the scientists refute the fact that moon is hollow!

 

[mattster]

Many of these "nutjobs" who believe in these conspiracy theories about the USA not really landing on the moon base that on the theory that since the US did it couple of times in the late 60's and 70's - then why did they suddenly stop lunar landings after that.

While it is ludicrous to believe that thousands of people involved the Apollo project perpetrated a massive fraud and kept it up this long, but these nuts/clowns are still out there.

But the question of why did they suddenly stop, and not go back to the moon again is certainly a valid question !


If you want an answer to this question - I would recommend a trip to the NASA Cape Canaveral Space Center in Florida where the Apollo rocket stages are on display horizontally like a museum piece. Its a trip I would recommend everyone takes, if they get a chance. It must have cost an absolute fortune to build the various rocket stages - you have to see it to believe how big it is. I did that last year.

A couple of points:

First off, even if they wanted to build an exact replica of the Apollo series rocket and lunar-landing module today - they couldnt do it. This is because many of the basic components used 40 years aqo like mission computers, etc are obsolete. They would have to redesign newer systems. Remember in those days there was no microprocessors. There would probably be thousands or 10s of thousands of obsolescence issues of electronic and mechanical parts.

The next thing that strikes you is the sheer cost of each such launch.
It would be absolute madness to keep going to the moon unless there was a compelling scientific reason to do so.

I laugh when folks talk about mining or manufacturing on the moon - its one thing to land there and take a few samples, but imagine for a second - what would be the cost or ROI(return on investment) for such a manufacturing project ??

 

[p2prada]

I laugh when folks talk about mining or manufacturing on the moon - its one thing to land there and take a few samples, but imagine for a second - what would be the cost or ROI(return on investment) for such a manufacturing project ??

The primary reason the moon mission was carried out was to beat the SU at it. The scientific capabilities of 3 men at a distance of 375000 Km is meaningless in the large scale.

Manufacturing is possible on the moon. Fact is there are sceptics until proven true by better people. Man cannot fly, the Wright brothers do it. Nuclear weapons don't exist, blow up Hiroshima. Man cannot leave the Earth, Gagarin does it. Man cannot go to the moon, Armstrong and crew do it. Moon cannot be used as a manufacturing base, xxxxx guys do it. Funnily enough there are always sceptics and will always be until proven otherwise.

When the Americans themselves claim the moon can be a good manufacturing base in the future and are planning moon bases, I don't have any reason not to believe them. There are things you can do on the moon that cannot be done on the earth. Like creating perfect crystals and spheres(bearing balls etc). Pretty soon we will need that capability or we will stagnate.

ROI for interstellar projects is very low in the beginning while costs are astoundingly high. As of the 20th century there were very few countries willing to participate in such projects. But with international collaboration this can be done. ISS is an example of that. In 20 years and later, China and India will be as big or bigger than the US economically, also with other countries joining the rich list in the future; we will be less pressed for finances.

 

[The Messiah]

^^^^^ What I have read is that the moon is hollow (by hollow it does not mean that it's a balloon), may be I have read wrong research; nevertheless, there is still a lot of things we don't know, and let the scientists refute the fact that moon is hollow!

The Hollow Moon theory is a pseudoscientific hypothesis proposing that Earth's Moon is either wholly hollow or otherwise contains a substantial interior space. No scientific evidence exists to support the idea.

The concept is related to or derived from the better-known Hollow Earth theory, and was an infrequent but recurring plot device in pre-spaceflight science fiction.

 

[mattster]

Not trying to derail this thread - but a few points.

There is a reason why neither the Soviets or European Space Agency have not undertaken any manned moon landings.
It just not worth the trouble or the money. there is no compelling scientific reason to do it. Both these teams have the technology to do it, but choose not to.

In my view the main reason the US did it was to thump their chest and say we were the first and we beat the Soviets.
Unless people want to build a launch pad to go to other planets - there cant be much of a reason for manned missions to the moon.

I just dont buy this mining or manufacturing on the moon.

 

[The Messiah]

Not trying to derail this thread - but a few points.

There is a reason why neither the Soviets or European Space Agency have not undertaken any manned moon landings.
It just not worth the trouble or the money. there is no compelling scientific reason to do it. Both these teams have the technology to do it, but choose not to.

In my view the main reason the US did it was to thump their chest and say we were the first and we beat the Soviets.
Unless people want to build a launch pad to go to other planets - there cant be much of a reason for manned missions to the moon.

I just dont buy this mining or manufacturing on the moon.

Im sure your ancestors wouldn't have thought that there desendent (you) would be posting on the internet.

Humans will go out into space in the future...whether it happens in the next 100 years or 1000 years or 10000 years etc...