ADA Tejas (LCA) News and Discussions

[ersakthivel]

Hey! If you want to donate money to an institution which didn't provide proper service (any semblance of education) that's all up to you.
If you don't want to be corrected in the forum then don't screw up in your analysis.
Whatever halo you think you're wearing doesn't absolve you from the sin of spewing BS!
Adios!

So you don't even hv the basic decency to disengage in a civilized manner???

I didn't call you names in my last post.


Why this ,"spewing bullshit",, blah,,,blah,

Every second year civil, or mech diploma students know you are an ignorant show off

, not worth even the crap you post here.


Why this showing off??

Only a fool will advertise his stupidity & be proud of that too,,,


What a disgusting behavior,,

After a page long convo , you couldn't even comprehend ,that the crap you pile up here is a laughing stock & calling me names,,,,,

 

[akk]

Everybody and everything teaches us something. I have learned how NOT to behave or respond. But is enough now. Each time I see a new message and hope for something interesting, I am disappointed. Is there no moderator on the forum to stop this please?

 

[ersakthivel]

Everybody and everything teaches us something. I have learned how NOT to behave or respond. But is enough now. Each time I see a new message and hope for something interesting, I am disappointed. Is there no moderator on the forum to stop this please?

Lots of interesting stuff in the thread below from page 1 to last page.



https://defenceforumindia.com/forum/threads/combat-aircraft-technology-and-evolution.47398/page-13


Sometimes convo gets hot in a few threads & threads get derailed.

Thats normal in all discussion forums

 

[ersakthivel]

Not quite!
If a 20% (say) increase in thrust can be achieved with 20-30% increase in engine weight, then the engine thrust/weight ratio would remain same or get worse! But it's inconsequential!
Because the AIRCRAFT thrust/weight ratio would see a major boost (as engine is only a small part of the aircraft weight!)
As such, a ~300 kg increase in Kaveri weight might be totally acceptable if it came with a 20% boost in thrust!

It all started with this seemingly innocuous post.

& My attempt to clear the air on such a totally misleading post.


Getting 300 kg extra weight at the tail of tejas , with same or worse engine thrust to weight ratio engine means,

the end of the road for tejas program

,Because it will ruin max G attained, AOA,ITR, STR Specs,

Why???

These specs are attained at much lower speeds than high sub sonic speeds at much lower engine dry thrust,

So extra 300 KGs + other weights needed to support this 300KGs are millstones around the neck of the fighter, which will pull down the fighter from improving its close combat specs,




&

Will lead to detailed reworking of weights inside fuselage, fly by wire RSS Codes,
Center of gravity management, etc, etc,

This is not the solution,IAF WILL NEVER ACCEPT IT.

The task for mk2 team is exactly opposite.


It is to get these numbers better, not worse,

GE 404 weighs 2185 pounds for its 84 KN Thrust ,with the twr of 8.

GE 414 weighs 2445 pounds for its 98 KN & has a twr of 9


dry thrust also improves,,

Bottom line is ,

ENGINE THRUST TO WEIGHT RATIO SHOULD IMPROVE ON EVERY NEW ITERATION OF THE ENGINE, FOR BETTER ITR, STR, AOA, MAX Gs pulled specs,



For a hundred Plus KG weight(10 percent) increase thrust increases by 20 percent,

This is by increase of thermodynamic efficiency,

If 20 percent thrust increase leads to just 20 percent weight increase ,(or 30 percent weight increase as suggested by this guy)

then other than mtow, all other specs will suffer.

For saying this I am hauled over the coals, my knowledge questioned, being called all kinds of names, etc, etc,,

 

[Kshithij]

Sometimes it si difficult to get the right words at the right time to articulate one's thoughts. That must not be considered as quackery

 

[Enquirer]

It all started with this seemingly innocuous post.

& My attempt to clear the air on such a totally misleading post.


Getting 300 kg extra weight at the tail of tejas means,

It is the end of the road for tejas program

,Because it will ruin max G attained, AOA,ITR, STR Specs,


&

Will lead to detailed reworking of weights inside fuselage, fly by wire RSS Codes,
Center of gravity management, etc, etc,

This is not the solution,IAF WILL NEVER ACCEPT IT.

The task for mk2 team is exactly opposite.


It is to get these numbers better, not worse,

GE 404 weighs 2185 pounds for its 84 KN Thrust ,with the twr of 8.

GE 414 weighs 2445 pounds for its 98 KN & has a twr of 9


dry thrust also improves,,

Bottom line is ,

ENGINE THRUST TO WEIGHT RATIO SHOULD IMPROVE ON EVERY NEW ITERATION OF THE ENGINE, FOR BETTER ITR, STR, AOA, MAX Gs pulled specs,



For a hundred Plus KG weight(10 percent) increase thrust increases by 20 percent,

This is by increase of thermodynamic efficiency,

If 20 percent weight increase leads to just 20 percent weight increase ,

then other than mtow, all other specs will suffer.

For saying this I am hauled over the coals, my knowledge questioned, being called all kinds of names, etc, etc,,

You're back at it - after the disengagement?? Eh?

The extra weight doesn't hang on the TAIL of the aircraft, but it's uniformly DISTRIBUTED along the engine; in fact the additional weight is more towards the blades than near the nozzle section!

I'll say this once again - aircraft requiring 6x additional weight to 'compensate' x extra kgs somewhere in the third quarter of aircraft's spine is RIDICULOUS! Moreover if the 20% additional thrust gives you the opportunity to haul 2000 kgs extra, is it really a issue to redistribute a small fraction of that in the foresection (while you're doing as major an op as replacing the engine)?

Your analysis is BS; your knowledge of physics/aerodynamics is BS. As I said, it happens to those who somehow manage to read/hear some advanced terminology without understanding the basics! That's the inherent disadvantage of an education system where folks displaying as little as 35% knowledge of the foundational concepts are allowed to waddle in advanced courses!!

 

[ersakthivel]

You're back at it - after the disengagement?? Eh?

The extra weight doesn't hang on the TAIL of the aircraft, but it's uniformly DISTRIBUTED along the engine; in fact the additional weight is more towards the blades than near the nozzle section!

I'll say this once again - aircraft requiring 6x additional weight to 'compensate' x extra kgs somewhere in the third quarter of aircraft's spine is RIDICULOUS! Moreover if the 20% additional thrust gives you the opportunity to haul 2000 kgs extra, is it really a issue to redistribute a small fraction of that in the foresection (while you're doing as major an op as replacing the engine)?

Your analysis is BS; your knowledge of physics/aerodynamics is BS. As I said, it happens to those who somehow manage to read/hear some advanced terminology without understanding the basics! That's the inherent disadvantage of an education system where folks displaying as little as 35% knowledge of the foundational concepts are allowed to waddle in advanced courses!!

Engine sits at the tail of the plane is the common idea.

Is the engine stretched from nose to tail of the fighter , for uniform distribution??

Blades, nozzles all sit on the tail of the fighter, not in center or mid fuselage,

Hauling 2000 KG only increases MTOW.

All other close combat specs like max AOA Pulled, STR, ITR, Max G pulled at will suffer BECAUSE close combat happens at corner speeds, & at far lower thrust than even peak dry thrust,

Once you reach peak dry thrust your speed becomes near high sub sonic & you can't maneuver with high STR,ITR,AOA, Max G pulled.

You are in essence buildin a bomb truck,

Not a cutting edge fighter with top notch close combat specs

Reply without using your much "vaunted subjective opinions " on my capabilities & that of the education system I went through.

REBUT A TECHNICAL ARGUMENT WITH A TECHNICAL POINT,

Lets see,

 

[Enquirer]

You & your freaking apologies,

Where are the SCBs situated??

In HPT High pressure turbine,

Where is the HPT situated??

At the tail, near the nozzle,

Even your lame excuse is a complete lie.


If you increase the weight of hot section SCBs , your engine gains weight only at its tail.

Not uniformly distributed.

So the final excuse you use , to get at me is also a complete lie.

Boy oh boy!!
You're still not satisfied by the public humiliation you're subjecting yourself to.
So, SCBs/HPT section is at the tail end, near the nozzle. Wonder where the afterburner section is???

(you've 30 mins to edit your nonsense or forever leave a record of your third grade knowledge!)

See where the HOT section of the engine is??

 

[ersakthivel]

Boy oh boy!!
You're still not satisfied by the public humiliation you're subjecting yourself to.
So, SCBs/HPT section is at the tail end, near the nozzle. Wonder where the afterburner section is???

(you've 30 mins to edit your nonsense or forever leave a record of your third grade knowledge!)

You can take all the time in the world,

What happened to your earliest claim of engine's extra 300 kg weight being evenly distributed???

Which weighs more??
After burner or HPT with SCB??

Lets see how far you show your KNOWLEDGE in


Challenging quacks,

Improving quality of information,,,,

Diminishing Apetetites,


Saving new members from falling into the divide, .

Lets see how far the forum 's torch bearer, guardian angel performs his job in busting,
Quacks

 

[Enquirer]

You can take all the time in the world,

Which weighs more??
After burner or HPT with SCB??

After burner is basically an empty chamber to combust injected fuel. The blade section will obviously be heavier (it's what I've said multiple times). And the HOT section with blades is NOT at the tail!!!!

 

[ersakthivel]

After burner is basically an empty chamber to combust injected fuel. The blade section will obviously be heavier (it's what I've said multiple times). And the HOT section with blades is NOT at the tail!!!!

That after burner is an empty chamber sticking out of engine.


Scaffolding of the engine inside the fighter, to fit the engine in the plane, ends at compressor section..

For all practical purposes these HPTs are the engine tail, with respect to weight & CG.

Light metal after burner chamber doesnt hv much weight to pull the CG back beyond HPT.

Its an empty chamber where hot gases expand has minimal impact on engine CG.


Not quite!
If a 20% (say) increase in thrust can be achieved with 20-30% increase in engine weight, then the engine thrust/weight ratio would remain same or get worse! But it's inconsequential!
Because the AIRCRAFT thrust/weight ratio would see a major boost (as engine is only a small part of the aircraft weight!)
As such, a ~300 kg increase in Kaveri weight might be totally acceptable if it came with a 20% boost in thrust!

Above is your post,

You haven't talked about weight distribution along the engine in that.

Suddenly you are saying that you were talking about weight distribution along the engine!!!!

Whole argument is about ,what happens to fighting specs due to engine weight increasing with no TWR increase for the engine.

The argument you had with me for pages is about CG Shift & weight gains in other parts of fighter,
Due to higher engine weight,

Now you are saying ,"weight distribution of the engine",

What is weight distribution of the engine got to do with the fighter's fighting specs???

 

[Enquirer]

Whole argument is about ,what happens to fighting specs due to engine weight increasing with no TWR increase for the engine.

I don't ask for it, but you continue to provide proof of irreparable mental derangement!
Whole argument is about increase in TWR of AIRCRAFT!

The argument you had with me for pages is about CG Shift & weight gains in other parts of fighter,
Due to higher engine weight,

That's your fixation. My contention is that it's a CG adjustment is trivial....move on!

Now you are saying ,"weight distribution of the engine",

Now? I gave it timely treatment it required.

What is weight distribution of the engine got to do with the fighter's fighting specs???

Is that a rhetoric or your own confusion. I don't care.

It has been established beyond doubt that you're just a bumbling idiot who likes to throw technical terms to show off, but has neither skills or intelligence to perform a scientific analysis.
Your chelas may disagree - you've inculcated some febrile minds into your cult! The rational ones will know.

Now F off!

 

[Enquirer]

That after burner is an empty chamber sticking out of engine.


Scaffolding of the engine inside the fighter, to fit the engine in the plane, ends at compressor section..

For all practical purposes these HPTs are the engine tail, with respect to weight & CG.

Light metal after burner chamber doesnt hv much weight to pull the CG back beyond HPT.

Its an empty chamber where hot gases expand has minimal impact on engine CG.


Not quite!
If a 20% (say) increase in thrust can be achieved with 20-30% increase in engine weight, then the engine thrust/weight ratio would remain same or get worse! But it's inconsequential!
Because the AIRCRAFT thrust/weight ratio would see a major boost (as engine is only a small part of the aircraft weight!)
As such, a ~300 kg increase in Kaveri weight might be totally acceptable if it came with a 20% boost in thrust!

Above is your post,

You haven't talked about weight distribution along the engine in that.

Suddenly you are saying that you were talking about weight distribution along the engine!!!!

Whole argument is about ,what happens to fighting specs due to engine weight increasing with no TWR increase for the engine.

The argument you had with me for pages is about CG Shift & weight gains in other parts of fighter,
Due to higher engine weight,

Now you are saying ,"weight distribution of the engine",

What is weight distribution of the engine got to do with the fighter's fighting specs???

Also, why are you posting the same crap again & again & again.....even after disingenuous pledges to disengage?

 

[lcafanboy]

GTRE has issued a tender for 'Expression of Interest for Altitude Tests of Kaveri Engine and its Derivative', bid opening on 1st Aug 18

Dimensions & details of Engine as per EOI document
Inlet Dia : 749mm
Max Dia : 940mm
Length : 3900mm

LP Comp - Three stage
HP Comp - Six stage
HP Turbine - single stage & cooled
LP Turbine - single stage
Main Combustion Chamber - annular direct flow
Afterburner system with axi-symmetric exhaust nozzle
The engine has a Kaveri full Authority Digital Engine Control System (KADECS)

Kaveri is of following performance class at Indian Standard Atmosphere (ISA) Sea level Static (SLS)

Dry Thrust 52 kN
Dry SFC 0.78 kg/kgf/hr
Dry air flow 77.8 kg/sec
Reheat Thrust 81 kN
Reheat SFC 2.03 kg/kgf/hr
Reheat air flow 77.8 kg/sec

Tests to be conducted in two phases in next 3 years Phase 1 AT-1 75 hrs Phase 2 AT-2 100 hrs

 

[charlie]

I think this @Enquirer guy is actually an old poster @Scrutator , he was very active on early 2017 and finally leave forum in frustration after losing continuous technical battle against some really good poster.

Even I thought it was the same guy but @Scrutator sounded somewhat mature though same in nature but he would never swear at people, but @Enquirer sounds like a kid.

 

[Enquirer]

GTRE has issued a tender for 'Expression of Interest for Altitude Tests of Kaveri Engine and its Derivative', bid opening on 1st Aug 18

Dimensions & details of Engine as per EOI document
Inlet Dia : 749mm
Max Dia : 940mm
Length : 3900mm

LP Comp - Three stage
HP Comp - Six stage
HP Turbine - single stage & cooled
LP Turbine - single stage
Main Combustion Chamber - annular direct flow
Afterburner system with axi-symmetric exhaust nozzle
The engine has a Kaveri full Authority Digital Engine Control System (KADECS)

Kaveri is of following performance class at Indian Standard Atmosphere (ISA) Sea level Static (SLS)

Dry Thrust 52 kN
Dry SFC 0.78 kg/kgf/hr
Dry air flow 77.8 kg/sec
Reheat Thrust 81 kN
Reheat SFC 2.03 kg/kgf/hr
Reheat air flow 77.8 kg/sec

Tests to be conducted in two phases in next 3 years Phase 1 AT-1 75 hrs Phase 2 AT-2 100 hrs

Does anyone have ideas about how Kaveri in this configuration would be used?
I feel it's pretty much set now that an engine below 100KN would not be considered for Tejas Mk2 (the proverbial bus for Mk1A has been already been missed)

If I have to take a guess, this could power the UNMANNED Tejas - which project is just taking off.
Unmanned Tejas (even if not used as combat drone) could act as buddy refueler to Tejas (or any other aircraft). This could be a bare bones Tejas (no radar, SPJ etc.). It could easily carry 2.5 tonnes internally & 2 tonnes externally thus capable of transferring around 3 tonnes fuel to any another aircraft!

If bare bones unmanned Tejas could be built for under $30 million then ten of these could be made for the price of a single A330 refueler! Ten Tejas refueler could do 10 simultaneous refueling (vs just 2 for A330!), and not to mention 10 different rendezvous points vs 1.

Just an interesting thought.

 

[ersakthivel]

I get no pleasure in swearing, but once an imbecile drags you into the mud then it's hard not to get dirty.
Adios!

The arguments I MADE hv lot of holes & I DID THAT On PURPOSE.

I hv repeatedly said AOA ,ITR,STR all of them are achieved at lower subsonic speeds & at a thrust far lower than peak thrust.

Extra weight spoils all that.

I expted you to ask,

If that's the case,

Why cant the pilot pull the stick further to increase the thrust,

to reach the speed ,beating the extra weight , & get the STR,ITR,AOA G etc.

Answer- perfectly possible.

Since there is more spare thrust.

But you couldn't understand it

Instead started for all foul words in the dictionary,,

& Shifted your research to auto refuelling unmanned tejas, !!!!!
Funny guy you are.

 

[Enquirer]

The arguments I MADE hv lot of holes & I DID THAT On PURPOSE.

I hv repeatedly said AOA ,ITR,STR all of them are achieved at lower subsonic speeds & at a thrust far lower than peak thrust.

Extra weight spoils all that.

I expted you to ask,

If that's the case,

Why cant the pilot pull the stick further to increase the thrust,

to reach the speed ,beating the extra weight , & get the STR,ITR,AOA G etc.

Answer- perfectly possible.

Since there is more spare thrust.

But you couldn't understand it

Instead started for all foul words in the dictionary,,

& Shifted your research to auto refuelling unmanned tejas, !!!!!
Funny guy you are.

I forgot about you, and moved onto other stuff in my life. You don't intrigue me!
Seems like you're not able to get me out of your mind though!

I can't believe I have to keep reminding you a million times - the hypothesis was not to add weight for kicks but to achieve HIGHER THRUST. I could try and explain once again, but either you're not smart enough to understand or you're too stubborn to admit you misspoke!

So, I don't want to waste my time on you anymore.

Please talk to @Willy3 who follows your cult blindly.

 

[lcafanboy]

ADE has issued a tender for Tejas MKIA DFCC Chassis Assembly. The tender opens by end august and first unit to be supplied in 3 months from date of contract

The fabrication of the chassis has to be carried out in Three Stages, based on the following Terms &
Conditions:
1) FIRST UNIT - PROTOTYPE UNIT (01 No.)
• The first prototype unit shall be fabricated using the first set of chassis component drawings released
and approved by ADE.
• The first prototype unit shall be delivered within 03 months from the date of placement of
order/contract.
• Depending on the outcome of the fabricated components and results of the preliminary assembly
tests and checks, the second set of drawings will be released with modifications (if required).
2) SECOND UNIT - QUALIFICATION TEST (QT) UNIT (01 No.)
• The second unit, which will be the Qualification Test (QT) unit, shall be fabricated from the modified
set of drawings approved and released by ADE.
• The QT unit shall be delivered within 03 months from the date of receipt of the modified drawings. T0
for the QT unit starts from the date of receipt of the modified drawings from ADE.
• Based on the Qualification Tests of the QT unit carried out in ADE in collaboration BEL Bangalore,
the third set of components drawings will be released (if required).
3) THIRD, FOURTH & FIFTH UNITS - FLIGHT WORTHY UNITS (03 Nos.)
• 03 numbers of Flight Worthy units shall be fabricated from the final modified set of drawings
approved and released by ADE. T0 for these three units starts from the date of receipt of the
modified drawings from ADE.
• These units shall be delivered together within 04 months from the date of receipt of the final modified
drawings.
• These final flights worthy units will accepted based on the mechanical inspection reports and
Qualification Tests results carried out in ADE in collaboration BEL Bangalore.
ADE has the right to short-close the demand, in case the design requirement of fins with 0.4mm or lesser
thickness (as mentioned in Annexure 'A') is not achieved even after the Second Unit (QT Unit) is fabricated.
4) Detailed drawings shall be obtained from ADE against Non Disclosure Agreement for details refer
1.1, Part 1(A) of RFP at Page No. 3.

Mk1A coming

 

[Enquirer]

ADE has issued a tender for Tejas MKIA DFCC Chassis Assembly. The tender opens by end august and first unit to be supplied in 3 months from date of contract

The fabrication of the chassis has to be carried out in Three Stages, based on the following Terms &
Conditions:
1) FIRST UNIT - PROTOTYPE UNIT (01 No.)
• The first prototype unit shall be fabricated using the first set of chassis component drawings released
and approved by ADE.
• The first prototype unit shall be delivered within 03 months from the date of placement of
order/contract.
• Depending on the outcome of the fabricated components and results of the preliminary assembly
tests and checks, the second set of drawings will be released with modifications (if required).
2) SECOND UNIT - QUALIFICATION TEST (QT) UNIT (01 No.)
• The second unit, which will be the Qualification Test (QT) unit, shall be fabricated from the modified
set of drawings approved and released by ADE.
• The QT unit shall be delivered within 03 months from the date of receipt of the modified drawings. T0
for the QT unit starts from the date of receipt of the modified drawings from ADE.
• Based on the Qualification Tests of the QT unit carried out in ADE in collaboration BEL Bangalore,
the third set of components drawings will be released (if required).
3) THIRD, FOURTH & FIFTH UNITS - FLIGHT WORTHY UNITS (03 Nos.)
• 03 numbers of Flight Worthy units shall be fabricated from the final modified set of drawings
approved and released by ADE. T0 for these three units starts from the date of receipt of the
modified drawings from ADE.
• These units shall be delivered together within 04 months from the date of receipt of the final modified
drawings.
• These final flights worthy units will accepted based on the mechanical inspection reports and
Qualification Tests results carried out in ADE in collaboration BEL Bangalore.
ADE has the right to short-close the demand, in case the design requirement of fins with 0.4mm or lesser
thickness (as mentioned in Annexure 'A') is not achieved even after the Second Unit (QT Unit) is fabricated.
4) Detailed drawings shall be obtained from ADE against Non Disclosure Agreement for details refer
1.1, Part 1(A) of RFP at Page No. 3.

Mk1A coming

Interesting to note that the Mk1A chassis prototype will be subject to tests that might result in modifications!!!!
I was presuming the tests & resultant modifications are related to the undercarriage (only) - the rest should be the same as Mk1.

But then, I thought HAL was in charge of Mk1A (including the work related rearranging the LRUs & reduce undercarriage/landingGear weight). Wonder why ADE is issuing tenders? Something doesn't fit well!

Perhaps this has something to do with the inclusion of RWR & SPJ internal to the Mk1A airframe - A DRDO project that's been recently approved.