And your qualifications for criticising the marshals ? Flying an office desk at mach 2 vis'-a-vis' men who actually serve and are better placed to understanding the requirements and evaluating the programs ? I'd chose the judgement of the latter. What will you do if your "new man in charge" continues to buy "foreign toys"? Send him to Andaman too ?
Fartsy matsy in Vayu stratpost conferece 2014 calls tejas mk1 below Mig-21 bison level.
But Suneeth krishna the IAF group catain and the most experienced test pilot of tejas mk1 calls it "at least equal to
upgraded mirage-2000".
Please tell me when IAF Worthy Mateswaran put his ass on the tejas pilot seat and "intimately knew " that it was below Mig-21 bison.
Who is the armchair pilot here? Suneeth krishna or Matheswaran?
So whom will we send to Andaman?
And this is what Cmde Jaydeep Maolankar, Test Pilot of the Tejas program and Cmdr Sukesh Nagaraj think about tejas mk1 as posted by karthik in bharath rakshak forum.
Attended my first Aero India this Saturday. I won't describe the difficulties in getting into the show, but once I did, it was quite alright. The highlight for me was the conversations I had with Cmde Jaydeep Maolankar, Test Pilot of the Tejas program and Cmdr Sukesh Nagaraj (Deputy Project Director, NLCA).
I was lucky to spot Mao sir alone and walked up to him, introduced myself and spoke of my association with BRF and then we had a conversation on the Tejas program for half an hour..he was incredibly frank, friendly, didn't hold back any facts and only left when he got a call from someone..here are the salient points of our conversation, some of which we already know but am listing it anyway.
- Tejas LSP6 is the platform on which the spin chute will be integrated but it's not here as yet. Will get done before FOC.
- Tejas Mk1 has achieved the IOC AoA limit of 22 deg (in IOC-2 it was officially stated that it has cleared 24 deg AOA and will reach 26 to 28 deg according to test pilot Suneeth krishna )and they will go a couple of degrees further in tests, when the spin chutes are integrated on LSP6.
This is to ensure that they know that the airplane is safe even at higher alpha although the FBW will restrict it to the AoA limit for FOC for service pilots (which is higher than 22 deg, but he didn't say how much)
- Mao Sir scoffed at the suggestion that the engine was choking at higher alpha. He said there is no such thing, but rather because it was designed initially for the Kaveri's airflow and had to redesign it for the F-404. They have already tried various intakes on the LCA, with/without spring mounted doors on the intakes.
- Tejas MK2 will get an approx 10mm increase in diameter for the increased air flow requirement of the F-414 (Cmdr Sukesh Nagaraj confirmed this as well). Too small a difference to be visible to the naked eye for us jingos. The spring mounted doors may also be bigger if needed
- When asked about the STR and ITR rates of the Tejas, he simply smiled and said "it's enough, let me put it that way". When I queried him further, asking about the ASR that the IAF had set based on the Mirage-2000 and MiG-29's STR and ITR, his smile vanished and he got serious.
He said that when people look at 10 different brochures and come up with requirements, without looking at whether meeting all those requirements is even possible for ANY one fighter, they set themselves and the program up for failure.
He was very frank about this, stating that even those brochure specs were just that- brochure specs that even those famed fighters sometimes don't meet. But they were taken as benchmarks anyway and then, without even bothering to look at the technological base in India, the ASR was prepared.
- He was full of praise for the handling of the Tejas. It's a true delight to fly and both he and Grp Cpt Suneet Krishna have tremendous confidence in the aircraft itself. He said that they both push the aircraft to its current limits without any worry since the FCS is very good. He did mention that they didn't push the Tejas Mk1 to its limits at the airshow but just wanted to display that it is maneuverable enough.
- When I asked him whether the Navy fully backs the NLCA program, he laughed and said "I'm here, aren't I?". So all in all, it appears that the IN is backing the program fully
- NP1 hasn't flown more than 4 flights because they're re-designing some of the structures on board. This is the additional strengthening required for handling the thumping that is a carrier landing. The landing gear is being re-designed since its overweight and NP2 is going to fly soon.
- I brought up the point he made at AI-2011 about how the Tejas should've started as a carrier variant and then gone on to the IAF variant. He seemed genuinely happy that someone had remembered that point of his and described the main issue with the NLCA NP1.
The issue as he described it was that the LCA didn't have a central keel to pass the structural loads to, something he said that the AMCA won't face since it's a twin engine fighter. This meant that they had to put new attachment points which aren't the ideal solution and result in the bulky appearance of the current landing gear.
- I was going to ask him about the AMCA naval variant and he said that currently there is no plan for it.
At this point he had to leave and I was disappointed since I hadn't gotten to discussing anything about the Elta 2032/MMR, Litening LDP and the weapons on the Mk1 such as the Derby/Python V/R-77/Astra and Sudarshan..
When asked about the STR and ITR rates of the Tejas, he simply smiled and said "it's enough, let me put it that way". When I queried him further, asking about the ASR that the IAF had set based on the Mirage-2000 and MiG-29's STR and ITR, his smile vanished and he got serious.
He said that when people look at 10 different brochures and come up with requirements, without looking at whether meeting all those requirements is even possible for ANY one fighter, they set themselves and the program up for failure.
He was very frank about this, stating that even those brochure specs were just that- brochure specs that even those famed fighters sometimes don't meet. But they were taken as benchmarks anyway and then, without even bothering to look at the technological base in India, the ASR was prepared.
So looking at ten different brochures and adding them all up in one ASR, without even bothering to know whether it is possible technically is the view of Cmde Jaydeep Maolankar on the so called shortfalls.
And that too expecting them to be met in hot indian conditions where wing lift drops 12 percent and engine thrust falls 10 percent is even more unrealistic.because most of the fancy ITRs and STRs mentioned for other fancy fighters are for IDSA conditions where temp and atmospheric conditions are vastly different from the punishing indian conditions.
In a recent flight from france to reunion islands rafale with two external fuel tanks and no weapons needed refuelling every 1500 Km, that too even for an optimal high altitude ferry range flight conditions in hot inidan ocean climate!!!
Incidentally IOC-2 tejas mk1 press release(when center line fuel tank was not validated!!!) says that tejas has a range of 1700 Kms
If we add extra fuel tanks and weapons on rafale for combat mission in punishing high temperature low altitude intrusion flight profile in the sub continent, how much will be optimal combat range?
It will be nice if IAF releases what the six famed MMRCA contenders achieved as top specs in these hot indian conditions. Why those details are kept in sealed covers?
Tejas mk1 has a half fuel TWR of 1.07 with a wing loading much lower than Gripen C, rafale, typhoon, F-16 , F-18, Mig-35 or for that matter any other fighter plane in the world.
A good enough combination for good ITRs (which enable HMDS enabled visually cued high off boresight deadly R-73 WVR missile shot , which even rafale does not have) for which it was designed. SO expecting higher STR from this platform is unrealistic.
And the so called old hag rants of AIR INTAKE BAD was completely rejected by Cmde Jaydeep Maolankar.
And IOC-2 clearly says that AOA 24 deg reached. SO there can be no problem with air intakes , if they can sustain such high alpha . And it is slated to go to 26-28 range within fly by wire restrictions , which is pretty much the norm for any fly by wire fighter.
And even for 98 Kn engine tejas mk2 they are proposing just 10 mm size increase in air intake. SO why are people criticizing the 84 Kn engined tejas mk1's air intake as small and inadequate?
If IAF asks Dssault to give a radar as big as SU-30 MKI, along with thrust vectoring engine and tail boom radar in rafale , will dassault be able to do it?
And that too expecting brochure specs to be met in hot indian conditions where wing lift drops 12 percent and engine thrust falls 10 percent is even more unrealistic.
Because most of the fancy ITRs and STRs mentioned for other fancy fighters are for IDSA conditions where temp and atmospheric conditions are vastly different from the punishing indian conditions.
It will be nice if IAF releases what the six famed MMRCA contenders achieved as top specs in these hot indian conditions. Why those details are kept in sealed covers?
Even if the IAf does not disclose it because it was bound by secrecy laws in MMRCA contracts, the makers of these 6 MMRCA contenders can publicly declare what are the extreme specs achieved by their mean machines in indian conditions.
But none of them has done so. Why?
Twinblade
Value outside opinions. These would be good for you as well as IAF. There are few training, procurement and structural problems with IAF. They just dropped to ground a brand new $400 million transport plane. Accident rates are very high in IAF and Marshals know about it but can do nothing. They at the moment are hell bent on acquiring a very expensive Rafale, even if it bankrupts the nation, not even with the initial purchase price of $20 billion but with spares, training and excessive repairs after every one hour flight, year after year. There is not much TOT, which the French would give you that easily with this deal.
Rely on MK1 fighter. It is the best in business. We already have 200 of these another hundred can be ordered. MK1 can shoot any plane which Pakistan and China can put out against IAF in an air battle. Wait until PAKFA is ready in five to seven years. Plug the Medium fighter hole in the IAF inventory with upgraded LCA 2. India can seek outside help at tenth of the Rafale cost. Swedes have already offered that. The latter would be cheaper and educate the IAF and HAL, DRDO better.
Marshals have Rafale stuck in their head. As long as tax payers are footing the bill, they wish to have merry go round. They have stopped thinking of anything else. Sometime to break this logjam, a few Marshals, the experts have to be relieved of their duties so an alternative could be more objectively looked at.
Now do you get my point.
Stay away from making disparaging remarks about other members. You made some about me in your post 548. Who knows others may be better qualified than you are. At 72 years of age I have earned a huge distinction of offering better advice than the most.
Ask him to reply to this post , he will be quiet for a few weeks!!!!
