No where that article mentions that the Kaveri weight is reduced to 1000 kg or the thrust has been increased from 72 kn.
I linked Bharat Rakshak link just below the original quote.What is the source? Please give link. It appears like a excel sheet
We will be operating 123 mk1a (40 mk1 will be upgraded to mk1a. It will be second most numerous fighter in iaf after su30mki by 2030 untill mwf crosses it's numbers.
Mwf is mini rafale . Rafale is twin engine so operations and maintenance cost are much higher . We need Single engine birds to make up the numbers .
Mwf will have hardly an similarity with mk1a. From radar to software, to jammer and to even system architecture, will be different, their wont be any Similarity in the mission computers due to different origin. The thing they will share are the weapons not anything from avionics .
This is besides my point. I'm trying to point out the stupidity in @Avaidhya Tiwari's logic. He thinks that Kaveri was a success so we will remove the Rafale's M88, and use the Kaveri instead, because "indigenous alternatives are available".
Cites a dead Facebook link. Also in contradiction with many other articles on the Kaveri since.
They would be jumping all over the place about how the production MWF and AMCA would fly with Kaveri.
So why not just ditch Rafale entirely? Why not just rely on ourselves? You're making stupid half baked arguments.
We could have said "no, we don't want to export". Instead we sent a Tejas team there, let the RMAF evaluate it and responded to their RFI. Stop being silly, use your brain. We very much intend to export it.
Secifications of Kaveri by DRDO (It was updated in 2018):
From the DRDO website :
Bharat Rakshak is also a forum like this. I have seen many more ridiculous excel sheets. That is why I asked for source with proper details, not BR-forum.
The 123 is not a big number when being made fully indigenous. the small number of Indian fighters is due to India lacking ability to make them till now.
What? Different origins? MWF & LCA are both made by same agencies and using same people. MWF is like an upgrade of LCA just like Super-hornet from hornet or Su30 MKi from Su27. MWF will use same or upgraded version of the items used in LCA MK1A, depending on how much upgrade happens in the time gap between Mk1A & MWF.
It is not flying with kaveri but K10 engine. Since it is not yet developed, they are skeptical about stating that. Last time GTRE had faced severe brickbats and the people in GTRE stall would always be pessimistic in exhibitions. So, they learnt to not open their mouth before the project reaches certain maturity level. They are just keeping quiet for this reason, not that K10 isn't under development
I am being extremely coherent. The most important aspect here is "uncertainty". We don't have a guarantee in R&D. So, we take as many options as possible. We get rafale with UTTAM & kaveri as an indigenous option while also getting MWF developed in India to hedge the risk.
We don't say no so directly. No is always said in indirect and polite manner so as to keep options open in the future. It is always better to say no in terms of "capability deficit" rather than "intention deficit". This is true in real life too.
We've been making most of the Su-30 MKI indigenously, and now the Tejas MK1. Please find another more sane argument.
The MiG 21 Bison was far shittier than the Tejas yet it was used on the 27th. No AF will induct 123 birds and then completely ignore them, especially when the Mk1 and Mk1A are probably the most modern fighetrs iwth the IAF right now.
It is only physically similar to the LCA. It has new CLAW, and will share avionics and other equipment with AMCA. So IRST, Radar, and net centric capabilities are definitely new, and much more massive than the F/A-18C/D to F/A-18E/F. ADA has already stated this.
Right but fitting the Kaveri on the mk1A is something they can definitely do. It will improve performance over the mk1. This is your own argument. Yet you claim that Tejas is somehow some irrelevant plane.
Oh ok. Some really great imagination you have there.
Exactly. Rafale is a proven design. We won't modify it by fitting parts from other designs which aren't proven, like Kaveri, Uttam and other things.
Right. HAL doesn't have to answer. Ask how the US denies F-22 sales? They say no. Nobody offers planes like this and then says "we don't have capability to sell". Do you realise how insane you sound? That means we just wasted the RMAF's time. If we said no straight away, they wouldn't waste their time evaluating Tejas. There's also the money wasted in flying Tejas there and maintaining it.
I have already told you that those are the target specifications. The fact is Kaveri never achieved 81 KN thrust and was shut down after achieving 72 KN thrust in 2012.
which item can you clarify,how drdo made things are upgraded hal things.
https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/systems/f414.htm
Su30 MKI has been made fully only since Fy15. Till then India used to import engine. Duh!
In its time, MiG21 was much betetr. Now, it is just being continued and not given too much importance. Tejas MK1A is not yet developed. Many electronic capability is being developed.
Not new but upgraded ones. Only some items are new like AESA and few other avionics. The problem we have is with the physical design itself. The Tejas is too small and hence undesirable
Tejas is irrelevant plane and that is why we don't put much efforts. It should be cmmon sense. The 3.5ton payload is considered as too measly and only good for air superiority/ interception role. It is considered as being too light to carry ground bombings. After 2 drop tanks and 2 AAM, the remaining payload weight is 1.5ton which is too less. hence the physical design of Tejas MK1 itself is undesirable. Regardless of what electronics you put, it will still be undesirable
The design is proven. So, when Kaveri and UTTAM are proven, then it will work. The main problem here is about physical design of airframe of Tejas Mk1 is faulty and hence we get Rafale's airframe design from France. Tejas Mk1 is irrelevant plane and is only used to maintain assembly line expertise and to ensure the workers are well tarined.
We can't be like USA as we have only 1 plane LCA. USA has many planes and does offer F15, F16 to others. They only refuse certain models. So, it is different
It should be common sense that if dry variant is working, the engine is working well. the wet variant is the after burner and does not involve much of the complex parts like hot turbines etc. All these parts rests in the dry core. So, if that is working, it mean engine is working.
MK1A is esentially an upgrade over MK1. It has several new things like EW, SPJ, AESA etc over MK1. These are made by DRDO in various departments like LRDE, DARE etc. HAL upgrades some parts liek avionics in HAL-SAMTEL JV etc.
The price of F414 is politically decided, not a function of cost. Even if it costs USA just $1000 to make it, it will still price it high as it is monopoly scenario.
What does the above BS has got to do anything with what I asked. It is very clearly written everywhere that the target wet thrust of 81 KN was never achieved. You claimed that Kaveri has achieved 81 KN thrust and a weight of 1000 kg. I am simply asking you to prove either of the above statements. I have categorically proved that Kaveri never achieved more than 72KN of thrust and it was shut down after that.
Irrelevant. We have two airframes we can build now.
You're starting to sound really dumb. The MiG 21 Bison was our primary interceptor on 27th. That's not a platform you just ignore. Again, why buy 123 planes if the design is so useless? We could have bout 40 and left it at that.
I was discussing the MWF there, not mk1A
Right. We buy 123 irrelevant jets. We have too much cash lying around so we decided 123 "waste" fighters is good use of it. As for your common sense, if we integrate Kaveri, with the specs you claim it has, it will improve MTOW. So 3.8T can become around 4T. With 4T, it can easily carry 2xJDAMS with 1 drop tank, and 2xAAMS, and a IRST pod. That works out well. Stop making up BS by picking random arbitrary configurations. Also Kaveri is shorter, so it afford more space internally. That can be used for more fuel, reducing the need for external tanks.
The Kaveri didn't succeed. Why is this hard to comprehend? There is no evidence that Kaveri was successful. Literally no evidence. The best we have are rumours. No major news site reported it. Its not even in the DRDO newsletters. The Tejas airframe works just fine, and will be even better with the supposed Kaveri. The Tejas had issues with F404's intakes, which could not be enlarged for sufficient airflow. The Tejas was designed with Kaver's intakes in mind. We could have easily just stuck the Kaveri and would have improved the Tejas's performance. Use your brain.
That's irrelevant. They deny the sales. Same way, we don't waste someone's time, and our money. We just tell them no, we won't export. It literally takes less effort and money. You're being really stupid here.
You clearly know nothing about jet engines. Don't make up nonsense.
Only you noticed this change and nobody else. And this supposed change is irrelevant. Unless DRDO publicly announces that the Kaveri is successful, and attempts to integrate with the Tejas prototypes, it is a silent failure.
https://idrw.org/general-electric-offers-india-a-new-engine-for-mwf-and-amca-fighter-program/
You gave 2013 article based on UPA government;s sabotage tactics? Wah! If giving DRDO website is not explicit, what is/?
So, what? What is your point?
Are you mentally unsound? There is something called capability. Since we can't do magic, we have to tolerate things. But we try to change them as soon as possible. Don't irritate if you can't sit and think about capability deficit.
The price of making 123 tejas is an investment in capability building! It is not money spent wit intention of usage. Do you have cmprehension problem when i say that Tejas MK1 is a stop-gap plane and is irrelevant for usage? How many time should I repeat this?
The fact that you yourself are saying that Kaveri will be used i
That is called diplomacy. Malaysia requested India to participate and it is undiplomatic to say no. It is simple common sense. You appear to have no soft skills and simply blabber here
I know very well. If you lack basic understanding of the inortance of the dry core it is your fault.
This was even discussed in this forum and there is a screenshot of older page too. I am findung it tedious to find it in this clutter as images can't be searched like texts
Why is it hard to understand that based on MK1A does not mean equal to MK1a? It is more than 1A but its origins are roted in 1A and the expertise of making the plane comes from learning from Tejas Mk1. if tehre was no tejas Mk1 then making MWF would have been much harder. Why is it idifficult to understand?
Are you really that stupid? Are you saying that article is of UPA's government time so it is not reliable? So all defence articles published between 2004-14 are wrong? This is the new level of stupidity I am seeing here.
Hopefully this should inject some sense into you now.
Wah! What evidence? You jsut waste my time by being childish.
| Thread starter | Similar threads | Forum | Replies | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Rafale in Croatian Air Force | Military Aviation | 7 | |
| W | Rafale and F 18 super hornet shortlisted by Indian navy | Indian Navy | 21 | |
|
Indian Navy more likely to select F 18 than rafales | Indian Navy | 164 | |
|
|
Greek Rafale vs Turkish EF 2000 Who has the Technolocal Edge | Military Aviation | 5 |
