LCA TEJAS MK1 & MK1A: News and Discussion

[MonaLazy]

Same result achieved with 2 missiles that day. One with low risk kill and another with high risk kill. AMRAAM and R73.

how? low risk amraams fired at Dmax for Avenger wasted away- while high risk WVR R-73 munched F-16.

 

[Ghost hale]

how? low risk amraams fired at Dmax for Avenger wasted away- while high risk WVR munched F-16.

Don't take it to that place. Its very slippery slope which starts with questioning the decision even to follow inside enemy space and a lot of patriotism will beat logic.
About shots on Avenger, Those were seemed to be for isolating front package (just my understanding can be wrong) and if so then it worked.
Wrong thread for this discussion.

 

[MonaLazy]

About shots on Avenger, Those were seemed to be for isolating front package (just my understanding can be wrong) and if so then it worked.

Wrong again. The Sukhois counter attacked- that's what took the F-16 armada by surprise. They stopped lazing their targets, tucked tail and fled. For your reading pleasure, tip of the twitter thread-


Pajikis lost both BVR & WVR engagements that day.

In BVR they could not get air superiority over the Indian mil formations they wanted to bomb- all bombs fell off target.

In WVR they lost an F-16 and two pilots. Getting OT here so you might want to take it to the right thread.

 

[Ghost hale]

Wrong again. The Sukhois counter attacked- that's what took the F-16 armada by surprise. They stopped lazing their targets, tucked tail and fled. For your reading pleasure, tip of the twitter thread-

Read that man. I have read too many theories version proofs counter proofs more than required for my own good. Have read this too before hand. I am just mentioning what i got from reading all as the easiest way to divulge the MKIs was with no use BVR shots providing enough time to get max bite, even wingman was to be taken out but seems he retorted back.

 

[BON PLAN]

Vietnam war is 45 years old. Its a very bad example for modern warfare.

Forgotten the history lessons is a bad choice.
Do you know what is the sucess rate of AMRAAM? poor, very poor. Even in far smaller range than max one.
Do you remember that SH18 whose AIM9X failed against a old syrian Sukhoi over Syrian airspace some years ago?

 

[BON PLAN]

If u are caught up in dog fight even in highly contested air space of so called world war 3 with all the "electronic counter measure ambiance" not sure what it means, then already a million things have went wrong. I am discussing from the point of of usage and time investment on 20 KM range missile.

Another aspect : in a world war III, with a lot of planes in the sky, the risk of friendly fire will be great. Another reason not to use BVR missiles. And then short range engagement is more and more credible.

 

[FalconSlayers]

Forgotten the history lessons is a bad choice.
Do you know what is the sucess rate of AMRAAM? poor, very poor. Even in far smaller range than max one.
Do you remember that SH18 whose AIM9X failed against a old syrian Sukhoi over Syrian airspace some years ago?

Correction: AMRAAM had failed and the AIM9X was used for the kill.

 

[Ghost hale]

Forgotten the history lessons is a bad choice.
Do you know what is the sucess rate of AMRAAM? poor, very poor. Even in far smaller range than max one.
Do you remember that SH18 whose AIM9X failed against a old syrian Sukhoi over Syrian airspace some years ago?

Didn't get the point of SH18 incident reference. No one is asking to forget history but need to know at which point history has become obsolete. There is always cost effort analysis. Importing and maintaining a foreign SAM inventory with time for integration or work with indigenous integrations with waiting for other indigenous SAM already in pipeline is not aligning with me. IAF knows more than us and can leave it to them. I am pointing out as a spectator what it looks like.

Another aspect : in a world war III, with a lot of planes in the sky, the risk of friendly fire will be great. Another reason not to use BVR missiles. And then short range engagement is more and more credible.

FF detection helps ignoring most such cases. BVR engagement of interceptors are being talked about here. Nobody is pushing ASFs to dog fight yet.

Correction: AMRAAM had failed and the AIM9X was used for the kill.

Something wrong here.

How Did a 30-Year-Old Jet Dodge the Pentagon's Latest Missile?

The AIM-9X Sidewinder failed to bring down an aging attack jet.

www.popularmechanics.com

Lastly, No one is arguing on role of SAMs but we are discussing this particular situation here which IAF is having with python 5. Personally, I feel SAMs have there role but ratio of dog fights to BVR battle will surely tilt towards BVR in coming decades. With wingman and UAVs it only bound to increase.

We are way off topic in this thread. It would be better if needs to be further discussed, we move to specific thread for it.

 

[BON PLAN]

Correction: AMRAAM had failed and the AIM9X was used for the kill.

No. It was the contrary.

 

[Abdus Salem killed]

Is there a engine testing wind tunnel in India any news

 

[Chinmoy]

Is there a engine testing wind tunnel in India any news

14 in total in between CSIR, DRDO and HAL.

 

[Abdus Salem killed]

14 in total in between CSIR, DRDO and HAL.

No where do we test the Kaveri engine we used to test in Russia and Ukraine

 

[Chinmoy]

No where do we test the Kaveri engine we used to test in Russia and Ukraine

You are talking about flight testing. We don't have flight test bed. But do have static test facility. Latest being the upcoming high altitude test facility.

 

[Blank]

You are talking about flight testing. We don't have flight test bed. But do have static test facility. Latest being the upcoming high altitude test facility.

There was this engine complex being made by HAL or DRDO with the help of Safran I think. What will it do?

 

[WarriorIndian]

Is there a engine testing wind tunnel in India any news

We have quite a few wind tunnels from subsonic to hypersonic but if you are talking about High Altitude Engine Test Facility, we have none.

 

[Chinmoy]

There was this engine complex being made by HAL or DRDO with the help of Safran I think. What will it do?

Engine development and existing engine repair and overhauling.

 

[Abdus Salem killed]

Country lacks testing facilities for aircraft engines: Kota Harinarayana

Kota said that the engine was fit for use in an unmanned combat air vehicle.

www.google.com

How do we fix this any news turkey has no Engine testing or supercomputer how are they making drones

 

[Chinmoy]

Country lacks testing facilities for aircraft engines: Kota Harinarayana

Kota said that the engine was fit for use in an unmanned combat air vehicle.

www.google.com

How do we fix this any news turkey has no Engine testing or supercomputer how are they making drones

You are looking at Turkey in a post Erdogan era. But the Turkey aviation industry is much older. It is based on NATO technologies acquired for past many decades.

For example, the engine used in their most successful UCAV, Anka is based on a JV firm between TAI and GE which was founded in 1985. So its just like comparing our cruise missile program.

On top of that, the testing cycle of Turkish military is too short. For example Anka suffered a crash during test in 2012, but it got clearance for induction in 2013. Now imagine something like that with IAF or IA.

So its not just facility which matters, its the overall system along with infra which dictates a successful MIC setup.

 

[BON PLAN]

Country lacks testing facilities for aircraft engines: Kota Harinarayana

Kota said that the engine was fit for use in an unmanned combat air vehicle.

www.google.com

How do we fix this any news turkey has no Engine testing or supercomputer how are they making drones

To study a drone and to study a jet is not the same challenge !
Drone : fly mainly straight, with few G, always at the same altitude zone, not supersonic (with some rare exceptions), without pilot inboard (need less safety measures)....

 

[BON PLAN]

You are looking at Turkey in a post Erdogan era. But the Turkey aviation industry is much older. It is based on NATO technologies acquired for past many decades.

For example, the engine used in their most successful UCAV, Anka is based on a JV firm between TAI and GE which was founded in 1985. So its just like comparing our cruise missile program.

On top of that, the testing cycle of Turkish military is too short. For example Anka suffered a crash during test in 2012, but it got clearance for induction in 2013. Now imagine something like that with IAF or IA.

So its not just facility which matters, its the overall system along with infra which dictates a successful MIC setup.

you are right.
And the status of their last attempt for a helo turbine is unclear...