LCA TEJAS MK1 & MK1A: News and Discussion

NutCracker

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2022
Messages
5,042
Likes
27,065
Country flag
Brimstone 2 is definetely not needed. We have all the tech as I said earlier in nag,hellina & sant missiles we are the only country which has such things developed still importing such missiles. Look at turkey they have there own now..
Literally we will be only example who millimetres wave radar all the tech and still importing it we just need to enhance sant missile..
Mbda has lobbied our corrupt unaccountable beurocracy is behind this.. we suck what does it need to develop a small turbo jet to power spear like missiles we have made manik for 1.5 ton nirbhay missiles.. everything is damn slow
We have to enhance sant missile range 2x keeping the weight same. I don't see it happening very soon. Missiles have shelf life, it's not like these will forever be in our inventory, we will discard them 10-15 years later once our product is ready.
 

Samej Jangir

Regular Member
Joined
May 15, 2023
Messages
178
Likes
388
Country flag
We have to enhance sant missile range 2x keeping the weight same. I don't see it happening very soon. Missiles have shelf life, it's not like these will forever be in our inventory, we will discard them 10-15 years later once our product is ready.
There is always a cost factor. To get low weight missile, one will need to use extremely complex fuel systems like solid fuel RAMJET where the solid fuel sublimes and propels the missiles. These kind of fuels will be very expensive and difficult to mass manufacture during wars. They are good for fancy shows and advertisements but unsuitable for actual combat use
 

Satish Sharma

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Dec 3, 2023
Messages
1,461
Likes
4,121
Country flag
There is always a cost factor. To get low weight missile, one will need to use extremely complex fuel systems like solid fuel RAMJET where the solid fuel sublimes and propels the missiles. These kind of fuels will be very expensive and difficult to mass manufacture during wars. They are good for fancy shows and advertisements but unsuitable for actual combat use
Brimstone 2 is bigger missile and carries more fuel almost double.of sant.
Spear if turbo jet which.consumes atmospheric oxygen unlike this other rocket propelled which propels for some seconds only whereas this turbo.jet are more efficient as they only carry fuel. Which is why with just 100kg it can go 100km + .
Tejas deserves such missiles otherwise what is the use of having such capable air 2 ground mods of its radar.
 

NutCracker

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2022
Messages
5,042
Likes
27,065
Country flag
Brimstone 2 is bigger missile and carries more fuel almost double.of sant.
Spear if turbo jet which.consumes atmospheric oxygen unlike this other rocket propelled which propels for some seconds only whereas this turbo.jet are more efficient as they only carry fuel. Which is why with just 100kg it can go 100km + .
Tejas deserves such missiles otherwise what is the use of having such capable air 2 ground mods of its radar.
No it's not bigger. It has upgraded rocket motor thanks to which Brimstone 2 has range of 60km yet weighs same 50kg as Sant.
 

Samej Jangir

Regular Member
Joined
May 15, 2023
Messages
178
Likes
388
Country flag
No it's not bigger. It has upgraded rocket motor thanks to which Brimstone 2 has range of 60km yet weighs same 50kg as Sant.
Brimstone does not have 60km range but has 40km range when fired from helicopter, likely from its maximum altitude of 5-6km. While when fired from a plane likely from altitude of 10+km, it has 60km range. But no one will fire a small missile from a fighter jet. So, for all practical purpose, it is limited to be fired from helicopters only. Even there, helicopters don't normally fly at 5km altitudes. So, the range may be lesser than claimed 40km. Also, note that SANT has weight of 43kg with 8kg warhead whereas Brimstone has 53kg weight with 6kg warhead. Since the motor, seeker and other components stay the same, increase of fuel by 12kg with lower warhead size can explain the increased range.
 

NutCracker

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2022
Messages
5,042
Likes
27,065
Country flag
Brimstone does not have 60km range but has 40km range when fired from helicopter, likely from its maximum altitude of 5-6km. While when fired from a plane likely from altitude of 10+km, it has 60km range. But no one will fire a small missile from a fighter jet. So, for all practical purpose, it is limited to be fired from helicopters only. Even there, helicopters don't normally fly at 5km altitudes. So, the range may be lesser than claimed 40km. Also, note that SANT has weight of 43kg with 8kg warhead whereas Brimstone has 53kg weight with 6kg warhead. Since the motor, seeker and other components stay the same, increase of fuel by 12kg with lower warhead size can explain the increased range.
Again Rubbish, what do you think will be the range of Sant (20km Max) from heli flying at low altitude, ?

Why don't you put helicopter atitude limitation on Sant also and then compare the range . Brimstone 2 will have double the range in any case.
 

Samej Jangir

Regular Member
Joined
May 15, 2023
Messages
178
Likes
388
Country flag
Again Rubbish, what do you think will be the range of Sant (20km Max) from heli flying at low altitude, ?

Why don't you put helocpter altitude limitation on Sant also and then compare the range . Brimstone will have double the range in any case.
SANT has 43kg weight with 8kg warhead, 2kg seeker & batteries, 5kg frame and motor. The total fuel is likely 28kg. In Brimstone, it is likely to have fuel of 40kg. Don't you think this will have an inherent range advantage? Moreover, the increased range with increased fuel is not linear as majority of the work is done for accelerating the missile in first 20 seconds. Then onwards, small amount of fuel can sustain longer flights. Also, there is a likelyhood of Brimstone using expensive fuel which can add to the cost.

Considering the low power of mmw radars on a helicopter, do you really think that it can lock a target at over 20km? It can use network centric warfare to use radar from another aircraft or drone to acquire longer range targets but is that really practical and worth the extra cost?
 

NutCracker

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2022
Messages
5,042
Likes
27,065
Country flag
SANT has 43kg weight with 8kg warhead, 2kg seeker & batteries, 5kg frame and motor. The total fuel is likely 28kg. In Brimstone, it is likely to have fuel of 40kg. Don't you think this will have an inherent range advantage? Moreover, the increased range with increased fuel is not linear as majority of the work is done for accelerating the missile in first 20 seconds. Then onwards, small amount of fuel can sustain longer flights. Also, there is a likelyhood of Brimstone using expensive fuel which can add to the cost.

Considering the low power of mmw radars on a helicopter, do you really think that it can lock a target at over 20km? It can use network centric warfare to use radar from another aircraft or drone to acquire longer range targets but is that really practical and worth the extra cost?
First let Sant be embedded into a helicopter first. We will see how much it weighs.
DRDO hasn't even released spec sheet and here you are making ifs and buts claim about weight of various sub components.
We will see if DRDO has attained 20km Max range with same weight as original Naag/Helina.
 

Samej Jangir

Regular Member
Joined
May 15, 2023
Messages
178
Likes
388
Country flag
First let Sant be embedded into a helicopter first. We will see how much it weighs.
DRDO hasn't even released spec sheet and here you are making ifs and buts claim about weight of various sub components.
We will see has DRDO attained 20km Max range with same weight as original Naag/Helina.
Earlier Brimstone version had 12km range. Can you explain how it suddenly got 40km range out of nowhere? What changes were made?
 

OutForVendetta

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 11, 2023
Messages
44
Likes
132
Country flag
India has indigenised Su30 helmets and will likely indigenise the Tejas helmets too given more orders. Also, there is no defect in Russian ejection seat and hence it makes no sense to buy Martin Baker if it is expensive. Ejection seats are low end tech which have been around since WW2 and hence no need to spend high.



Do you have any proof that the machines are running on full capacity? Typical loser attitude to ask for proof instead of giving logical replies. Can you give me one example of a major product (non manual) which will need additional machines for increase in production from 16 to 32 planes a year?

Tejas can definitely replace Jaguars for CAS roles and in fact will be even more potent as Tejas is much faster and more maneuverable. But CAS roles are only 2nd stage roles which is done for supporting ground invasion. The frontline roles are always offensive ones. This is why I am saying that Tejas Mk1 is not the right plane to be mass manufactured. India needs MWF or Tejas Mk2 which will be a multirole plane capable of doing all tasks
WW2 ejection seats were indeed low end tech with many pilots unable to eject fro planes. Modern ones arent as basic are you're making them out to be.

Ejection seats from UK is one of the reasons our bid for LCA will not ahead with Argentina, you know that right ? Why can't we make our own ejection seats ?
 

Samej Jangir

Regular Member
Joined
May 15, 2023
Messages
178
Likes
388
Country flag
WW2 ejection seats were indeed low end tech with many pilots unable to eject fro planes. Modern ones arent as basic are you're making them out to be.

Ejection seats from UK is one of the reasons our bid for LCA will not ahead with Argentina, you know that right ? Why can't we make our own ejection seats ?
WW2 ejection seat was indeed low tech as they had to scale up so quickly that focus on quality was not possible. However, after WW2, pretty reliable tech for ejection seat was developed. Even Mig21 ejection seats are good technology. India had made Mig21 ejection seats in 1970s and still has the technology to make them. But I guess, the main problem is in the scaling. With India making just 6-7 planes a year, there isn't enough scale of production for running an entire plant for ejection seats
 

Samej Jangir

Regular Member
Joined
May 15, 2023
Messages
178
Likes
388
Country flag
You can read one of my previous comments which you replied. I've mentioned.
Upgraded rocket motor? Is that a serious explanation? What does upgraded motor do? Do you understand that these rockets don't have a moving motor like turbofan or ICE engines but the motor is mostly simpler combustion zones for mixing fuel with air? How can you possible improvise such a simple technology to such an extent?
 

NutCracker

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2022
Messages
5,042
Likes
27,065
Country flag
Upgraded rocket motor? Is that a serious explanation? What does upgraded motor do? Do you understand that these rockets don't have a moving motor like turbofan or ICE engines but the motor is mostly simpler combustion zones for mixing fuel with air? How can you possible improvise such a simple technology to such an extent?
You always oversimplify things for your own mental capacity.

"Just add two rockets motors beneath seats and voila we got ejection seat".

"Oh look.rocket motor is just mixing of fuel."

Ever though that Fuel chemistry can be changed and so can be the material used in nozzle. Even design improvements in combustion chamber or nozzle are possible explanation.
 

Samej Jangir

Regular Member
Joined
May 15, 2023
Messages
178
Likes
388
Country flag
You always oversimplify things for your own mental capacity.

"Just add two rockets motors beneath seats and voila we got ejection seat".

"Oh look.rocket motor is just mixing of fuel."

Ever though that Fuel chemistry can be changed and so can be the material used in nozzle. Even design improvements in combustion chamber or nozzle are possible explanation.
There are many things that can be changed. But the impact of change is not significant for a solid fuel missile. If it was a liquid fuel missile, there could have been lot of changes in control and release of fuel. But for a solid fuel one, that is not the case. The design of a solid fuel combustion chamber is not very complex and if there was a better design, it would have been easily found out and implemented in the initial versions itself. The reason why the upgrade is taking after decades of lower ranged version is because the change is not about simple design but about chemistry of fuel which also makes it expensive.
 

NutCracker

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2022
Messages
5,042
Likes
27,065
Country flag
There are many things that can be changed. But the impact of change is not significant for a solid fuel missile. If it was a liquid fuel missile, there could have been lot of changes in control and release of fuel. But for a solid fuel one, that is not the case. The design of a solid fuel combustion chamber is not very complex and if there was a better design, it would have been easily found out and implemented in the initial versions itself. The reason why the upgrade is taking after decades of lower ranged version is because the change is not about simple design but about chemistry of fuel which also makes it expensive.
Yeah. That's what they have done.
One or combination of various changes I mentioned. They have a proven product weighing 53kg with range of 40km from helicopter.

Go ask DRDO to release Sant spec sheet. Then compare. Till then let armed forces buy the needed armaments.( Which will be made in India by MBDA.)
 

Samej Jangir

Regular Member
Joined
May 15, 2023
Messages
178
Likes
388
Country flag
Yeah. That's what they have done.
One or combination of various changes I mentioned. They have a proven product weighing 53kg with range of 40km from helicopter.

Go ask DRDO to release Sant spec sheet. Then compare. Till then let armed forces buy the needed armaments.( Which will be made in India by MBDA.)
Needed armaments from MBDA? If the cost is the same, only then it makes sense. If cost is multiple times higher, it makes no sense to buy it. Using a missile of over 20km in range from a helicopter is impractical without network centric warfare. Network centric warfare is not completely reliable and not really helpful for fighting from helicopters due to inherently high risk. So, what is your obsession with Brimstone about? You don't even seem to know the reason for the difference in range of Brimstone-1 to Brimstone-2 and yet and quite gung-ho about it!
 

NutCracker

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2022
Messages
5,042
Likes
27,065
Country flag
Needed armaments from MBDA? If the cost is the same, only then it makes sense. If cost is multiple times higher, it makes no sense to buy it. Using a missile of over 20km in range from a helicopter is impractical without network centric warfare. Network centric warfare is not completely reliable and not really helpful for fighting from helicopters due to inherently high risk. So, what is your obsession with Brimstone about? You don't even seem to know the reason for the difference in range of Brimstone-1 to Brimstone-2 and yet and quite gung-ho about it!
20km from heli flying at low altitude is what Brimstone2 might achieve . It's double than than what Sant can currently achieve from same altitude.

So I don't know what you are yapping about. It's falls within your self imposed imaginary limitations that ,
"network centric warfare not good, no need of missile beyond 20km".
 

SKC

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2014
Messages
8,781
Likes
30,252
Country flag
20km from heli flying at low altitude is what Brimstone2 might achieve . It's double than than what Sant can currently achieve from same altitude.

So I don't know what you are yapping about. It's falls within your self imposed imaginary limitations that ,
"network centric warfare not good, no need of missile beyond 20km".
We have a new Ugra Bhairav now!
Original one is for Politics thread and this new one - @Samej Jangir for Arms and equipment threads!
 

Samej Jangir

Regular Member
Joined
May 15, 2023
Messages
178
Likes
388
Country flag
20km from heli flying at low altitude is what Brimstone2 might achieve . It's double than than what Sant can currently achieve from same altitude.

So I don't know what you are yapping about. It's falls within your self imposed imaginary limitations that ,
"network centric warfare not good, no need of missile beyond 20km".
Yes, but what about the cost? Also, are you sure that SANT can't achieve similar range? Even if it weighs 10kg more, does it really matter if the cost is low? A helicopter can easily carry 1.5ton weight. Even if it carries 16 of these missiles, it will still be 960kg vs 800kg. A 160kg difference is not going to change much. if the cost is much lower, then minor quality compromsies is better for quantity increase
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top