aimarraul
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2008
- Messages
- 2,778
- Reaction score
- 0
if kaveri can give LCA a supercruise capability without turning on the afterburner,then it's a fifth generation engine
Grandmother of all defense deals- FGFA on their way
- Thread starter Dr sim
- Start date
if kaveri can give LCA a supercruise capability without turning on the afterburner,then it's a fifth generation engine
ouiouiouiouiouioui
BANNED
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2009
- Messages
- 489
- Reaction score
- 0
that is a hell of a techi over south asia.....
alam.saquiba
BANNED
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2010
- Messages
- 113
- Reaction score
- 0
@ alam.saquiba
Look i am not an expert but i would like to counter some of your points :
1. Su30 MKI is the closest of Su35
I said Su35 advanced version has some features of 5th gen. I agree both of them are almost same but the only difference b/w them are the 5th gen features, which we need.
2.Some time we need to learn run before learning how to walk.
Agreed !!! But we are talking about 5th gen tech, do you know how much time it took US to develop them.
3.India is not fool that they investing billions in FGFA, FGFA experience will be used parallely to make AMCA.
Agreed !!! Its because of this reason HAL is claiming the timeline of 2017-18 but i think they are sommiting the same mistake again. What if dere are some delays on the russian side ? We have to admit then we don't have anything else, we would be stuck once again untill we recieve and dats why i proposed for a second source, so that we don't feel useless.
4.Su35 is testbed for avionics , original testbed for Design was MiG1.44 and Sukhoi Berkut.
My bad. That was my mistake. What i meant was, Su35 is actually used for testing. The 5th gen features of FGFA are tested on Su35.
5.Don't forget the help we got from Russia for our Defense programs.. Half of the Adm Gorshakov money was paid for ToT for Arihennt...
Plz give me the source of this info. + you see the delays, that what i am saying. I am not saying we wont be able to complete fgfa but timeline is unrealistic. Many things can go on.
We delayed tejas even when we had options but in this project, HAL wont have much options as nobody else can help. It will be the same as when we faced problems in the earlier development phase of tejas, when we were stuck because of various restrictions.
Plz do reply.....
==========================
@angeldemon_007
I am agree to almost all ur point.... But I strongly feel that HAL will learn from its past mistakes (Delay) .. But still I am against purchase of Su35BM (Higher cost ) .
There are many thing which go under blanket, Russian help are of similar nature... No one can prove that russia helped india for Arihant, But that can't change the truth.....
Look i am not an expert but i would like to counter some of your points :
1. Su30 MKI is the closest of Su35
I said Su35 advanced version has some features of 5th gen. I agree both of them are almost same but the only difference b/w them are the 5th gen features, which we need.
2.Some time we need to learn run before learning how to walk.
Agreed !!! But we are talking about 5th gen tech, do you know how much time it took US to develop them.
3.India is not fool that they investing billions in FGFA, FGFA experience will be used parallely to make AMCA.
Agreed !!! Its because of this reason HAL is claiming the timeline of 2017-18 but i think they are sommiting the same mistake again. What if dere are some delays on the russian side ? We have to admit then we don't have anything else, we would be stuck once again untill we recieve and dats why i proposed for a second source, so that we don't feel useless.
4.Su35 is testbed for avionics , original testbed for Design was MiG1.44 and Sukhoi Berkut.
My bad. That was my mistake. What i meant was, Su35 is actually used for testing. The 5th gen features of FGFA are tested on Su35.
5.Don't forget the help we got from Russia for our Defense programs.. Half of the Adm Gorshakov money was paid for ToT for Arihennt...
Plz give me the source of this info. + you see the delays, that what i am saying. I am not saying we wont be able to complete fgfa but timeline is unrealistic. Many things can go on.
We delayed tejas even when we had options but in this project, HAL wont have much options as nobody else can help. It will be the same as when we faced problems in the earlier development phase of tejas, when we were stuck because of various restrictions.
Plz do reply.....
==========================
@angeldemon_007
I am agree to almost all ur point.... But I strongly feel that HAL will learn from its past mistakes (Delay) .. But still I am against purchase of Su35BM (Higher cost ) .
There are many thing which go under blanket, Russian help are of similar nature... No one can prove that russia helped india for Arihant, But that can't change the truth.....
angeldemon_007
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2010
- Messages
- 5,298
- Reaction score
- 0
Your idea is good but KALI is not possible for fighter aircraft
Yeah i know that, it was just a star wars fantasy man.
What are the differences between 4th and 5th generation engines?
I am not an expert on the engine design. But still, from what i have learnt, Russians are looking for 2-d or 3-d thrust vecctoring + superssonic speed + more range + more weapons etc. In short whatever they are planning to achieve, can't be achieved by present engine and thats why they have separate engine being prepared for t50.
Plz correct me if this is wrong : Su 30mki has very good thrust vvectoring.
Sukhoi Su-30 MKI - Purpose of Thrust Vectoring
Plz verify it...
@ alam.saquiba
But still I am against purchase of Su35BM (Higher cost ) .
I don't know about the prizes, but i saw in wiki it isn't that expensive (<70 million $) and thats why i suggested for 70 only. It is still cheaper than typhoon and rafale. By the way if we want to get technology we have to invest. In my opinion if we doesn't want a deadlock to happen, we have to work, we can just sit, the whole world will laugh.
There is one more thing that India can do. India wants some of the parts to be Indian(i.e. JV with french and israelis), we should start working on our requirements so as to reduce the delays (which is unavoidable).
India has even started working in this field, although it is for LCA but it can be used in case of fgfa :
Mayavi Electronic Warfare System (Indo-Isreal JV)
Angle of Attack: Mayavi Electronic Warfare System
Yeah i know that, it was just a star wars fantasy man.
What are the differences between 4th and 5th generation engines?
I am not an expert on the engine design. But still, from what i have learnt, Russians are looking for 2-d or 3-d thrust vecctoring + superssonic speed + more range + more weapons etc. In short whatever they are planning to achieve, can't be achieved by present engine and thats why they have separate engine being prepared for t50.
Plz correct me if this is wrong : Su 30mki has very good thrust vvectoring.
Sukhoi Su-30 MKI - Purpose of Thrust Vectoring
Plz verify it...
@ alam.saquiba
But still I am against purchase of Su35BM (Higher cost ) .
I don't know about the prizes, but i saw in wiki it isn't that expensive (<70 million $) and thats why i suggested for 70 only. It is still cheaper than typhoon and rafale. By the way if we want to get technology we have to invest. In my opinion if we doesn't want a deadlock to happen, we have to work, we can just sit, the whole world will laugh.
There is one more thing that India can do. India wants some of the parts to be Indian(i.e. JV with french and israelis), we should start working on our requirements so as to reduce the delays (which is unavoidable).
India has even started working in this field, although it is for LCA but it can be used in case of fgfa :
Mayavi Electronic Warfare System (Indo-Isreal JV)
Angle of Attack: Mayavi Electronic Warfare System
angeldemon_007
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2010
- Messages
- 5,298
- Reaction score
- 0
A very interesting interview that i found in a forum, sorry if it is a repetition. Its for Indian fans
Concept of Stealth in Sukhoi Family.
Stealth Aircraft Technology: "Our Capabilities are not Inferior to Those of America"
Andrey Lagarjkov, Director General of the United Institute of High Temperatures of the Russian Academy of Sciences (and an Associate Member of the Academy), talks about Russian stealth technology in the following interview with the Russia/CIS Observer.
Until recently, all Russian developments in the field of stealth technologies were strictly classified. There weren't any reports made concerning research institutes dealing with these issues. The veil was raised somewhat last year when it was announced for the first time that the United Institute of High Temperatures of the Russian Academy of Sciences was carrying out research in the domain of reduced aircraft visibility. The information was rather sketchy. It was reported that the institute is specialized in creating materials with new properties, in particular with ferromagnetics and so-called artificial magnetics. It was pointed out that technologies developed by the institute were used in designing and manufacturing the Sukhoi Su-27M and Su-37 (Su-47). Director General Lagarjkov, who hasn't spoken about such matters in public before, told Sergey Sokut about work of his institute in greater detail.
- How does Russia's way of making aircraft stealthy differ from the American technology?
- The Americans have two approaches. The first, and earliest one, was used for the F-117 and B-2. The low radar cross-section (RCS) was achieved through the shape of the aircraft and the use of radar-absorbing materials to cover the airframe. In this application, the principle of minimal level of visibility was a cornerstone - and other characteristics had to be sacrificed. For example, both aircraft are subsonic. Later the Americans tried another approach: modern radar absorbing materials are applied to F-16 and F-18, as well as to 5th generation F-22 and JSF combat aircraft, which have a traditional shape. The low level of visibility is achieved through different techniques, which Mikhail Pogosyan, director of Sukhoi, and I are going to reveal in the near future. We and the Americans are close to each other in this type of technology. Russia possesses the technology for upgrading in-service aircraft with modern stealth characteristics, and moreover, this technology is demanded by foreign operators of Russian aircraft. We, together with Sukhoi, have achieved world-class results in this area, which are confirmed by tests of real aircraft. We also can optimize the shape of the aircraft to lower the level of visibility, but I still wouldn't like to speak about the use of our techniques for 5th generation aircraft.
- When would it be possible to speak about achieved results?
- Some discussion is possible today. The exact results of radar cross-section reduction will never be disclosed, neither here in Russia nor abroad. But sometime ago it was announced that the RCS of a MiG-21 fighter after its treatment by our institute is approximately 0.25 sq m. This corresponds to the characteristics of a cruise missile.
- How far is it possible to go in reducing visibility of the 4th generation aircraft, and what additional improvements can be achieved in the next generation?
- My MiG-21 example demonstrates that the RCS of upgraded/modernized aircraft can be reduced 12-15 times. If we speak about new designed models, I wouldn't want to discuss the numbers publically.
- In the press, information has been published about exotic technologies for providing low visibility, for example, plasma. How effective is it?
- We use plasma in solving the problems of RCS of an aircraft's nosecone. In general, plasma technologies are very useful at flight altitudes of more than 25 km. At low altitudes it is impossible to use them, because there is not enough power on board.
- What is the share of stealth technologies in the total aircraft cost?
- If stringent, but reasonable requirements for visibility are implemented in the project from the very beginning, it won't be too large. I'd like to point out here that at my institue, we have carried out advanced work in fundamental research. I also want to stress here that we had to do this without governmental support - funding our research from out-of-budget sources during the last 10-15 years.
- It is known that you cooperate closely with Sukhoi. What about the institute's work with other design bureaus?
- Recently, we have started cooperating intensively with the others as well.
- If we compare achievements of different countries in the reduction of aircraft visibility, who would the leaders be? Obviously, the Americans would hit the top, wouldn't they?
- The Americans are no. 1 because of the application of stealth to a large volume of real products. But considering the understanding of the whole problem in general - and the potential
- I don't think the Americans are better than we are. We are able to achieve, and already have achieved, the same - and even in some areas, we have had somewhat better results. Another plus for the Americans is their broader application of stealth. In particular, they are entering the world market with the stealthy aircraft. Similar developments are being made in Europe, but the level of these countries is not so high. The French are tackling this problem as well. They have very good research equipment - anechoic chambers, for example. Their Rafale fighter is advertised as an aircraft with a low radar cross-section.
Concept of Stealth in Sukhoi Family.
Stealth Aircraft Technology: "Our Capabilities are not Inferior to Those of America"
Andrey Lagarjkov, Director General of the United Institute of High Temperatures of the Russian Academy of Sciences (and an Associate Member of the Academy), talks about Russian stealth technology in the following interview with the Russia/CIS Observer.
Until recently, all Russian developments in the field of stealth technologies were strictly classified. There weren't any reports made concerning research institutes dealing with these issues. The veil was raised somewhat last year when it was announced for the first time that the United Institute of High Temperatures of the Russian Academy of Sciences was carrying out research in the domain of reduced aircraft visibility. The information was rather sketchy. It was reported that the institute is specialized in creating materials with new properties, in particular with ferromagnetics and so-called artificial magnetics. It was pointed out that technologies developed by the institute were used in designing and manufacturing the Sukhoi Su-27M and Su-37 (Su-47). Director General Lagarjkov, who hasn't spoken about such matters in public before, told Sergey Sokut about work of his institute in greater detail.
- How does Russia's way of making aircraft stealthy differ from the American technology?
- The Americans have two approaches. The first, and earliest one, was used for the F-117 and B-2. The low radar cross-section (RCS) was achieved through the shape of the aircraft and the use of radar-absorbing materials to cover the airframe. In this application, the principle of minimal level of visibility was a cornerstone - and other characteristics had to be sacrificed. For example, both aircraft are subsonic. Later the Americans tried another approach: modern radar absorbing materials are applied to F-16 and F-18, as well as to 5th generation F-22 and JSF combat aircraft, which have a traditional shape. The low level of visibility is achieved through different techniques, which Mikhail Pogosyan, director of Sukhoi, and I are going to reveal in the near future. We and the Americans are close to each other in this type of technology. Russia possesses the technology for upgrading in-service aircraft with modern stealth characteristics, and moreover, this technology is demanded by foreign operators of Russian aircraft. We, together with Sukhoi, have achieved world-class results in this area, which are confirmed by tests of real aircraft. We also can optimize the shape of the aircraft to lower the level of visibility, but I still wouldn't like to speak about the use of our techniques for 5th generation aircraft.
- When would it be possible to speak about achieved results?
- Some discussion is possible today. The exact results of radar cross-section reduction will never be disclosed, neither here in Russia nor abroad. But sometime ago it was announced that the RCS of a MiG-21 fighter after its treatment by our institute is approximately 0.25 sq m. This corresponds to the characteristics of a cruise missile.
- How far is it possible to go in reducing visibility of the 4th generation aircraft, and what additional improvements can be achieved in the next generation?
- My MiG-21 example demonstrates that the RCS of upgraded/modernized aircraft can be reduced 12-15 times. If we speak about new designed models, I wouldn't want to discuss the numbers publically.
- In the press, information has been published about exotic technologies for providing low visibility, for example, plasma. How effective is it?
- We use plasma in solving the problems of RCS of an aircraft's nosecone. In general, plasma technologies are very useful at flight altitudes of more than 25 km. At low altitudes it is impossible to use them, because there is not enough power on board.
- What is the share of stealth technologies in the total aircraft cost?
- If stringent, but reasonable requirements for visibility are implemented in the project from the very beginning, it won't be too large. I'd like to point out here that at my institue, we have carried out advanced work in fundamental research. I also want to stress here that we had to do this without governmental support - funding our research from out-of-budget sources during the last 10-15 years.
- It is known that you cooperate closely with Sukhoi. What about the institute's work with other design bureaus?
- Recently, we have started cooperating intensively with the others as well.
- If we compare achievements of different countries in the reduction of aircraft visibility, who would the leaders be? Obviously, the Americans would hit the top, wouldn't they?
- The Americans are no. 1 because of the application of stealth to a large volume of real products. But considering the understanding of the whole problem in general - and the potential
- I don't think the Americans are better than we are. We are able to achieve, and already have achieved, the same - and even in some areas, we have had somewhat better results. Another plus for the Americans is their broader application of stealth. In particular, they are entering the world market with the stealthy aircraft. Similar developments are being made in Europe, but the level of these countries is not so high. The French are tackling this problem as well. They have very good research equipment - anechoic chambers, for example. Their Rafale fighter is advertised as an aircraft with a low radar cross-section.
angeldemon_007
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2010
- Messages
- 5,298
- Reaction score
- 0
if kaveri can give LCA a supercruise capability without turning on the afterburner,then it's a fifth generation engine
I agree with you, thats what they are claiming but my point was that it is still in development. It should provide features of thrust vectoring. Secondly, LCA is very light as compared to FGFA. But still, if it works, India is even thinking of using Kaveri SNECMA engine in FGFA. French even offer to put this engine if rafale wins the MMRCA deal if India wishes.
I agree with you, thats what they are claiming but my point was that it is still in development. It should provide features of thrust vectoring. Secondly, LCA is very light as compared to FGFA. But still, if it works, India is even thinking of using Kaveri SNECMA engine in FGFA. French even offer to put this engine if rafale wins the MMRCA deal if India wishes.
Similar threads
