Key.Aero Network
Register Free

Page 21 of 24 FirstFirst ... 111718192021222324 LastLast
Results 601 to 630 of 704

Thread: Quadbike Indian Air Force Thread Part 18

  1. #601
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,531
    Sukhoi snag hits flight operations in Pune

    PUNE: Flight operations from the city's Lohegaon airport were suspended for four hours on Thursday after a Sukhoi-30 Mk-I fighter jet of the Indian Air Force made an emergency landing on the runway at 9.05 am. At least a thousand passengers were left stranded at the airport.

    An official IAF release attributed the emergency landing to a problem in the nose undercarriage of the Su-30 aircraft, which was on a routine flying exercise. No casualty was reported. "The runway was cleared for flight operations at 1 pm," stated the brief release issued by Flight Lieutenant T Ramesh Kumar, PRO, Air Force Station (AFS), Pune.

  2. #602
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    336

  3. #603
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,531
    Quote Originally Posted by WinterStars View Post
    Nothing as complex as the systems being tendered for.
    http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/MONITO...-4/sainis.html
    The problems confronting the R&AW in the field of technical intelligence gathering stem in part from the TECHINT asset list. The aerial survey equipment is of western origin. The ARC makes use of Gulfstream III/SRA-1[37] (or perhaps the upgraded version i.e. the Gulfstream IV/SRA-4[38,39]), the equipment from the west has in all probability come with end-user obligations that limit its targeting uses[35] to certain countries only.
    There might be also be a request for an airborne standoff radar soon.
    Last edited by Twinblade; 22nd April 2012 at 08:36.

  4. #604
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    4,893
    Rivet joint comes to mind!

    are they trying to get the kind of capability that allowed the attacks near Damascus totally spoofing the Anti air systems?
    Wrinkles wrinkles my kingdom fallen to a wrinkle

  5. #605
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    3,561
    How likely are the U.S to sell India these systems, I guess this will be the governments excuse to sign the pending alliance treaties with the U.S.
    Love Planes, Live Planes

  6. #606
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,531


    LCH TD-2 seen over Bangalore sky.

  7. #607
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,531
    http://livefist.blogspot.co.uk/2012/...says-drdo.html

    AURA UCAV/USAV might have its first flight in 2015. Too far a date to keep fingers crossed, but best of luck anyways.

  8. #608
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,036
    cross-posting from BRF, courtesy Nick_S

    A-330 MRTT at Leh airport during trials

    "By the whiskers of Kurvi-Tasch!"

  9. #609
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,036
    upgraded MiG-29UB of the IAF in Russia

    "By the whiskers of Kurvi-Tasch!"

  10. #610
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,036
    N-LCA's first flight cleared by the Flight Readiness Review Board (FRRB)

    Tarmak blog post

    Bangalore: The naval variant (NP-1) of India's Light Combat Aircraft is ready. Having missed many deadlines like its air force avatar – Tejas, sources now confirm to Express that the Flight Readiness Review Board (FRRB) has cleared NP-1 for first flight. Rolled out on July 6, 2010 amidst cinematic settings and blessed by defence minister A K Antony, the NP-1 ran into a spate of technological challenges. As this piece goes live, the total systems onboard NP-1 have completed fault-free tests on Iron Bird – ahead of the possible maiden flight.
    Sources say that the platform has so far completed four low-speed taxi trials (LSTT) and one high-speed taxi trial (HSTT). “On Thursday, the NP-1 did an HSTT at 220 kmph, lifting the nose-wheel. We are now hoping to have the first flight next week,” sources at Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) said. While some crucial parts of NP-1 gave nightmares to both designers and engineers, including the bulky undercarriage, sources now confirm that the defects have been rectified.
    The NP-1 will be put through another HSTT next week before the Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA) and HAL combine take a final call on the first flight. “Everything is in place and our engineers and technicians are leaving no stone unturned ahead of the first flight. We had some software snags which have been rectified at the right time,” HAL sources said.
    "By the whiskers of Kurvi-Tasch!"

  11. #611
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,036
    From Livefist blog- the 8 contenders for the IN's MRMR requirement. No analysis, just pics.

    Link to the blog post
    "By the whiskers of Kurvi-Tasch!"

  12. #612
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,036
    IAF An-32 serial K2724 in Kiev, Ukraine prior to its modernisation upgrade



    An-32 serial K2677 after its upgrade

    "By the whiskers of Kurvi-Tasch!"

  13. #613
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,079
    That MiG-29 upgrade seems to have a real small nose cone, what gives? Trainer?

  14. #614
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    5,658
    Quote Originally Posted by uss novice View Post
    That MiG-29 upgrade seems to have a real small nose cone, what gives? Trainer?
    No radar on MiG-29UB.
    http://img818.imageshack.us/img818/9098/rsz11rsz3807.jpg

  15. #615
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,531
    LCA naval variant’s first flight on Friday


    The pitbull is finally ready to leap off its pudgy feet

  16. #616
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    .de
    Posts
    1,974
    Quote Originally Posted by Kramer View Post
    IAF An-32 serial K2724 in Kiev, Ukraine prior to its modernisation upgrade


    An-32 serial K2677 after its upgrade
    I kinda like the An-32 - a very straightforward Soviet workhorse. I get the impression that the Indian AF likes it too.
    Patrick

  17. #617
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,036
    Quote Originally Posted by Levsha View Post
    I kinda like the An-32 - a very straightforward Soviet workhorse. I get the impression that the Indian AF likes it too.
    The IAF does like the An-32. It’s the workhorse of the transport fleet with the HS-748 Avro having grown very long in the tooth now.

    From what I’ve heard, it is reliable and very rugged and the hot and high take off capability allows it to reach far flung air strips to resupply troops and civilians, but has absolutely no frills whatsoever. Neither for the crew nor for anyone else being transported. Very noisy in the cargo hold area and can be very fatiguing to fly as a passenger. But the IAF got them for cheap and they have had a relatively good safety record considering how many were purchased and how varied their operating climes are, so this upgrade (which at approx $4 million per aircraft was a steal) made ample sense..new satnav, new GCAS, new Ground Proximity Warning system, new avionics, improved crew comfort, improved engine life and airframe life extension with improved MTBO for both and improved fuel burn increasing range and payload.
    "By the whiskers of Kurvi-Tasch!"

  18. #618
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,000
    Quote Originally Posted by Twinblade View Post
    LCA naval variant’s first flight on Friday


    The pitbull is finally ready to leap off its pudgy feet
    from the above link..
    But they will not retract the undercarriage, as they do not want to take a chance. “It is potentially risky to retract it,” a source said, indicating that there are some problems still persistent. The undercarriage is retracted to reduce the drag experienced by aircraft.
    the later part was not really required. All do the first flight without retracting the undercarriage..

  19. #619
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,036
    Quote Originally Posted by JangBoGo View Post
    from the above link..

    the later part was not really required. All do the first flight without retracting the undercarriage..
    let me qualify it further..all new prototypes with new landing gear configurations do not retract their undercarriage. Once it has been validated, other prototypes retract theirs during their first flights..for instance, LSP-7 retracted its gear during its first flight itself, since they were confident that it would work fine and had no risk. But TD-1 didn't retract its landing gear during its first flight being the first of its type. NP-1 will follow the same principle.
    "By the whiskers of Kurvi-Tasch!"

  20. #620
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,000
    Quote Originally Posted by Kramer View Post
    but has absolutely no frills whatsoever. Neither for the crew nor for anyone else being transported. Very noisy in the cargo hold area and can be very fatiguing to fly as a passenger.
    That happens when using an aircraft brought for transport military and troop deployment. Also the cargo hold is not pressurized and insulated which causes the sound to filter in (along with the NVH of the engines)

    btw, most of the complaints about the discomfort & noise created by the An-32 come only from the media guys who on tax-payers money enjoy the free-ride. No military guy will complain about an aircraft which was meant for military transport.

  21. #621
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,000
    Quote Originally Posted by Kramer View Post
    let me qualify it further..all new prototypes with new landing gear configurations do not retract their undercarriage. Once it has been validated, other prototypes retract theirs during their first flights..for instance, LSP-7 retracted its gear during its first flight itself, since they were confident that it would work fine and had no risk. But TD-1 didn't retract its landing gear during its first flight being the first of its type. NP-1 will follow the same principle.
    Yeah, I agree.
    But before any flight tests, tests on under carriage are done numerous times when the airframe is still on the assembly line. But still its a norm for almost all to keep the undercarriage non-retracted during their first flight.

    But what i was mentioning was w.r.t to the article in which the author mentions non-retracting as a sign that something was/is wrong.

  22. #622
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,000
    Quote Originally Posted by swerve View Post
    But note that this order depends on the An-124 being modernised, & put back into production, for which a larger order was necessary than India was willing to commit to. It also implies some uncertainty in the delivery dates, performance, & ultimate cost.

    At worst, an Indian deal to buy modernised An-124s off a re-opened production line could have been another Gorshkov, with years of delays & demands for more money to complete the deal.

    India was able to buy C-17 from a functioning production line, with both delivery & performance assured.
    Gorshkov and An-124 are not the same, work on Gorshkov was much more complex and was like building almost 2 carriers.
    The dealy in An-124 procurement will be on how soon they can start production of the aircraft and deliver it. But the cost of An-124 will anyway be lower than that of C-17 for the same number of orders. $400+ million per aircraft for strategic heavy lift is just insane!
    IAF still don't show any urgency for augmenting the the AWACS fleet, but they are more interested in having C-17s and strategic airlift.


    Quote Originally Posted by Shalav View Post
    The An 124 is in the C5 Galaxy class heavy lifter not comparable to the C-17.

    I don't believe India is in the market for a strategic heavy lifter.
    True its in the class of C5 and still the An-124 costs less than the C-17.



    Btw, C-17 is bought as a strategic heavy lifter by completely ignoring the true heavy lifter on the market.
    Like the Bofors, in the near or distant future we'll get to hear a lot on who all made money in many deals that happened from 2004 onwards...

  23. #623
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    898
    Quote Originally Posted by Levsha View Post
    I kinda like the An-32 - a very straightforward Soviet workhorse. I get the impression that the Indian AF likes it too.
    except the vibrations.
    HAL - one step ahead of IBM

  24. #624
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    5,658
    Never been in an An-32, but have jumped from an AN-26. Very loud, then again I wasn't expecting a Toyota Prius.
    http://img818.imageshack.us/img818/9098/rsz11rsz3807.jpg

  25. #625
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,531

  26. #626
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    28
    First photos,screen grabs from HT.

    http://livefist.blogspot.in/

  27. #627
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    324

  28. #628
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Near Colombo, Sri Lanka
    Posts
    969

    Thumbs up

    thats definitely the best looking LCA!


  29. #629
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Asia
    Posts
    5,217
    Wings aside, the fuselage look a lot like the Hawk
    the missile will require about five times the G capability of the target to complete a successful intercept.
    -Robert L Shaw

  30. #630
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,531
    If the levcons were any larger, I would have been inclined to call it a flying wing. That fuselage looks tiny compared to the ridiculously large wing area.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

- Part of the    Network -

KEY AERO AVIATION NEWS

MAGAZINES

AVIATION FORUM

SHOP

 

WEBSITES