Light Stealth Aircraft(LSA) /Medium Stealth Aircraft(MSA) - Concept Discussion
- Thread starter Kane
- Start date
- Status
The revised proposal is being studied by IN as of now and after that I expect a joint presentation of the concept with IN, IAF, HAL & DRDO. The design now fully complies with the requirements of the IN and also meets the criteria for STOBAR launch with better safety margins than a catpult launch aircraft without payload restriction for STOBAR. The new design is quite revolutionary as it allows full potential of the aircraft to be utilised even from STOBAR.
Till now in my discussions with IN what I have found to my shock is that DRDO, ADA and IN have been very badly misled by EADS and USN in the design consultancy for N-LCA. They have wrongly given the max vertical speed requirements and also STOBAR launch profile. It is this wrong data which has made STOBAR carriers unsuitable. While the truth is that they are superior in every manner compared to CATOBAR carriers.
Can you believe that while a dip below the deck height of upto 10feet is allowed for CATOBAR, an aircraft launching from STOBAR is forced to maintain positive climb rate of climb thruout its trajectory and even a dip down to deck height is not allowed. This means that an aircraft launching from STOBAR must achieve its wingborn flight before reaching the apogee of the launch parabolic trajectory. The whole concept of safety with respect to STOBAR has been altered at the behest of US firms making catapults and associated gear. This lie has been created just to ensure that more money continues to be poured in catapults and larger carriers when smaller and more capable carriers can be built cheaply with much better operational availability requiring smaller engines.
Till now in my discussions with IN what I have found to my shock is that DRDO, ADA and IN have been very badly misled by EADS and USN in the design consultancy for N-LCA. They have wrongly given the max vertical speed requirements and also STOBAR launch profile. It is this wrong data which has made STOBAR carriers unsuitable. While the truth is that they are superior in every manner compared to CATOBAR carriers.
Can you believe that while a dip below the deck height of upto 10feet is allowed for CATOBAR, an aircraft launching from STOBAR is forced to maintain positive climb rate of climb thruout its trajectory and even a dip down to deck height is not allowed. This means that an aircraft launching from STOBAR must achieve its wingborn flight before reaching the apogee of the launch parabolic trajectory. The whole concept of safety with respect to STOBAR has been altered at the behest of US firms making catapults and associated gear. This lie has been created just to ensure that more money continues to be poured in catapults and larger carriers when smaller and more capable carriers can be built cheaply with much better operational availability requiring smaller engines.
This is not the final design. It is now more of a flying wing with a nose and tail plane.
When I presented LSA to IN I was told to ensure a vertical speed limit of 7.2m/s for it. I questioned it and gave data of six aircraft including Rafale-M to prove my point. The Navy guys told me that this is what has been told to them by ADA which has hired EADS as consultants and one of the Admirals who certified Mig-29Ks on Vikky also told me that this is what USN follows. I proved him wrong using data about F-35C. he and me belong to same pilot's course and started flying together.
The kind of wrong data which is being fed to our designers as a must and accepted practice is so corrupt that we are trying to make an "Impossible Aircraft". ADA is not so wrong as much as they have been misled in to designing one such "Impossible Aircraft". N-LCA is surely well short of its performance figures but its due to the design. If ADA does what DA did w.r.t Mirage F-1, they will have an outstanding STOBAR launch aircraft.
When I presented LSA to IN I was told to ensure a vertical speed limit of 7.2m/s for it. I questioned it and gave data of six aircraft including Rafale-M to prove my point. The Navy guys told me that this is what has been told to them by ADA which has hired EADS as consultants and one of the Admirals who certified Mig-29Ks on Vikky also told me that this is what USN follows. I proved him wrong using data about F-35C. he and me belong to same pilot's course and started flying together.
The kind of wrong data which is being fed to our designers as a must and accepted practice is so corrupt that we are trying to make an "Impossible Aircraft". ADA is not so wrong as much as they have been misled in to designing one such "Impossible Aircraft". N-LCA is surely well short of its performance figures but its due to the design. If ADA does what DA did w.r.t Mirage F-1, they will have an outstanding STOBAR launch aircraft.
This project has been discussed to length.....Closed for now @vstol Jockey ping any of us when there is a progress.... We will open it for you....
- Status