I am not really sure who’s really clueless now. Any way ether hints at an established material from an established source.

Anyway you obviously know a lot more than I do

Don’t want to put a damper on this but if Tejas is physically smaller than the others mentioned and (I guess) has a higher proportion of composites, why does it not weigh LESS than the others?

Do you mean the LSP’s prototypes or the stipulated weight of the LCA MK1?

Matt, but that still doesn’t explain how you came up with that 4G figure restriction or was that just a speculation?

lmao that 4g was hypothetical.

The thing about the structure wasnt, whether people want to believe the ether or not is not for me to say or force if it is true no matter how much the fans would argue otherwise they could not make the plane lighter and get it into spec.

If you chose the right cf/epoxy,
If you do the testing as required for certification
if you do your structural testing as required at the top of the testing pyramid.

I can not see why you would feel the need to add a safety factor over and above what is mandated by JAR. unless you have a process deficiency and there is something that does not tie up between your coupon level testing and your actual structure.

What is suddenly causing the knockdown that you feel the need to beef up the structure of the aircraft so much that you take a hit in performance that the customer is not going to be happy about and causes you major program delays and actually go to a design review before you finish manufacture of the originally intended number of aircraft??

whether you chose to believe it or not is upto you.

No one told me about the nlca weight issues but unless they have sorted out the lca weight issues I do not see how the nlca would come out lighter and better performing. I heard about the lca in the ether.

What are the weight and performance numbers of the N-LCA? If the LCA was suffering from being over weight and having lack of performance how is the N-LCA coping with the added weight of reinforced undercarriage and support structure?

Wasn’t there a pitch to upgrade the mig 27 engines?

This is a interesting, wonder why they did place the propellers beneath, and not on top, it seems a bit over complex, but i think there are reasons for such unconventional design.

******

I might understand it better now…these are electric motors…so a single electric motor could be too heavy..so they went with 4 lighter ones, i don’t know, any better insight?

I was going to mention the above but also in terms of steering and nest use of space its easier to accommodate eight wires going to four points and control current to them then it would be to accommodate a gearing system.