the PAF maintains that only 1 soldier was killed and 1 officer injured in the attack and 1 aircraft (JF-17?) was damaged
[/url]

As per a few journalists I follow on twitter, an Il-78 refueler was damaged a bit.

Definitely not fabricated:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5T2dz2tGQVI

If that is a “non-aggressive” display then I can’t wait to see a full blown one 🙂

Surya Kiran display team will be back… with Hawks 🙂

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/bae-submits-quotes-for-new-indian-hawk-deal-375015/

Speaking at the Farnborough air show last month, BAE’s director of Hawk aircraft programmes Michael Christie said the expected 20-unit deal with New Delhi will re-equip the Indian air force’s Surya Kiran aerobatic display team. The formation currently uses HAL-built HJT-16 Kiran jet trainers.

To Twinblade :- The MoD treats the Private Defense players very badly and won’t award them any contracts of any worth.

Tell me one instance where an agency/organisation which has qualified as a vendor/contractor was denied an equal oppurtunity ;). There is a reason why all new private shipyards are becoming junior partners to existing players and that reason isn’t survival. It is to gather reasonable amount of experience as a sub contractor with a track record to show of in that particular field. This is how it works and there are no shortcuts, unless you are one of the first movers in that field.

whats the rootcause for the drag? Crosssection?

Quoting from the link I posted on the earlier page :-

One of the major out come of sea level trial of Tejas is that the drag of the aircraft is high such that the aircraft could not reach the supersonic Mach number at sea level. The components contributing for the maximum drag rise
has been identified and improvement methods were worked out. Nose cone extension using a Plug: The major component of drag at higher speed is the wave drag. This can be minimized by following the Whitcomb’s Area rule for the aerodynamic configuration design. The cross sectional area variation of LCA along the length of fuselage is shown in Fig 12. Between station X = 5000mm & 6000mm there is a sudden increase in area. By smoothing this sudden rise, the wave drag can be minimized.

OK, the reason for the delay in Tejas IOC and FOC is out. As per Vijainder K Thakur, the tiny airframe of Tejas has a high variation in weight between different LSPs because of outdated production technology used for assembling them, which has increased the distance between center of gravity and lift, far more than anticipated. End result is that the LSP’s are far more unstable than intended at high AoA (beyond what FBW can handle).

https://plus.google.com/u/0/115477337653794596531/posts/3BMVLgfmJLS

Moreover, the link says that this is the reason why IAF will not be inducting any of the LSPs.

My dear fellow, how do you expect anyone to open an assembly line for anything unless there’s demand for it first? Why should Tata and co invest billions until they have an assurance of orders(and hopefully, funding) from the Defence Ministry first?

Despite the chicken and egg argument, Mahindra is in the process of opening a line in Bangalore (no orders, see?), anyhow that was not the point I was trying to make. When evaluating a tender bid, a bidder with an assembly line or concrete plans to build one while having a significant in house capability/industry ties to manufacture components will always trump other bids both on technical and cost price estimation (the figure above the dotted line is less likely to vary). Moreover there are only two vendors with the ability to manufacture aero structures as of today, only one with an upcoming assembly line and testing facilities and rest have thin air and MoU’s to show for if they are sent RFIs for industry participation. Its unlikely that there would be a major change in status quo by the time RFP’s are invited, leaving the overall process at the mercy of MoD’s TEC, at which point I lose trust in the process. This ‘tender’ will be favoured lopsidedly for the first mover, and the contract size would ensure that the winner becomes the primary alternate to HAL. What IMO should have been done was to allow atleast two more vendors to make foray into the field via acquisition and/or sub-contracting before this decision was made, but desperate times call for desperate measure, so even CAG accountants might oversee this one.

indeed, they are quite similar so I dunno why the other poster said they are not comparable. The only major difference is that one went delta and the other went conventional.
whats odd is that you figure a delta air frame would be less draggy, yet the tejas has drag issues. Could it be the F-18E of light fighters? 😮

Correct me if I am wrong, but isn’t a conventional wing design the de-facto choice for a trainer ?