the fact that I’m probing you and not you probing me is proof of our superiority”
Good one, 😀
well there are crappy american goods in walmart too, so what? its silly yo assume that all products coming out of a huge country such as china will all be of the same quality.
what many westerners seem to failt to realise is that while chinese good are generally much cheaper then their western counterparts, there are still varying prices to present different quality levels.
you cant really expect to go into your local walmart, pick out the cheapest product on offer (which often will be chinese) and expect it to work just as well as the more expansive products also on offer (many of which will also be chinese).
also, it is human nature to only take notice of things that dont really work as expected. if your ketal is working perfectly and has been working perfectly for years, would you really bother to check where it was made? however, if your ketal breaks down after only one year, you would most likely check its lable yo see where it is from.
all this means is that people buy the cheapest goods and expecting them to work like the best on the market, and getting diapointed when these products fail to meet expectations, and when they check the lable, most are found to be made in china, hence creating the false impression that all chinese goods are of poor quality.
just go through your house and take a look at all the lables of your durable and good quality products and you might be suprised just how many of them have ‘made in china’ on the back.
I was making the same argument dude. So chill. All that I was claiming was: User and Design requirements dictate quality of a product. Not culture.
Chinese aircrafts had always good craftsmanship, even long before, when they had access to western equipment. Perhaps a function of culture.
NOT TRYING TO START A FLAME WAR:
I beg to differ. How does culture has anything to do with quality of aircraft? If you do maintain that agrument, then how come walmart sells such crapy stuff from china? Don’t you think design requirements and user requirements have a major role to play?
which plane PLA?
IJT
What’s a tks?
Thanks.
And they all laugh at bollywood… Let us laugh back…
Nitpick: PLA, you mean lollywood. There is no bolywood in Pakistan…….. 😡
So the original Kaveri is still on track to be finished, while they use 40 GE engines in the interim?
Earlier reports indicated such an approach. There has not been any news reports to the contrary recently.
EJ-200, M-88-3
Why not get one of them for the LCA.
A new engine at this point in time will set back the project by atleast 2 to 3 years (while its FBW is Updated/Modified/Vaidated). 🙁
Just think. Boost the LCA’s size by 30%, add the AL-31F, and boom: instant MCA.
Its not that simple. LCA, MCA projects are aimed at developing local R&D and cutting edge technologies in house. Making existing design (LCA) bigger, as you rightly pointed out, is simpler and does not significantly contribute towards these goals. If IAF needs a bigger LCA, my guess is that they will build Super_LCA or LCA2 etc. MCA will remain a sepetate project.
F36 to F116? 😀 😮 :p
http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article_418.shtml
” the nose canards or ‘moustache’ as seen on previous Naval LCA models, are missing. The canards were indeed deleted from the design after extensive wind tunnel testing showed that they provided no significant performance, lift increase or improved handling at higher AoA. The LEVCONs will however, be retained and along with a higher thrust to weight ratio, will help the naval variant exceed the conventional LCA’s AoA and turn performance. Both the trainer and naval version have an additional intake at the tail-base for cooling the tailpipe. “
Not just that, but you have to wonder about approach speeds. Delta’s traditionally have had higher approach speeds haven’t they? The Grippen and Rafale are said to have excellent approach characteristics, but they use canards. Would a naval LCA have similar characteristics?
It was supposed to have canards. But testing showed no advantage. So it was droped.
From BR
“The dying spark of the Marut program was an attempt to design and build a Deep Penetration Strike Aircraft (DPSA) the HF-73, a twin engined derivative of the Marut. The demise of the HF-73 later culminated in the purchase of the Jaguar to fill this role. While a series of imports and license assembly programs followed, hopes were kept alive by the launch of the Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA) in 1984 with the sole purpose of developing the LCA.”
Victor, Hope you don’t mind me adding one more line to yours.
“what does it matter if a cat is black or white? as long as it catches mice” and don’t fall for a flame bait……..:D
one that is on another continent
Both belong to Asia BTW………:D