JohnWooCan anyone read and translate #1003?
Thanks.
JJ
JohnWooThis is obviously a fan based website free of charge for anyone to participate in, the person in question is not the mouth peace of the DRDO, he may claim what he wishes, you both can create your own thread where you can try to proove who is smarter.
I agree this is a public website and whoever interested can be participate into the discussion (flamers are not welcome). I obviously know he is neither can represent DRDO, GTRE, HAL etc.. nor the GOI.
I just wonder how he can comeup with what he has claimed and like to here some explaination from him.
I don’t think you can answer my question cause you both have different mind, thought, and brain function etc.
In turns of creating another thread, there is no need. We are in the discussion of LCA and Kaveri and it is not off the topic.
Also, there is no need for you to overreact the fact that there is no flame and offense to anyone, any firm or organization.
JohnWooIs this thread is military aviation or drug producing and AIDS spreading? 😀 😀 😀 You peole are nuts.
JohnWooIf you read my post on this very page, I already answer this confusion of yours, THEY ARE THE SAME ENGINE ITS JUST THAT THE MCA KAVERI is supposed to be even more powerful, there were plans for it to be a completely different engine with thrust vectoring etc but this is very much on the drawing stages, so for now there is only one engine and the MCA will use a slightly more powerful version of it.
I alreay knew that there is only one engine for LCA and MCA. That is Kaveri. But, Steathy Spy kept insisting they are two different things, and that GTRE asking help for MCA’s engine but not LCA’s. Then, let him clarify what he claimed.
JohnWooPardon me sir, but let me clarify this >>
The State owned Gas Turbine Research Establishment [GTRE] was to indigenously develop the Kaveri engine to power the LCA and MCA. But there have been major slippages in all the milestones. GE, SNECMA, and Klimov had all offered to provide the engines for this aircraft.
But now the GTRE is asking these companies for help in designing the MCA Kaveri instead of asking them to provide the whole engine themselves (if you read the article on the previous page)
and the MCA kaveri details is there at >> http://www.geocities.com/spacetransport/aircraft-mca.html#engine
Trying to read your links again and again. I don’t see there is two different engines for LCA and MCA. They both are the same engines basically. MCA’s is just a minor modification to the LCA’s. I belive MCA one is still a propose and there is no physical engine yet, they still need to certify the main Kaveri of LCA first, then will make modification for MCA.
The one cracked-down in Russia is a fact that it is Kaveri engine of LCA, and you are trying to fool, twisted, and misleading us that it is MCA’s engine and LCA’s is no problem.
JohnWooThere are different Kaveri’s for the LCA and the MCA.
check out the MCA’s Kaveri’s details at http://www.geocities.com/spacetransport/aircraft-mca.html#engine
and this link >> http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/IAF/Info/Aircraft/MCA.html
says : (pay attention to the bold part)
Yes, I read the links your provided, and here is the engine parts:
The State owned Gas Turbine Research Establishment [GTRE] was to indigenously develop the Kaveri engine to power the LCA and MCA. But there have been major slippages in all the milestones. GE, SNECMA, and Klimov had all offered to provide the engines for this aircraft.
The Kaveri engines in the MCA will have a slightly higher dry thrust than in the LCA engine.
Basically they both are the same engines, MCA’s have a slightly higher dry thrust than LCA’s. However, I don’t find information on which engine fault and which one is success. Are you just making up? Perhaps, you can show us more information and links.
JohnWooDon’t trust the Chinese, they only showing the good looking ones.
They will throw you all the ugly ones when you don’t have any more suspicious. :rolleyes: 🙂 😉
JohnWooand guys the foreign partners that the DRDO is looking for is for the MCA’s Kaveri engine; not the LCA’s
How many Kaveri engines are there?
One Kaveri for LCA and another one Kaveri for MCA?
So, you are implying that MCA’s Kaveri fault and LCA’s Kaveri sucess?
Frankly, this is the first time I heard there are 2 different Kaveris.
:confused: :confused: :confused:
JohnWooand another world famous fighter.
What is that?
JohnWooI am not insulting you! i will delete parts of my text since u think it is an insult, but you should have been able to think for yourself as to why it would NOT benifit Russia to set up a infrastructure in China.
No, you are not insulting me, but your are insulting another country which you think making your country on top of the world, LMAO.
If it is not benefiting Russia, Russia will not ask China in the first place. Those top dollars are a must survival for the Russia military industry.
Don’t just think in a single minded (and in your own wishful thinking), there are many things involved, Russia needs help from outside. India can only provide limited fund, and it is not enough. 50-60 billions dollars is way out of their budget.
Besides India and China, Russia has no other country to back up with fund for the project. I don’t see any countries willing and having ability to back up with adequate fund.
– Europe – No way, they have their own fighter programs.
– USA – don’t even think about it.
– Asia countries like Malaysia, Indonesia – they can afford only 10-20 fighters
– South America – their economy is in bad shape
– Middleast – they only know how to get oil and live like a king.
– Africa – They don’t even have enough food.
Now, only with India limited fund and without China, the success of PAK FA project looks very dim unless there is a big money coming from somewhere. (Very unlikely)
it would NOT benifit Russia to set up a infrastructure in China.
LOL, you think that is free service? Do you know how much Russia earning from this?
Base on your logic, Russia should not TOT of Su-27 to China, and Sukhoi should go bankrupt. 🙂 🙂
JohnWooI am fustrated more then anything and i dont care if India is better then China or not for this thread. It was your insessent questions and your inability to think as to the reason why it would not be in Russias best interest knowing the Chinese aerospace fraternity love to Pirate as much techonology as they can.
You are frustrated does not meant you have a right to insult other countries. You have make a statement only based on your opinion, but far away from the fact.
Your statement “Russia has no interest to cooperate with China” has never been made by Russia itself. You are the only one who made this claim. BUT IT IS FACT THAT THEY HAVE ASKED CHINA.
Is your words represent Russia Government?
JohnWooI think you guys are overreact and misunderstanding from my posts.
Russia has asked China to join the project, but China turned it down. It does not meant China is more capable than India, it is simply China wanted to try itself, and it does not wanted the whole project is controlled by another country.
I think this was resulted from recent China weapons procurement from Russia, which is tightly controlled and disappointed of low tech transfer(hiding the latest tech).
JohnWooSimple fact that none of the advance materials producing nations can export mil standard fibres and even relatively old resin systems to china due to embargos, and military secrets act in the west means that while china maybe be able to produce panels for things like the A380 it doesnt have the skilled labour force nor the IMPORTANT MATERIALS needed for something like the PAK-FA.
Whereas India does NOT have these Embargos and so can import the important raw materials needed for the next generation aircraft..
And following on from that, it would not be in Russia’s interest to have China in as a partner pulling them behind in a race they are already behind in.
Russia would have to train a Chinese work force, build material factories and help China setup the neaded infrastructure. And this in turn would doubly hurt Russia as the return for all this will be a China that will be pirating more Russian techonology using prison/low payed labour to produce parts and under cutting the Russians in the future. And in effect posing a greater threat to Russia.
And the Russians have stated when the PAK-FA may fly why dont you just wait 🙂
You just keep listing of what you think China is incapable areas (fact is you don’t wanted to see China join in), does not matter China is capable or not, no reason to debate in this thread.
The fact is Russia has asked China, and you still can’t explain why.
JohnWooChina is not even close to making the F-22, if they are lucky they will be able to make something that is close to the F/A-18 (not the sub-par hornet). Please get over the dreams!
As for me being contradicted, not really. I said it would not be in Russia’s best interest to work with the Chinese that is and will be true for some years to come!
At this moment India can offer a bit more then China in terms of materials and know how.
True, I personally doubt China can make a plane like F-22, the same way goes to Russia who is lacking all the fund now. Even India joint with 2-4 billions, but way far from 50-60 billions.
But you can’t seems to explain why Russia is asking China to joint the project.
All you can say is India is better than China in material and know how, but can’t back up your claim. Anyway, this thread is not to compare which country is doing better, but it is rather how the PAK FA is doing.
It is clear PAK FA is still no where only in talking status. How long we have to wait for seeing this thing fly.
JohnWooI personally doubt neither PAK FA nor XXJ/J12 can be a match to F-22.
Consider that America use 20 years and 80 billions to developed this monster.
One project is lack of fund and one side is lack of experience and tech.
Sign In
