I don’t know what you mean and am unfamiliar with the statements you are referring to. Specifics would be great!

…. What I was questioning was Deino‘s suggestion that Mk. I entering service at the end of this year would not ‘really’ be operational, which I interpret as suggesting some ongoing deficiency relative to IAF requirements that will only be rectified with Mk. II, e.g. lack of a qualified PGM or something…..

Sorry if I was misleading and to admit the least thing I wanted to to put oil into that already burning LCA vs. JF-17-fire in the other tread, which is just glowing up here too.

My point I wanted to note is that – even if quite similar to all types indroduced (EF Typhoon Tranche 1 -2, Rafale block xyz, JF-17, LCA, F-35 …. and surely PAK-FA too) – there seem to be some certain defaults within the Indian Avaition Industry, the management of HAL, the political system, the IAF with rising requirements too and so on.

To sum it up – and here to be clear I do not want to open yert another contest of ABC vs. XYZ and this is better than that – it seems that there is simply something going wrong …. and since my topic is more the CHinese system: it reminds me to the times when in China nearly all went wrong again for several and even more quite different reasons ! These reasons might be different in each case, but all in all if not even an advanved Jet trainer can be designed, developed and manufactured in time and budget delivering the original requirements, if a fighter has to be redesigned right after the pre-serial testing being finished – and from Tejas Mk. 1 to Mk. 2 is a much larger step tahn from JF-17 block I to II simply to the fuselage and powerplant changes …. then there is something wrong. … and that is something that I deeply regret !

Again I do not tink the Chinese way is or was better and even more that Chinese types are better than … but if You look at both countries and their sometimes quite similar highly aimed goals and ambitious plans … and what comes out in the end, then there’s sadly to say so something wrong.

Deino

Overreaction. It’s a weight optimisation tender before commencing production which probably means that everything is ok. The tender itself states service entry within an year.

http://www.hal-india.com/tender/ardc/NIT_EOI-%20HJT-36_16-8-14.pdf

But here is another report stating that it is in even more trouble:

http://aviationweek.com/defense/india-issues-rfi-intermediate-jet-trainers

Regardless what will come out I find it disturbing and it tells sadly a lot about the Indian Aviation sector that so many projects are hampered by often the same problems … look at the Tejas, that will only become fully operational in Mk. II form, the Sitara too …. and this one is only a tiny advanved trainer. :apologetic:

Deino

Sorry to be so pessimistic (but IMO it’s only realistc) but with the political situation right now there will be NO future for an Ukrainian AF, at least not in the near future.

Deino

I have this question gnawing in my head – can an al-31 be modified to fit a MiG-29 / 35 or JF-17? I was looking at the specs and noticed that they are about the same diameter (RD-93 actually is slightly wider!). Al-31 is longer, but if some of the stages could be reduced (compromising max afterburning thrust) you could have a great engine that would be signifocamtly less fuel thirsty… particularly at dry thrust.

9 compressor stages could surely be rationalized? If turbofan engines have nonafterburning versions, this should be possible?

…

Sorry, but there must be a grave mistake !!

the RD-93 has a diameter of 730 mm inlet and 1,000 mm maximum external
the AL-31 has a diameter of 905 mm inlet and 1,280 mm maximum external

So there is simply no chance to fit an AL-31 into a MuG-29, FC-1/JF-17 or J-31 without any mayor redesign.

Incidentally their is a rumour PAF is interested in Russian Mi-35s and even flankers. I thought an al-31 could perhaps even power a jft and solve its thrust issues…

Here I’m very much sceptical too (do You have a source for that ??) … the Mi-35 might be, but surely not a Flanker (or they are surely “interested” as much as Germany might be interested in the F-22 but simply without any chance budgetwise to acquire them) !