Last batch of photos from the October 25 HAL air display. The controversial Saras.
The Indian Navy has officially opened vendor discussions with Boeing Defense and Dassault Aviation under its most ambitious current aviation […]
Could this be the first true foot in the door for Indian-built military drones? The Indian Army has opened what […]
By Sanjay Badri-Maharaj A somewhat curious report emanating from the Indian Air Force, purportedly in response to a request […]
What is the controversy about Saras?
Enough of flying machines Shiv. What about the Arjun Tank?
don’t know what the controversy is all about, but she sure is a lovely looking bird. kudos shiv.
saras is named after the sarus crane, which according to wikipedia is an all-year resident breeding bird in northern Pakistan and India (especially Central India and the Gangetic plains), Nepal, Southeast Asia and Queensland, Australia. It is a very large crane, averaging 156 cm (5 ft) in length, which is found in freshwater marshes and plains. beautiful looking thing.
For the record, all development costs included, it is the worlds costliest plane in its class..
LCA Tejas updates Please
Copied from the Piaggio P-180 na
Mr. Aroor, I shall be informal in this post. The so-called “controversy” about Saras that you have ‘singularly’ attributed is not clear. It has never been subjected to public ‘scrutiny’, ‘criticism’ and ‘debate’ unlike the Tejas and Arjun.
It has successfully conducted test-flights and is expected to enter serial production very soon. NAL has assured that it’s 500-kg extra weight will also be eliminated.
The CAG of India is not only “joking”, but LYING that there is “no market” for 14 seaters in India, when the fact is that western small airplane firms like Gulfstream, Cessna, Dreamliner etc. have increased the marketing of corporate 14-seaters in India. It thus appears that the CAG report has been influenced by private agents, who do not require the cheap and effective Saras to compete with their US clients’ airplanes in India.
If on the basis of this one “jab” of the CAG on the Saras — which otherwise has had successful test-flights in 4 years — you have “stereotyped” it has controversial, I’M AFRAID THIS JOURNALISTIC INTENT IS QUESTIONABLE
In a media where consistently poor performing cricketers like Ganguly and Dravid etc. are “poetically eulogized” simply on the argument of past glory that is now long gone, it is very surprising that a minor CAG remark is sufficient to “label” the Saras as controversial. Even though our cricketers are “poorly flickering tubelights”, the media stands to gain advertising contracts from sponsors whom these cricketers endorse. Thus, it may be surmised that the Indian corporate media cannot be trusted with ANY journalistic ideals that were once taken for granted.
A CAG report HAS to be packaged as a scandal, else it is not a saleable “commodity” for the media
Reply to “Tongue firmly in cheek” regarding the Saras being a copy of the Piaggio P180 Avanti..except for the rearward facing turboprop, their layouts are not at all similar..what you’re saying is that if the engine placement solution is the same, then the entire aircraft is a copy ?! what a joke ! and even then, the Saras has its engines mounted on pylons that attach to the fuselage- on the Avanti, they are mounted on the wing itself, which is placed close to the rear, as compared to the Saras, where they’re closer to the mid-section.
so then Airbus has been blatantly copying Boeing for decades, just as almost every other aircraft without the most unique configuration is a copy..its amazing how idiots will rush to label something a copy without an iota of proof.
@ “Tongue Firmly in Cheek” pleae dont make ir-responsible and wild comments. First of all i would like to tell you that cut-copy-paste is simply not possible in aircraft designing if one is making a completely new aircraft. One may get only different ideas for solving a particular problem and even this cannot be done just like that as engineers are required to produce a complete analysis of the system or component to put it on production.
Every single component of this machine is systematically analysed and flight tested and DGCA is not foolish enough to certify a copied aircraft. Produce enough proofs to support your argument or otherwise simply dont make fun of other people’s work.
Interesting debate. But somebody *please* spell out the “controversy” over this gorgeous bird.
Time is of essence. Dont keep on testing it till your grand children ask you questions…
I agree with Abhiman that there is a lot of market for this class of aircrafts in India,if only India can make it competitively priced. If a more established foreign aircrafts are available for much less, why will someone even care to look at this? Patriotism? BS
By the way, what is wrong with copying if it will help you progress? By the time we perfect this, China will be serial producing copycats of Boeing 747s and Airbus A380s. (Believe me they are neither as righteous nor as dumb as we are)
same guy who posted the previous comment[email protected]:30
The main controversy behind SARAS development is the increase in all up weight of the first prototype and the subsequent delay in flight testing. Because of the increase in weight PT1 is not able to meet performance parameters but even so it has completed around 120 flights.
The Second prototype has more powerfull engine but is still living with the increased wt. It has completed around 32 flights. Pt2 is more closer to the required performance. As far as the individual systems are concerned some of the snags in pt1 are addressed in pt2.
The third prototype or the Production standard aircraft (PSA) is expected to fly around the late 2009 has a reduced all up wt of 500kg and also with the more powerfull pt6a 67a engines. This combination in PSA will make the saras a totally differnent aircraft as compared to the pt1 and all the snags will be addressed in PSA before its flight.
Technical questions –
1. Can it fly on one engine in case it suffers a failure in the other engine?
2. Can it take off on one engine in case the other fails during takeoff?
Yes it can fly and land with one engine in case the other one fails. in facts it is a requirement for certification for multi-engined aircrafts.
The saras is required to continue to climb with one engine and sustain fligh in case one engine fails during take-off. this again is a requirement for certification.
anon @ 10:57: Cheers! Does that mean the PSA is sitting pretty in terms of required weight? Also – when is it slated to finish all testing? Thanks in advance.
Overweight? drop a few seats, name it a 10 seater.
An aircraft is used for commuting people – not only for testing. This is not a toy that you keep playing around and testing all the time. BTW, when is the planned IOC and FOC for this craft? 2025?
In my view, the cost of Saras is likely to be significantly lower than foreign competitors like Cessna, Beechcraft etc. This is similar to how HAL Dhruv beat Bell and Eurocopter to obtain contracts in Ecuador, Peru and Turkey on the “sheer dint” of it’s low cost.
Saras should not only find a “foothold” in India, but like the Dhruv it must also acquire ‘captive’ markets in North America, middle East and Africa.
The all up wt is to be reduced in the PSA by making the wing out of composite materials and also the weight of the other structural components are optimised without compromising the strength.
The certification of the Saras is to be done by 2010, without which the airforce would not purchase the no of aircraft which they have promised earlier
what s the reson behind this crash?what happened exactly?i can t able to digest this ……..
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *