LCA News and Discussions, 22-Oct-2013

vic · Post by **vic** » 22 Jul 2014 22:54

F-35 will achieve IOC after 300 planes are already in production. FOC after 1000 planes are produced.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 22 Jul 2014 23:03

F-35 will achieve IOC after 300 planes are already in production

Incorrect

F-35 LRIP (Low Rate Initial Production) schedule -

Lot 1- 2
Lot 2- 6
Lot 3 - 21
Lot 4 - 32
Lot 5 - 32
Lot 6 -36
Lot 7 -35
Lot 8 - 35
Lot 9- 57

F-35 would IOC with the USMC while LRIP block/LOT 7 is just beginning deliveries

FOC after 1000 planes are produced

Production rates for FRP have not been determined as yet, so what the number would be by the time the variants reach FOC is impossible at the moment. FOC is a service and operator related thing. Each of the 3 services in the US, and each export customer has a specific set of conditions that need to be met before FOC.

Ganesh_S · Post by **Ganesh_S** » 22 Jul 2014 23:04

My point was that the F-16 developmental program is not the correct program benchmark for AMCA time-lines.

LCA i believe.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 22 Jul 2014 23:06

LCA i believe

No, AMCA. My comment was in relation to this statement -

If you want a genuine comparison then after 20 years, do a comparison of "AMCA vs. F-16 Block I" development time schedule and you will be surprised to see AMCA beat F-16 development time schedule(assuming foreign suppliers don't delay the engines)

Ganesh_S · Post by **Ganesh_S** » 22 Jul 2014 23:13

brar_w wrote:
LCA i believe
No, AMCA. My comment was in relation to this statement -

If you want a genuine comparison then after 20 years, do a comparison of "AMCA vs. F-16 Block I" development time schedule and you will be surprised to see AMCA beat F-16 development time schedule(assuming foreign suppliers don't delay the engines)

Even then perhaps it would be unfair on part of LCA/AMCA. F 16 was a breakthrough in terms of FBW and was kind of a revolutionary platform. Not sure if IAF will not change its requirements considering the pace of technological change.

Ganesh_S · Post by **Ganesh_S** » 22 Jul 2014 23:16

AMCA has to be conceived as a collective responsibility between IAF and HAL/DRDO

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 22 Jul 2014 23:33

^^^^^

Supposedly it was. To the extent it could be.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 22 Jul 2014 23:41

BUT, even in the case of the "AMCA", the ideas/expectations they had a few years ago - I bet - have changed dramatically.

Which is why I think this whole drama needs to be "de-linked" IAF needs planes and the Indian Labs need infusion of productive technologies with complete life-cycle. The prior is possible - buy planes as-is from France/Russia/Who-ever - done, satisfies the rec for uping the number of squadrons. Gaming the future is a totally different story and needs to be thought through and played in the future. With India fielding one of the largest armed forces it would be total travesty if India did not put in the effort to go-it-alone. Now is the time. Huge risk - granted. Worth taking. Not a knock on anyone - they can participate if they want to, but they cannot (or should not) drive.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 22 Jul 2014 23:46

Even then perhaps it would be unfair on part of LCA/AMCA.

I agree..The F-16 is the wrong program to compare the AMCA or the LCA to.. The biggest thing about the F-16 was that its design philosophy and concept was a radical shift from the accepted norm at the time. This was very tough for some to digest even within the pilot community at the time.

member_28677 · Post by **member_28677** » 22 Jul 2014 23:49

Ganesh_S wrote:what makes you think 20b$ deal is funding Laboratories in France? do you have a breakdown of how money is being spent?
MMRCA and LCA are mutually exclusive so its not Dassault's fault if LCA doesn't make the cut.

1. First one doesn't make sense. Is France here to serve bharat maa?
2. I never blame Dassault for LCA. They are wise, we are stupid and they are aware of this. Laboratory Science is never transferred through any TOT(production) deal. Whatever production line management experience we needed, we already got it from Mig, Su30-MKI production lines. We don't need to repeat same thing now with Rafale. We should look for "Co-Development" projects, instead of this "Rafale production line" which costs mammoth $20 Billion & offers no 'development' experience. Rafale project has gone far beyond that phase now. Same is not true for FGFA, we will get something from it(even though some people are saying HAL's "development" workshare in it is very low, compared to our financial investment share, but that's expected since Russia holds more leverage).
3. LCA made the cut actually. We got 4th Generation fighter "development" technology now in India. And you know, noone will share this with you in any TOT deal. We can't buy this in market, because you can't buy "25 years of fighter development experience" from international Market for even $50 billion. LCA project alone is worth more than Rafale deal.

If you give me a choice, i will stick with an "India with LCA and no Rafale" & better use that cash in hand to hire better scientists, engineers from world-over for AMCA. This cash is useful for building new India. Time passes very fast, costs huge in technology age and money can fasten your learning time if invested in proper manpower+resources. China has started doing this, we are still half-leg in Soviet era dependence and getting shivers in walking alone. (At first, we will feel scared but that's how u learn to drive cycle. You have to do it alone sooner or later. Rafale will push India 20 year back into same old dependency chain. This is why i thank MMS & Antony for delaying this crap enough to kill it. Now lets pray this administration kills it completely.)

World class products cannot be churned overnight simply by pumping more money. A lot more has to be done at institutional levels which is time consuming.

World-class Air-fighter is result of -
1. world class development team(1st timers need not be world-class at all),
2. with world class commitment & support from the partner(user/IAF - should be ready to accept it half-working for longer term benefits),
3. with world-class development & test facilities(some of which were denied).

Money can definitely get the 3rd part fixed. Money is a wonderful thing because it can do wonderful things. While we were allocating $100 million on Light-Howtizer(which was incidentally cancelled & money never utilized), the test-beds cost even less? Pay russians and lease one for 10 years. If they can lease you Akulla Subs, why not test-bed? Either these test-bed was/is not available to us for a lease or there is/was half-hearted commitment from top to LCA.

This is 2014 and they are going ahead with Kaveri engine tests, tied to testing in Russia. So, i hope its the first case: Test-bed is not available to us. If its latter, god save India from such short-sighted planners(MoD). Keeping test-bed in india, saves crucial time & team fatigue. Both of which can FAIL/delay such crucial project enough for IAF to jump into another dependency 20 years later.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 23 Jul 2014 00:04

Rafale will push India 20 year back into same old dependency chain

I agree.

In fact, to me, it seems that they play India vs. India - IAF vs. the Indian Labs.

Ganesh_S · Post by **Ganesh_S** » 23 Jul 2014 01:17

But, it is not late to combine them. India has to have a far better idea of what the future holds for her and IMHO should reconsider all alternatives including FGFA. Much has changed, including the F-35 (not as a purchase, but as a demonstration of what the future could hold - France does not offer such a future). Point being Indian MMRCA decisions are out dated by now.

True, but then one has to consider the current geopolitical scenario with china trying to dominate proceedings. As of now Rafale seems to be the closest advanced platform IAF could have.

IMO Rafale and AMCA can complement each other where one can aid development/MLU of other. Both F-35 and FGFA could equally cull
AMCA that's why i believe LCA shoud be done and dusted ASAP for development work on AMCA to commence. Orders in terms of numbers shouldn't be a concern regarding LCA. At least work on Core/peripheral technologies can be continued by commencing work on AMCA.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 23 Jul 2014 01:21

MahaKaal ji - are you the cataloger of the flower delivery vehicles? If so, welcome back sirjee.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 23 Jul 2014 01:53

When you guys are done with 'All LCA and no Rafale/Import and move to AMCA' argument(s), do spend a little bit of time on the minor question of equipping the air-force with necessary squadron strength and technology. And in a time-frame which makes sense.

member_28677 · Post by **member_28677** » 23 Jul 2014 02:26

^ flower vehicle? no idea who that is. I joined a day back sir ji, following the forum since long, but got chance tobe member just now & scored a warning too.

Ganesh_S · Post by **Ganesh_S** » 23 Jul 2014 02:31

How does inducting LCA in significant numbers by scrapping Rafale be of any advantage to Indian R&D. Post MK2 development LCA has to enter production phase and make way for AMCA development to commence. Technologies developed for AMCA can be incorporated as MLU for LCA.

Same is not true for FGFA, we will get something from it(even though some people are saying HAL's "development" workshare in it is very low, compared to our financial investment share, but that's expected since Russia holds more leverage).

Its not some people, its the Russians who are saying that. Neither Russians nor Americans (f-35)will part away anything that India cannot develop domestically. At the most Russians might allow us to MKI'z the Indian version in the name of joint development. so why not buy them off the shelf with some degree of customization if needed. Six bilion dollars (Presumably) in the name of joint development will only Kill AMCA.

Are you not bothered about the "World class Infrastructure" being provided to SDRE's by virtue of these $$$

India’s share in research-and-development work for the joint Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft (FGFA) project with Russia is currently limited by India's domestic industrial capabilities but will gradually increase with the project’s implementation, a Russian military expert said Friday.

India’s The Economic Times newspaper reported on October 17 that Indian military officials were concerned over the country’s work share in the FGFA project, which is currently only 15 percent even though New Delhi is bearing 50 percent of the cost.

“The figure cited by the Indian side reflects current capabilities of India’s industry, in particular the Hindustan Aeronautics Limited [HAL] corporation,” said Igor Korotchenko, head of the Moscow-based Center for Analysis of Global Arms Trade.

“With the progress in the implementation of this project, we expect the Indian engineers and designers to approach the share determined in the [Russian-Indian] agreement: 50 percent,” Korotchenko said in an exclusive interview with RIA Novosti.

Russia will certainly provide all necessary knowledge and logistics support to Indian specialists, but developing skills and acquiring experience in design and development of advanced fighter aircraft takes a long time and substantial effort (Bluntly saying, for the moment you SDRE's are not worth it) the expert added.

http://en.ria.ru/military_news/20131025 ... -Grow.html

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 23 Jul 2014 02:48

My two cents starts with a basic question:

In several other threads, the SU30MKI availability/up time or more specifically the below normal figures, has come up. If it's not engine MTBO's being reduced from 1000 hours to 700 hours due to unexplained flame outs and single engine landings, it seems to involve spare parts which we don't have the capacity to manufacture either at all or not in sufficient quantity.

So the question: if MKI availability was at international norms, would we really need the Rafale to take on the pakis? If we got to certain stage where we are kicking their butt, they'll threaten to go nuclear.

WRT to PRC, the Rafale is not going to make a difference in the outcome. They will have the edge in quantity, availability and strategic location (our cities are closer to their perimeter).

Whether we admit it or not, our strategy WRT to PRC has to be the same redline Pakis type: Go beyond a certain line, and we will nuke you and you have more to lose—the US and Japan will laugh up their sleeves, than we do—your great power dreams will be dealt a severe blow.

This means taking the $20bn for Rafales and putting it into Arihants Mk2 with 16+ mirved K4s or whatever.

While getting the SU30s to be more dependable.

This whole two front war and squadron strength is delusional IMVVVHO. We are a status quo power and all we need is to have credible deterrence and that means different things against different enemies.

The Rafale deal no longer makes any sense and we don't have the money for it.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 23 Jul 2014 03:16

True, but then one has to consider the current geopolitical scenario with china trying to dominate proceedings. As of now Rafale seems to be the closest advanced platform IAF could have.

I can live with that statement. But, what I am starting to not live with is that the Rafale will hold its own into the 50s, actually I doubt that it will survive into the 40s. 30s, OK, will accept that.

So, IMVVVHO, a plane that will overlap the "AMCA" (I have no clue what that is now), is a plane I can accept. That too one that provides enough push on the testing and manufacturing front (including supply chain, MRO, etc) (an dFrance - today - is pretty good at it - not top of the line (IMHO))

IMO Rafale and AMCA can complement each other where one can aid development/MLU of other. Both F-35 and FGFA could equally cull the AMCA that's why i believe LCA shoud be done and dusted ASAP for development work on AMCA to commence. Orders in terms of numbers shouldn't be a concern regarding LCA. At least work on Core/peripheral technologies can be continued by commencing work on AMCA.

After surfing the net for the JSF/F-35 Turkey thread, I am of the very staunch opinion that a 4th Gen is 4th Gen and a proper 5th Gne is a 5th Gen - *they do not mix* - not even possible to mix.

So, nope, I totally disagree that they compliment each other.

IMHO, when the final story on the F-35 comes out, outside of the mismanagement, it will be a re-write-story. Others will not even be close. IMHO of course. Not even close. The one thing I am starting to realize is that "5th Gen" seems to mean different things to different AFs. So, to that extent I am willing to be happy with a FGFA or a "AMCA". But, if one were to compare .......................... dunno. At this point in time, IMHO, it is not even close. And, I feel that the US will maintain that gap. So, *the* question: where does India (IAF) want to head? That goal has to be set and aimed for. With that in mind, neither the Rafale and certainly not the LCA will help.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 23 Jul 2014 13:28

MahaKaal wrote: Same old colonial argument - "I have 20 billion dollars for funding FRANCE's laboratories and getting 126 planes, but giving 2 Billion dollars to indian weapons maker is wasteful because i don't have money."

Can you please quote example(s) especially with respect to the entire LCA Program where it has been held up because GOI/MOD have not been willing to put money into the program? Which particular aspect of the program has been stuck-up/was stuck-up because MOD/GOI won't part with the money and had the same been made available, LCA would've been flying in squadron strength with IAF.

Lets get this clear:
1. If you need world-class product, then provide world-class funds and facilities to DRDO(and GTRE who is working without any test-bed because IAF is unwilling to help with funding/leasing Indian scientists with a engine Test-bed)
2. If you pay crappy, low funding, then you will get only a crappy, compromised product.

1. GOI sanctions the strength and actual number of transport aircraft which IAF operates. How many IL-76 does IAF to spare one for Kaveri high altitude testing? And what does that do to operational requirement of the IAF?

GTRE Head said in 2009 that it cost 'several hundred crores' to set-up such facility. And do tell me this - has DRDO asked for such altitude and flight test facility from GOI as part of their budget? From what I understand, Boeing is developing Mach 3.7 Wind-tunnel and high altitude testing facility in India as part of 30% off-set clause for C-17. Given the C-17 deal size, 30% is substantial amount of money. Does GOI provide IAF with funds to invest in all these facilities? And if it's IAF which is supposed to be investing in R&D Infra in the country, what is DRDO for?

2. And KAVERI is a 'compromised' & 'crappy' product because of lack of funding?

USAF pays fat money and gets a nice fat product.

What's with the rhetorical and circular arguments?

LCA costs what is cost (USD 26 million as per latest HAL estimate) because it is LCA. If we'd aimed to build a MCA in the class of Mirage-2000 or F-16, it would've cost more. LCA was not under-funded as a project leading to compromise in capability. LCA will not start shooting LASERS if the per unit price is increased to 42 million dollars!

And what determines the end-price of a product? Did IAF decide what should be the development cost of LCA - from R&D to Infra to production? Reality Check: It all came from R&D Establishment. And IAF is buying at the price negotiated between the seller and buyer.

India did not aim to develop a F-16 competitor and ended up with LCA because there was lack of funds.

IAF loves to pay third-world price, and they don't want to fund research in Indian universities (like USAF owns up responsibility & funds within the United States, they don't go around the world spending like a crazy, mad man) so they get a third-world quality plane.

Good morning and smell the coffee - IAF does not have money to indulge in all these. And if it is IAF which has to do all these, then I guess we need to wrap up all aviation related activities in DRDO and place it under IAF. But I forgot, DRDO Chief does not even want IAF to have R&D cadre!

Indian R&D scene will take its own time to ramp up in capability - and while that is happening, the threat on India's borders will always be there. And which will not wait for Indian R&D scene to mature before springing a surprise. And while there is no accountability for any delay in any defense R&D or production, there will be hell to pay if the operational readiness of the Services is compromised.

If you still don't understand, then don't blame Indian scientists for that. Plus, foreign vendors are supported by their own airforce, not like our IAF who just sits and complains. USAF guys work in laboratories, they don't waste time even if product under-delivers sometimes because they know "American(home-made) is always the Best".

How sweet! But for the lack of involvement of IAF or Services with Indian R&D set-up, we'd be having a F-35 waltzing down the production facility of HAL. Right? It seems every issue in Indian R&D and Defense PSU can be zeroed down to lack of involvement of Services with the DRDO+Defense PSU. Nothing else ails the PSU or DRDO.

HAL declared dividend of INR 800+ Crore for 2012-13 - How much money did HAL invest in 'developing' Aviation related R&D facilities or initiated projects with universities in India? That's quite a lot of money by producing crappy products priced at 'third-world' prices, no?

Similarly, how much money did BEML or BEL or OFB plough back into the system to develop the knowledge base and projects in the country?

USAF guys do what they do because of the environment that exists there. Don't juxtapose things simply for convenience. IAF had asked for HAL to be placed under it - that would've been the ultimate synergy, no? And IAF could not have blamed HAL for any delay thereafter...but alas, it was not supposed to be so.

This colonial sahib attitude is the reason IAF has become a joke in the world(95% imported planes).

And of these 95% imported planes, how many would've been available from domestic R&D House or production facility?

anirban_aim · Post by **anirban_aim** » 23 Jul 2014 14:07

@Rohitvats,

while agreeing with the thrust of the arguements, I would like to add one small point:

<snip> Indian R&D scene will take its own time to ramp up in capability - and while that is happening, the threat on India's borders will always be there. And which will not wait for Indian R&D scene to mature before springing a surprise... <snip>

While Indian R&D and more importantly Production scene ramps up, it is incumbent on the politicos and the diplomats to ensure that relative peace is maintained. Flog me if you will, but I believe that, Lets scale down our expectations. Let Chinese intrusions be called "varying perceptions of the boundary" , let Cold Start wait.

I am of the opinion that imports need to be severely restricted.

May I also add the following 5 points:

1. No matter how much we may dislike the option but our defence planners, Politicians and Gens. alike need to accept the idea that in the long run our policy need to be that we will fight with whatever we can produce here. That's That. (Please note that I am not saying any of that fight and die stuff, In fact that's just stupid. I am saying if you don't have the wherewithal to go whole hog then keep the expectations and the scope limited) We have to be military hardware exporters and not importers.

2. Now if point 1 seems to be a tall ask for the forces, which it is, then the Politicians and Diplomats have to collectively ensure relative peace, to ensure that push doesn't come to shove till we achieve the capability desired in point 1. Save the moolah. Spend on Infra (may be more on local mil issues like border roads/airfields/railways).

3. The def PSUs and the nascent mil-ind complex leaders need to be held responsible for timely delivery of promised goodies.

4. More pvt and GoI investment in creating a large Mil Ind Complex

5. Fauj needs to tone down GSQRs to achievable levels domestically in a time bound manner. To achieve synergy, create multi agency project management committees which will be responsible for GSQR conception, design of the prototype, validation and then Production. Any failure to meet set parameters of performance, quality issues, timeline over runs are to be treated as collective failures and harsh dis incentives brought in.

Basically creation of a robust military industrial complex and platform development and production locally has to have the first claim on resources over any field operational plans. The Fauj needs to be made a stake holder in all this. Buyer Seller relationships should go off.

One eg to illustrate my point, the type of Front Line Assault Rifles of the fauj will not be replaced till we can make one here which is acceptable to the Fauj in quality and reliability. Will it endanger the lives of the soldier, if yes cut back on operations and patrolling, Can that lead to loss of territory or tactical setbacks, then OFB and DRDO chiefs also need to be held responsible. May be a sword can be left hanging over their heads, lets say if their organisations fail to deliver the goods in time then they and their senior officials will be tried for treason and endangering the security of the country punishable by life imprisonment with no bail or parole.

The assumption is that requirements of the gun will be realistic in the first place. Fauj, DRDO and OFB need to sit down in 15 days come up and agree on the qualitative requirements and the time for delivery and all 3 sign off. Till DRDO and OFB dont sign off, Fauj will have to continue operations with the same gun with no lee way acceptable. Once OFB and DRDO sign off they have to deliver else go to jail or worse.

I know it may sound impractical given the situation we have, but at least we need to start asking uncomfortable paradigm shifting questions and expecting the unreasonable.

member_23694 · Post by **member_23694** » 23 Jul 2014 14:18

^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^^^
@Rohitvats ji
Very well said. Have similar line of thought but honestly always listening about "give DPSU $100 billion and we colonize moon stuff " has been very frustrating. The suggestion has always been that nothing ails R&D and DPSUs in India but only funding

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 23 Jul 2014 21:25

nukavarapu wrote: @Rohit -- With all due respect, then why we are having IOC-1, IOC-2 & FOC for LCA when in its IOC-1 avatar it is far more capable than Mig-21 which it was always meant to replace?

Please answer a very simple question - forget about everything else: Can even ADA certify that LCA is cleared for induction into the service as an airworthy platform? As for the Mirage and gun example you gave - please remember, the gun trials on LCA are part of FOC certification.

As for IOC-1 and IOC-2, that was done more to save the blushes for DRDO than multiple milestones set-up by IAF. IAF would've been more than happy if the a/c had entered service ten-years earlier.

I will not funnel IAF alone, but why it is always that imports are inducted with less than half the effort of testing and trials whereas desi products are pushed very hard and then bought in pathetic numbers?

Please take your criticism where it's due. It's not in case of LCA and whatever is holding back the program between IOC-2 and FOC. As for my post above, it was not meant to prove who's the bigger culprit but simply to convey that it's easy to preach and point fingers w/o going into details or looking at things in context. Because that's the easiest way out. There's enough muck on both sides. But the situation is much better than it was before and both the sides are working much more closely.

And people on this board need to move on and not take the easy way out w/o bothering to do even basic research!

The sword can swing either side ....

Actually, it does not. It's the armed forces who suffer at the end of the day. No skin of the back of any DRDO or DPSU employee if a product is delayed or comes with QC issues.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 23 Jul 2014 21:27

anirban_aim wrote:@Rohitvats,

while agreeing with the thrust of the arguements, I would like to add one small point:

<snip> Indian R&D scene will take its own time to ramp up in capability - and while that is happening, the threat on India's borders will always be there. And which will not wait for Indian R&D scene to mature before springing a surprise... <snip>
While Indian R&D and more importantly Production scene ramps up, it is incumbent on the politicos and the diplomats to ensure that relative peace is maintained. Flog me if you will, but I believe that, Lets scale down our expectations. Let Chinese intrusions be called "varying perceptions of the boundary" , let Cold Start wait.

<SNIP>.

Please give me sometime, I will reply to your post. Because you've actually brought out a much bigger issue and how that effects everything.

Ganesh_S · Post by **Ganesh_S** » 23 Jul 2014 23:04

I will not funnel IAF alone, but why it is always that imports are inducted with less than half the effort of testing and trials whereas desi products are pushed very hard and then bought in pathetic numbers?

one must understand that MMRCA was a painstaking, exhausting and lengthy process for IAF.

Ganesh_S · Post by **Ganesh_S** » 23 Jul 2014 23:22

While Indian R&D and more importantly Production scene ramps up, it is incumbent on the politicos and the diplomats to ensure that relative peace is maintained.

NRao wrote:Supposedly it was. To the extent it could be.

Ganesh_S · Post by **Ganesh_S** » 23 Jul 2014 23:37

One most also understand that whether this painstaking and exhaustively lengthy process is actually required when the total acquisition cost is $20 Billion.

Well did IAF even know the monetary value of the Acquisition. It was supposedly $10 billion.

Ganesh_S · Post by **Ganesh_S** » 24 Jul 2014 00:03

Who knows what this $20 billion comprises?

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 24 Jul 2014 00:06

rohitvats wrote:Can you please quote example(s) especially with respect to the entire LCA Program where it has been held up because GOI/MOD have not been willing to put money into the program? Which particular aspect of the program has been stuck-up/was stuck-up because MOD/GOI won't part with the money and had the same been made available, LCA would've been flying in squadron strength with IAF.

http://tarmak007.blogspot.in/2011/01/wo ... -take.html

We ran the show with no man power, no experience, poor salaries, hurt feelings and snakes to fear: Dr V. Kala, Sc G, PD (LCA-FCS)
We had 4 designers and 4 testers in 1993. No man power, no experience. No tools and 50 per cent of us were ladies. And, the government rule says that if you are woman, you can’t work beyond 6 pm. But with all issues revolving around the LCA project, we decided to give everything. During those days it was a remote building and we were scared to move around after 6, due to snakes. Permission was denied to get our two-wheelers inside, despite all these issues. Once, Dr Kalam came to the lab and he had to encounter a snake. The rest is history. We were given permission to get the vehicles.
We had to a huge challenge to make the design document within 3 months. We used to go home sometimes at 2 am and family life went for a toss. Some of our colleagues left the job due to the tough conditions. We stuck on and from that batch, there are only 3 scientists left, including me. (The others are: Asha Garg, Sc F and Sreekalakumary, Sc E.)

http://tarmak007.blogspot.in/2012/06/cl ... rcame.html

The bad publicity that Tejas got in early days and low salaries ensured that most of the team members (men) had a tough time in finding suitable brides. “Yes. It's true and many of our team mates faced this problem. Our job profile was such that no father dared to give her daughter. Some of my colleagues even had to undergo counselling. All that is past and we are all happily married now. But can't believe how 20 years flew past,” said a senior NAL scientist.

This is but a fraction of the actual issues with funding programs like Tejas face, as versus the BS in MOD etc reports where a MOD representative turns out and says funds are always available, all iz well. And the committee members wolf down their samosa and chai.

One way to determine this is to do a value chain analysis, actually look up the costs involved at every stage - in terms of setting up infrastructure & then "greasing" the system with surplus to make it move along.

The LCA is a case in full reverse. Forget getting an IL-76 TestBed for the Kaveri (which BTW the Chinese purchased, we go to Russia with our entourage at their convenience), our facilities for the program have been funded in bits and pieces and are still far away from what other nations deploy as standard. We are using an ancient Avro Hack to "test" the MMR, never mind its meant to go on a fighter which flies/maneuvers at far greater speeds. Other countries have biz jets! HAL itself bound by Govt overregulation so poorly funded the MMR program, it was doomed to fail anyhow.

Every component, every system, every item in a properly funded setup, has its own organization or setup with a line of funding. In India, we managed it in bits and pieces.

Another revealing snippet. Even "well funded programs" (by Indian standards

) like the LCA struggled with resources to the extent that at time of sanction, there were only a handful of Moog actuators from the US. These were *rotated* between the flying LCAs and the Iron Bird to keep the program going. No GOI funding available BTW to realize alternate actuator programs with France or Russia or anyone else.

LCA is a full SDRE fighter, funded SDRE wise, while the Air Marshals scoffed at the "Waste of funding" that is the LCA. Its a common perception driven by the fact that the service simply don't have a build your own culture & nor are they used to working with Industry (the practise of the IAF to depute people to HAL was stopped by former citing manpower constraints & Matheeshwaran was expected to directly take the top spot in a "return to the practise").

The IAF deputed LCA Program Manager was denied his promotion & finally got it when civvies fought for his case. The IAF was advised by folks at AHQ not to even attend the LCA's first flight. Relevance being these are the same guys who would shoot down any proposal to fund the LCA when MOD/MOF sought their input!

Ultimately, many of these folks simply don't get the level of investment required in technology & let their objectivity go for a toss even as they are willing to import stuff at a heavy markup which subsidizes foreign complexes.

What adds to this is the GOI's piecemeal funding approach. Sometimes unavoidable -after 1991 forex crisis, several reports noted that work on the LCA literally slowed to a crawl - all projected consultancy, COTS stuff, test gear all on hold. Then there is bureaucratic BS.
CAG was angry at VKS because he used his powers and broke up programs into multiple ones so that they could get funded as required without launching one big program that required babu signatures in triplicate. Not the intent they said. Idiots.

Basically every year the DM used to come and tell us "everything is well". Ships sank. Army without guns. And LCA was also "funded" likewise. Only in recent years (post 2007) does it even appear that some decent funding is available for basics. No coincidence that's when the IAF also deputed a Project Team to ADA.

Actually, it does not. It's the armed forces who suffer at the end of the day. No skin of the back of any DRDO or DPSU employee if a product is delayed or comes with QC issues.

http://tarmak007.blogspot.in/2011/02/ir ... -told.html

. In spite of these alluring offerings to the core people associated with the Tejas program the program had continued without much deceleration and the ‘Tejas Loyals’ came out with flying colours. Most of these crazy people have even never seen their salary slips from past many years. Ask them their basic pay even today and they will start looking at the skies, not for a clue but to tell the world, Tejas is our actual pay that we have earned. The soldiers at the borders have the obsession of dying for the country, we, at Iron Bird live with that and are always ready to die with that furore.

Just a revealing snippet about the "no skin off their nose stuff"..sadly this sort of commentary is all too common from many on the service side who think they have a lock down on patriotism or that "the other side" doesn't give a darn. But its completely mistaken. There are many folks who persevere with these programs despite the taunting commentary they get even from the service folks themselves because they don't give up.

http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/drdo ... 93340.html

This guy gave his fathers funeral a miss because there was an Agni test. Far too many such examples.

Yes, there are OFBs and messed up structural issues - they need reform. But then again, those are systems set up to fail and run by the MOD & decisions influenced by a politico-agent nexus which has far too long been seduced by imports. OTOH, nothing stops the military from focusing on their own product development mechanisms - but apart from Navy, other services are giving lip service & have very limited indigenization/BRD structure with a token SDI or two, which is nowhere near what is required to understand the R&D process, let alone own it or manage it or direct it.

That is the big issue, because even where the services can make a huge difference, they are not punching at their weight. Folks who run programs like Pinaka, Arjun etc either are let go (with their decades of development experience) or have to be absorbed into the R&D side & still face criticism if they support the product (famous case in Arjun - Army rep says Army men who support the Arjun "have forgotten the olive green"). This sort of us versus them attitude is disastrous because program successes are not institutionalized. People are deputed on "tactical" basis, and many will simply demur from such postings if they see it will impact their own life

Word is that even F-INSAS's much anticipated software component is a disaster because different IA units are bickering about who owns the programs and what should be there. In the meantime, BEL will pick its teeth and whistle since there is no direction & hence no accountability. Its more of a symptom of not having an ownership culture and a "buy" culture.

OTOH, the French and Israelis who sell to us happily embed their service folks into product leadership and testing groups. Even with private sector, these challenges will remain.

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 24 Jul 2014 09:52

Karan M wrote:
rohitvats wrote:Can you please quote example(s) especially with respect to the entire LCA Program where it has been held up because GOI/MOD have not been willing to put money into the program? Which particular aspect of the program has been stuck-up/was stuck-up because MOD/GOI won't part with the money and had the same been made available, LCA would've been flying in squadron strength with IAF.
http://tarmak007.blogspot.in/2011/01/wo ... -take.html
.
.
.
.
.
.
OTOH, the French and Israelis who sell to us happily embed their service folks into product leadership and testing groups. Even with private sector, these challenges will remain.

+100. Epic post Karan.

Please correct me if I am wrong folks, IIRC, wasn't it that ADA was allotted only 2000+ crore funds in 1993 when it had asked for 4000+ crore?? And those 2000 crore also included the initial 560 odd crore given before. Funding has been an issue to DRDO, this is not even an arguable issue. And its not just about funding DRDO, the total investment by the whole country in S&T matters here. That makes the foundation for technological development. And we have lacked there. No doubt, DRDO is plagued by inertia and inefficiency, but then which government entity hasn't?? Its a systematic problem and castigating only DRDO for that wouldn't be fair. In a lot of projects they had done commendable job, even against lots of odds. LCA is pinnacle of this saga. But still all they get from the country is disdained looks, let alone recognition. If DRDO was given autonomy like ISRO, probably the story would have been different. DRDO, as any other organisation (even private entities) has good people and bad people. We need to encourage the good people and reward them for their service for the country and reprimand the bad ones so they will either fall in line or will *%$# off. There is no dearth of sincere engineers and scientist in India who, given conducive environment, would love to serve the country in S&T field.

I have had interacted with some DRDO guys a few times, and unfortunately only with those bad people. So I used to think DRDO guys are stupid and useless. The mainstream media do not leave any stone unturned to corroborate this feeling in masses. But then I had started looking more closely towards this whole defence saga in India. And my personal experiences in private industry made me see that bad and stupid people are ubiquitous and mismanagement and inefficiencies is a part of life. DRDO is no exception, the problem lies somewhere else. I do not think that, given level playing field, any PSU/GoI entity can not outperform any private entity.

There are problems in all the three parts of our defence establishment, the forces, DRDO/DPSUs and MoD, no one can deny that. Right now we are seeing an opportunity to improve the situation as a proactive and powerful government seems to be there at the helm and a PM who is taking personal interest in national security matters. We should except the problems, identify the solutions and try to solve them synergistically. This finger pointing game has been played on BRF on behalf of DRDO/DPSUs and the Forces thousands of times to no avail (and frankly I am sick of it). DRDO has become a s&^t-hole, Forces are corrupted and have egotism, and MoD has become a drunkard and doped father who not only fails to provide for his children but keeps abusing them. Maybe lets start with that.

BTW any updates on FOC on LCA??

member_22539 · Post by **member_22539** » 24 Jul 2014 11:12

Bravo Karan M, your post was fantastic beyond words. I now wonder what the import-apologists (who think they are more patriotic than the king) have to say now. This will be interesting

jamwal · Post by **jamwal** » 24 Jul 2014 11:14

rohitvats wrote: Actually, it does not. It's the armed forces who suffer at the end of the day. No skin of the back of any DRDO or DPSU employee if a product is delayed or comes with QC issues.

It's the poor grunt on ground who has to suffer, not the army babooze who ask for unobtainium with indigenous and natashas with imported stuff.

fanne · Post by **fanne** » 24 Jul 2014 14:36

KaranM good post!!

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 24 Jul 2014 15:02

I'm no advocate for total imports,and feel that the GOI must exert the maximum pressure upon the entire LCA team and stakeholders to work together "as patriotic Indians" to achieve set goals, but I was going through a v. recent issue of Vayu about LCA production and there are some details which must bring us down to earth.One fact which must be debated is that the production costs of the LCA estimated are more than that of the Gripen.Will post later.It finally concludes that due to the current situ and production facilities the most optimistic analysis shows that we will be able to produce only about 120+ LCAs acceptable in capability (MK-2) to the IAF.

I think I've posted enough info earlier about the history of the LCA from an AM, DCoAS who showed that the entire programme received step-motherly treatment ,"a fraud upon the nation" was how he described it,and that all sides are to blame.If the GOI was indifferent to it and funds were inadequate,our desi boffins made most ambitious claims and couldn't walk the talk.In fact as I've often said,even APJAK was fooled into believing of its progress by the DRDO,GTRE,etc.,and made his statement in 2003 that "by 2010,200 LCAs will have been built".2014 has arrived and the first batch of 20 MK1s have yet to be handed over to the IAF. I sincerely hope that with the new dispensation in Delhi,with Mr.Modi's statements about self-reliance in defence weapon systems et al,and Mr.Jaitley's acumen in cutting through the gordian knots of the MOD,the LCA programme will be given the required monitoring and support in every possible way.

member_22539 · Post by **member_22539** » 24 Jul 2014 15:14

^Thanks for your gratuitous advice. Your enduring support for all things indigenous (cough cough Russian) is well-known. Your optimism is shining light for all us patriots.

member_28677 · Post by **member_28677** » 24 Jul 2014 15:50

Karan M wrote:Just a revealing snippet about the "no skin off their nose stuff"..sadly this sort of commentary is all too common from many on the service side who think they have a lock down on patriotism or that "the other side" doesn't give a darn. But its completely mistaken.

++++++++1. I wanted to say this but was wordless, you said it!!

Not everyone1 in IAF top brass is a holy cow. They have misused our trust enough, by misleading us. This blind "our IAF soldiers die, we must not question them" has blinded our logical, clinical thought processes. We are not questioning "soldiers", we are questioning Character of IAF top brass, both are different things. This old argument is now supported by, General VKS who exposed that corruption is deep in MoD & previous Generals all kept silent rather than speaking up. (And so many articles are now being planted by agents of MoD babus in media suddenly to slowly coverup his expose on OFB & Boforse blueprints.) Also, i am disappointed with new administration who has ignored VKS for Defence Minister post and gave the post to a person who never got attacked by media or NDTV in whole life. He is turning desi-MIC into French-Desi-MIC.

In Aap Ki Adalat, he said - "isn't this better that French company make planes in India, rather than in France?" What a classical stupidity. Even that fake-studio audience didn't clap for him.

For those who don't understand why this is stupid, kindly ask yourself -
Why Russia/China doesn't allow FDI in Defence?
Will French love if HAL sets up a factory in France and supplies aircrafts to French airforce?

Rafale's FDI deal brings zero laboratory technology, only a few processes which are not worth $20 Billion.
If we invested merely 10 Billion$(half of 20) extra in DRDO+GTRE & get them world-class salary+infrastructure+testing equipments, we will make better stuff ourselves in within 10 years and no extra costs like in case of Rafale which you have to pay for next 40 years, taking total to $60Billion dollars.

Rafale is a Desi-MIC killer.

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 24 Jul 2014 15:58

Arun Menon wrote:^Thanks for your gratuitous advice. Your enduring support for all things indigenous (cough cough Russian) is well-known. Your optimism is shining light for all us patriots.

member_28677 · Post by **member_28677** » 24 Jul 2014 16:04

Philip wrote:In fact as I've often said,even APJAK was fooled into believing of its progress by the DRDO,GTRE,etc.,and made his statement in 2003 that "by 2010,200 LCAs will have been built".2014 has arrived and the first batch of 20 MK1s have yet to be handed over to the IAF. I sincerely hope that with the new dispensation in Delhi,with Mr.Modi's statements about self-reliance in defence weapon systems et al,and Mr.Jaitley's acumen in cutting through the gordian knots of the MOD,the LCA programme will be given the required monitoring and support in every possible way.

I trust DRDO more than what some high-level officer APJ(overhyped by media into some kind of Godfather) says, and if he said that while remaining on senior post then it should be investigated why he said that.

Was his statement backed by Government new funding proposal for LCA production line?
If not, was he misleading media and people into untrue hype around LCA?
Was he authorized to issue such statement, on behalf of LCA team?
Did he seek consent of the team before speaking?
Only a proper investigation can reveal this.
Its easy to take pot-shots on hard-working Indian scientists because its a fashion(thanks to so much motivational speakers in IAF/IA top. No wonder there are so many suicides is Services, it tells a lot about leadership.)

From the snake story, it is clear that even APJ himself was un-aware of conditions+hilarious working conditions given to our own DRDO till he actually visited the laboratory and then he was forced to fix it. (i hope he apologized to the team for this) There should be an investigation whether this was a lapse or intentional. To me, this sounds like senior babus want to blame GTRE and lower-level scientists to hide their own muck(or nexus). Nexuses are not hollywood anymore, they DO exist.

People come for photo-ops when its a Success, everyone loves the baby and want to be part of frame. But all run away the moment project hits hard time and team requires national motivation. Well, this is where American system rule. They never disappoint their own scientist even when they hit hard-times, delays. They stick behind and support them till the end.

Shameful thing about Indian echo-system(a reason why my class-toppers prefer foreign nations to work in) is, IAF/IA will probably show more trust, motivation, love, respect towards our Cricket icons(fake heroes) than those Scientists who work in DRDO. "Deliver me, or i will ridicule you" is a shallow-attitude. IAF/IA top-brass should be sent for some counselling on "good character building". That queen cross & etiquette spoils.

"Oh, we served under queen in second world war, we are proud of it". Excuse me, I as new post-independence born Indian, don't accept glorification of bonded-slavery. IAF/IA students should be taught the truth, not fairy tales, it will make them better human & they will learn to respect hardwork of other indians, rather than issuing sermons from a distance with high nose.

Sagar G · Post by **Sagar G** » 24 Jul 2014 18:09

MahaKaal wrote:I trust DRDO more than what some high-level officer APJ(overhyped by media into some kind of Godfather) says

Pray tell us why do his highness thinks that APJ is overhyped when on the ground level he is respected across the scientific class. How much do you know about Dr. Kalam to claim that he is "overhyped" and that too by none other than our own pressitutes !!!!!

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 24 Jul 2014 18:33

MahaKaal wrote: I trust DRDO more than what some high-level officer APJ(overhyped by media into some kind of Godfather) says, and if he said that while remaining on senior post then it should be investigated why he said that.

Was his statement backed by Government new funding proposal for LCA production line?

Sir jee, a thousand dandvat pranaams to you. It is hard, nay impossible to argue with such brilliance.

vic · Post by **vic** » 24 Jul 2014 21:45

The continuing delay in LCA especially after LSP-3 has been hard to swallow.