As Ramana had suggested, I am starting a new thread where all News reports can be collated and analysed by the wise people.<P>Giant leap for Indian aviation <A HREF="http://www.economictimes.com/today/in11.htm" TARGET=_blank>http://www.economictimes.com/today/in11.htm</A> <A HREF="http://www.economictimes.com/today/05econ04.htm" TARGET=_blank>http://www.economictimes.com/today/05econ04.htm</A> <p>[This message has been edited by ChandrGupt (edited 04-01-2001).]
ACM A.Y.Tipnis obsserved the flight from a M2000, to see how the plane handled in the air...i would like to hear what his commnets are, as he has said many times that IAF is already looking at alterantives to the LCA. lets see if he changes his stance and says something to the effect that IAF is really looking forward to inducting the plane into active service. Such a remark would mean that the LCA would be inducted by around 2006 and not go on till 2015.<BR>
Punnam, i think they mean that it might take 32 years from the time of conception to the time the fighter enters service.<P>------------------<BR>Nandai<P>Since time began,<BR>the dead alone know peace.<BR>Life is like melting snow.
No Nandai<BR> According to the EconomicTimes. <P>The LCA was conceived in 1968 but was given the go-ahead only in 1983. <P> They are calculating 32 years from the year of conception, which was 1968, to the year of first test flight i.e 2000(begining 2001).<P>
No they didnt take 32 years. EconTimes picked up this drivel from BBC. Rahul Bedi, & I do not know what his problem is, put out the blatantly incorrect statement in one of his BBC reports today to accompany and diss the first flight of the LCA. The guy is making a fool of himself with his obsession to put down certain Indian projects...<BR> <A HREF="http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/south_asia/newsid_1100000/1100639.stm" TARGET=_blank>http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/south_asia/newsid_1100000/1100639.stm</A> <P>In fact the LCA project was kicked off on 1983 and it was not until 1989 that they decided what configuration to build - a process which involved IAF doctrine issues no doubt. At that time India was in deep economic doo-doo, so real money was not sanctioned until 1993 - and we know that it takes real money to do things like this. Then in 1998 the US sanctions his. So of the 17 years of the project, chalk up a few at the outset to uncertanity in which way to go, remove 4 years of no funding, and finally a year or so at the very end to bypass the effect of US sanctions. And we come up with approximately 10 years of work on the LCA. Which is respectable.<P>In 1968 we just had had the Marut, so there was really no LCA as we know it on the horizon and any allusion to the generic acronym was to the Ajeet which was done then.. There was no FBW in 1968 for crying out loud!!<P><BR>
<A HREF="http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/p/nm/20010104/wl/imdf80946.html" TARGET=_blank>http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/p/nm/20010104/wl/imdf80946.html</A> <P>Capital Outlay on LCA<br> <A HREF="http://www.drdo.org/ada/ADA98-99/capital_outlay.pdf" TARGET=_blank>http://www.drdo.org/ada/ADA98-99/capital_outlay.pdf</A> <p>[This message has been edited by vverma (edited 04-01-2001).]
Mody,<P>"The Chief of Air Staff, Air Chief Marshal A Y Tipnis,<BR> however, struck a note of caution. "The pendulum of Indian<BR> emotions should not swing towards euphoria because<BR> many more aeronautical miles have to be flown. But the<BR> LCA has set the stage for more achievements for Indian<BR> aviation," he said. <P> Tipnis had flown alongside the LCA in a Mirage 200<BR> fighter-bomber of the Indian Air Force to observe how the<BR> jet behaved in the air. "<P>"integrated avionics with glass cockpit"<P>What is the above supposed to mean? Is there a realationship between integrated avionics and glass cocpits or is this another jouranislistic boo boo?<p>[This message has been edited by Niranjan Rao (edited 04-01-2001).]
LCA does `a beautiful take off and touch down' <BR> <A HREF="http://www.hindubusinessline.com/stories/14050406.htm" TARGET=_blank>http://www.hindubusinessline.com/stories/14050406.htm</A> <P>Nice picture. Can we get it? <BR>
Hi,<P>Almost certainly telemetry pods or additional air data sensors - a new aircraft on first flight will not carry anything remotely explosive (except for POL).<P>Notice the probe on the nose in ChandraGupts link, that is the primary air data sensor. It will definately be absent in the production variants of the LCA.<P>BTW, did anyone notice that the ticker on the ADA website refers to the LCA as the "KH-2001" (quote: ...Aircraft of India - LCA (KH-2001) has penetrated the skies at... ). Is this ADA's designation for the LCA or just TD-1? What the hell does "K" stand for? "H", presumably is "Hindustan". Shouldn't it be HF-2001 (ala HF for Marut)?<P><p>[This message has been edited by Badar (edited 04-01-2001).]
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Badar:<BR>BTW, did anyone notice that the ticker on the ADA website refers to the LCA as the "KH-2001" (quote: ...Aircraft of India - LCA (KH-2001) has penetrated the skies at... ). Is this ADA's designation for the LCA or just TD-1? What the hell does "K" stand for? "H", presumably is "Hindustan". Shouldn't it be HF-2001 (ala HF for Marut)?<BR><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>KH-2001? Probably KH as in <B>K</B>ota <B>H</B>arinarayana. I guess this from the ticker <I>...indomitable spirit of Dr. Kota Harinarayana has paved the way for ...</I><P>BY the way, now that LCA has test flown, the ADA site is empty, completely content-less, and yet it takes a long time to load. Ver strange!<p>[This message has been edited by bobj (edited 04-01-2001).]
The Rediff article on LCA's maiden flight reported that all the Indian states except J&K contributed to the project. It kinda warmed the cockles of my heart. I am interested to know how and what each of the states contributed, esp. the often neglected seven sisters. Does anybody have more info on this one ?<BR> <A HREF="http://www.rediff.com/news/2001/jan/04lca1.htm" TARGET=_blank>http://www.rediff.com/news/2001/jan/04lca1.htm</A> <BR><p>[This message has been edited by Vikram (edited 04-01-2001).]
WOW,<BR>so she finally flew!!! <BR>Looking at Shailesh' schedule, I say the Final Operation Clearance should be in 2007, which is "only" 2 years behind schedule.<BR>HAHA the joke is on the USA. Dispite sanctions India managed to get this plane airborne, and I know that we are far from operational level, but this is a very big step forward.<BR>Just my thoughts.
Following showup when you search on 'quadruplex fly by wire'<P>LCA (ofcourse, link posted above) <BR>EF2000 <A HREF="http://home.achilles.net/~rjl/aircraft_html/ef2000.html" TARGET=_blank>http://home.achilles.net/~rjl/aircraft_html/ef2000.html</A> <P>Su-35 <A HREF="http://www.bangalorenet.com/system1/shantanu/sukhoi.htm" TARGET=_blank>http://www.bangalorenet.com/system1/shantanu/sukhoi.htm</A> <P>RFX Stealth Strike/Recon Fighter Proposal <A HREF="http://www.csse.monash.edu.au/~carlo/archive/MILITARY/2025/2025-rfxc.html" TARGET=_blank>http://www.csse.monash.edu.au/~carlo/archive/MILITARY/2025/2025-rfxc.html</A> <P>Mig-29M <A HREF="http://www.robotgroup.org/lubbock/mig29.htm" TARGET=_blank>http://www.robotgroup.org/lubbock/mig29.htm</A> <P>F-16 <A HREF="http://www.csd.uwo.ca/~pettypi/elevon/baugher_us/f016.html" TARGET=_blank>http://www.csd.uwo.ca/~pettypi/elevon/baugher_us/f016.html</A> <P>
Quadraplex fbw is ,iirc,nothing more than quadraplex redundancy....one set of channels/controllers fail,the other(2nd) takes over.if that fails then the 3rd takes over and so on...<P>Note that the above is more sophisticated then our rivals' fc1...it has a single<I> analogue </I> fbw system with a hydraulic system(conventional) for backup.<P>The lca has <I>quadraplex,digital fbw</I>.<P><BR>"The result: Although the first LCA prototype is powered by the GE engine,<BR>India is having to speed up designing and testing its indigenous engine,<BR>the GTX-35VS Kaveri, if it is to seriously consider serial manufacturing of<BR>the fighter aircraft. Kaveri has so far failed to meet the LCA's parameters."<P><BR>Last time i heard,the kabini's testing aboard the flying lab in russia was done...where have they reached know?<P>Why do the media always have to say "failed" to meet specifications...for Gods sake,its in development!Do they expect miracles?<BR>Designing a a/c turbine is no joke...that too from scratch.<BR>The kaveri/kabini have wide ranging potential uses ,including naval power and by declaring them as "failed"....lets buy the rafale engine,shall we?<P>Our cynicism may destroy whatever <B>has</B> been achieved.<P>regards,<BR>nitin<P>PS:What about including the yahoo and other photos into the lca section?<p>[This message has been edited by nitin (edited 04-01-2001).]
Kaveri has failed to meets specifications.<BR>Well it just means that scientists and the IAF are not satisfied with the engines performance. Doesn't means it is failed. I wonder what the problems are. The engine works, if it wouldn't there wouldn't have been any tests. So either the engine isn't powerfull enough yet, or some components are giving trouble (the LCA is supose to be easy to maintain).<BR>Just speculating.
Good stuff. But not much new info. Only confirmation of previous data. Someone has to puttogether the schedule form various statements- Prototype and tech demo. <BR>There is big deal being made about the sanctions and GE engine. The LCA was never meant to fly the production version with GE engine. Only 11 engines( from the reports only 8 were obtained) were to be purchased for the development program. Kaveri was always the prod engine. The reason is no one develops a new a/c with unproven engine. The sanctions hit mainly with the FCS validation.<BR>Also LM sold that division to BAE but still based in US. So sanctions will be in effect unless revoked by new admin.<BR>Also most of the pictures except the BBC one are artist renderings.<BR>Wait for a couple of more days for real detials to emerge. I am interested in empty and take off weights.
From the Rediff link:<BR>The LCA has a wingspan of 8.2 metres and an overall length of 13.2 metres. It stands 4.4m high and its weight at take-off was 8.5 tonnes. The aircraft can carry up to 4 tonnes of armaments <P> So I would assume the empty weight is around 8 tonnes (sort of remember also from another report) and can fly with 4 more tonnes of goodies.
No, the nominal take off weight is 8500 kgs with internal fuel and a set of armaments. Max TOW is higher and empty weight is lower (~5500 kgs). So even with a nominal weapons load and an engine with modest thrust, the LCA has a very good thrust/weight ratio.<P>That's why there's so many composites.
<A HREF="http://www.timesofindia.com/today/05lcap4.htm" TARGET=_blank>http://www.timesofindia.com/today/05lcap4.htm</A> <P>VK Athre, Scientific Advisor to the Defence Minister, and KD Nair appear to disagree about the schedule for induction of the LCA into squadron service <P>Athre claims an operational date 9 years hence, and Nair hinges his bets on 6 years. There does appear to be some confusion among even the top echelons about the exact timetable for complete systems integration and induction.<P><BR>Of course, nothing but kudos to all those at HAL/ADA and elsewhere that contributed to the moment that WC Kathyal took the bird aloft. <P>Manohar.<P>
Correction, KD Nair claims the LCA will be operational in 3-4 years. Which one is closer to the truth??<P><BR>Also, Athre makes the astounding claim that Airbus Industrie is using HAL software for the Airbus A3XX project!<P>Anyone, is this really true? Or is he just the classic Indian bureaucrat in an unfamiliar technical setting??<P>Manohar.<P><BR>
<B>LCA to be top in avionics, strike capability </B><P><I> With the state-of-the-art technologies in every aspect of design and development, this single-seat, single-engine tactical fighter from India is among the best in its class. </I><BR> <A HREF="http://www.timesofindia.com/today/05lcap5.htm" TARGET=_blank>http://www.timesofindia.com/today/05lcap5.htm</A>
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Manohar:<BR>VK Athre, Scientific Advisor to the Defence Minister, and KD Nair appear to disagree about the schedule for induction of the LCA into squadron service <P>Athre claims an operational date 9 years hence, and Nair hinges his bets on 6 years. There does appear to be some confusion among even the top echelons about the exact timetable for complete systems integration and induction.<BR><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>This is a research project, for cryin' out loud! Of course there will be disagreement over such issues. The people who are doing the actual work want to add some "cushion" time; that is natural.<P>This disagreement is not indicative of "confusion"; it is indicative of our inexperience in these issues. Inexperience can be wiped out over time.<BR>
Rajeev Kothiyal....<BR>in some reports he's a mirage pilot..in others he's a mig29 pilot. <A HREF="http://www.timesofindia.com/today/05lcap3.htm" TARGET=_blank>http://www.timesofindia.com/today/05lcap3.htm</A>
It seems to be KH-2001. It might be corny but i am just stating what it looks like.<BR> You are actually seeing the whole second zero rather than portion of it, as you assume.<BR> Its the way the nose is turned upwards and the angle of the surface at that portion of the plane which makes the second zero appear smaller.
No need for any confusion , it is KH2001. Check the photo and also the report <P> <P><I><BR>The white-coloured LCA <B>KH-2001 </B>with a green nose, piloted by Wing Commander Rajiv Kothiyal of the National Test Flight Centre .......</I><BR> <A HREF="http://www.deccan.com/itop2.htm" TARGET=_blank>http://www.deccan.com/itop2.htm</A>
Now is the time to create a aerospace company taking elements of of the various disparate organizations (DRDO,ADA, NAL, etc etc) that contributed to the LCA development. The next step would be to privatize that company. Such a company would be the anchor for an indigenous defense industry, able to compete effectively against foreign companies that use all sorts of under-handed methods to get lucrative deals from corrupt babus and netas.
Folks, <P> A couple of old but interesting articles behind the *lot* of work that has gone on behind the LCA. It is much more than just a plane.<P>CAIR developed a robot for NDT inspection of LCA's wings: <A HREF="http://www.hindubusinessline.com/1999/11/17/stories/041767bg.htm" TARGET=_blank>http://www.hindubusinessline.com/1999/11/17/stories/041767bg.htm</A> <P>An even older article on the private sector subcontractors for the LCA: <A HREF="http://www.hindubusinessline.com/1996/03/13/BLFP16.html" TARGET=_blank>http://www.hindubusinessline.com/1996/03/13/BLFP16.html</A> <P>I had come across these articles sometime ago, and it seems really appropriate to post them here now...<P>
Privatization & business is about :<BR>- Risk (& reward if any)<BR>- Investment <BR>- Retrun On Investment, and<BR>- Cash Flow<P>Pray, tell me how to find a private party willing to swollow that ? <P>All in face of foriegn defence companies defending their existing turf with bribe, deep pockets and Cheap Babu Integrity <P>Would you takeup the offer ?<P>Making a new Aircraft company is too big for any current private company (even if you make one out of existing facilities). A phased growth with Indian Private companies making viable business out of defence sub-systems & components, followed by progressive mergers to bigger systems and weapons company is the way to grow a local private company.<P>Till then Indian Govt need to invest & run this industry, since its the only financial enterprize big enough to do it.<BR>
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests