LCA news and discussion

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 12 Dec 2009 21:52

kartik, I suppose you have read this ?

Broadsword said...

REGARDING DELAY ON THE LCA MK 2:

Perhaps you all should read the article more carefully. The EJ200/F-414 procurement option is being retained for now, even as the Kaveri-Snecma development programme proceeds on a parallel track.

sumshyam · Post by **sumshyam** » 12 Dec 2009 21:56

Vivek K wrote:
Think like the Chinese. Take 10 engines (bought for MK2) apart and copy/reverse engineer their design. Develop an engine from what is learnt from the Kaveri and the reverse engineering.

WELL...MY FRIEND....it is well documented that....NAKAL KE LIYEH BHI AKAL KI JARURAT HOTI HAI...!

So all I am saying is....the reverse engineering at that level will not be that easy....with reverse engineering definitely you can understand how things work...in a much better way...but to make them from scraps .... you still must be a master piece...!!

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 12 Dec 2009 22:47

Sum, If we don't have the akal for nakal then read my post and you will find a prescription for that circumstance. With GTRE being in operation since 1959, they must have learned something in all the 50 years. Jet propulsion started at the end of WWII or only 15 years before GTRE was started.

In the US there are facilities in some universities to reverse engineer components for aeospace. I am sure that Indian students work as research assistants in these labs. So there is akal. Is there a will?

sumshyam · Post by **sumshyam** » 12 Dec 2009 23:28

Vivek K wrote:With GTRE being in operation since 1959, they must have learned something in all the 50 years. Jet propulsion started at the end of WWII or only 15 years before GTRE was started.

In the US there are facilities in some universities to reverse engineer components for aeospace. I am sure that Indian students work as research assistants in these labs. So there is akal. Is there a will?

It exactly doesn't matter.....how long has GTRE been in operation....? Only thing that matter is what they have achieved..and that is null and void....when it comes to applications of their learning's...!

Just don't compare with US...they have attitude to do things on their own...and we have attitude to get it xeroxed...!

Above all...US gets best of Indian Talent as they pay....much much higher than any of the PSUs.....so while comparing US with Indian PSUs...you just compare best of the talent equipped with a good infrastructure and adequate financial support to something or some one....who neither have infrastructure nor do funding and most of all people here don't have jeal to innovate something on their own...!

Anyhow......perhaps...I have written something....in impulse...sry..if it hurts...!

Please call me Shyam rather than sum.

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 12 Dec 2009 23:47

How long are we going to hide behind poor infrastructure and lack of adequate funding as an excuse? In today's India, it would be shameful to talk about a lack of either of the above.

Also, Shyam bhai if there is a will talent abroad can be brought home. If Pakis could do so in the 70s, are we unable to do that in 2009?

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 13 Dec 2009 00:28

Rahul M wrote:kartik, I suppose you have read this ?

Broadsword said...

REGARDING DELAY ON THE LCA MK 2:

Perhaps you all should read the article more carefully. The EJ200/F-414 procurement option is being retained for now, even as the Kaveri-Snecma development programme proceeds on a parallel track.

No I missed out on that..thats good news. I thought that some of the GTRE folks had managed to convince the MoD that the Tejas Mk2 could be powered by the new Snecma-GTRE Kaveri version, which would've basically put an end to the Tejas at 40 units or thereabouts.

The article by Ajai Shukla stating that Eurojet and GE would both not offer high end technologies as part of ToT got me wondering about how it actually works..These companies invest billions of dollars in R&D and want to protect it, which is natural IMO. Unless they stand to gain something more than sales of engines, they will be very reluctant to share such technologies (even though the military engine market is relatively small). And even if they do, they won't share the key knowledge- the design intent and how they came around to getting there, because thats almost never done. simply knowing how to manufacture some component will tell you diddly squat about why it was designed like that. Manufacturing guys won't understand why something is designed the way it is and will fret over it till the engineer explains why it is the way it is (if the engineer knows that is). and even if the engineer knows, he cannot transfer all the knowledge and experience he has gained in an electronic format now, can he ?

The design and analysis knowledge will only come from hands-on work on the technology. This is where it would be good to have GTRE and other DRDO departments doing a proper JV with Snecma with mixed teams working on all key technologies and there are lots of technologies that are very complex on a turbofan which need to be mastered. This is what they did with Shakti, even though I've read some people here on BRF who claim that DRDO did nothing on that project and simply called it co-development. they actually deputed people to work with Turbomeca and ETBRDC was given the task of design and supply of oil pumps, oil cooling system, filter unit and external dressing. Engineers of ETBRDC also took part in casing modelling, rotor dynamics and stress analysis in France (as per 17th Report of the Standing Committee on Defence). But since the Kaveri is indigenous, they won't be relegated to a few tasks instead of working on the entire engine and all its technologies- the design knowledge will be within GTRE and other Indian institutes, so the key will be extracting all necessary knowledge and information from Snecma, but also giving them a share of the pie so that they don't end up feeling screwed.

Earlier there were reports of Snecma not being ready to offer key technologies to GTRE for a JV over Kaveri..some IAF committee even recommended that such a JV not be taken up because there was little know-how that would be gained. maybe the latest offer takes care of that because Pallam Raju is correct that all the effort spent in gaining knowledge will be frittered away if no new engine is developed within India. it should not be linked to the Tejas Mk2 because it would lead to un-realistic targets and some guy will say we'll do it within 3 years just to get the project and then take 7-10 years which will basically end up ruining their reputation and creating a bad taste everywhere.

The only way to go around it for the future is to step up in a big way the funding for R&D at post-graduate levels to get the young engineers and scientists into this field. give them projects that DRDO work on and fund them so they aren't constrained for money. Encourage them to get doctorates and those that dont want to, help them find jobs that pay well otherwise they will be poached by outsiders. There is simply no other way of getting knowledge in this field and India will forever be one or two steps behind leading engine makers.

Regarding offsets from the engine deal, I was reading about the Polish F-16 acquisition and found an article that was very interesting and detailed- gave very good details on how offsets are offered and how the customer can choose the ones that they want which fulfill their desire for high technology offsets as compared to low technology but high volume offsets.

hariks · Post by **hariks** » 13 Dec 2009 01:15

Regarding SC blades, if the folks at MDNL have done enough research on ow to develop SC tech and they are missing some key pieces/compositions, they should be able to figure out the key tech even from some steps in manufacturing process/composition which is given as part of ToT. Jut like in research folks in the same area can immediately relate to a new key idea just from a short description. But if they are way behind in research, then they will need the full course which most likely will not happen. I think the same applies for Kaveri. GTRE folks have spend a number of years developing a working engine and they should be able to reverse engineer a more modern engine like EJ200 and understand the key differences. They should be much better positioned than the manufacturing houses. They may still need the motive behind design decisions as part of ToT, but if they are not able to make progress (even after we get SC tech) then something is fundamentally wrong. I don't understand what we are supposed to get from Snecma - SC tech or a course in compressor design? Joint R&D is a different issue and will make sense only if both partners have some expertise to offer which the other one doesn't have. Otherwise it could be just "doing R&D using other party's money and may be resources for some low level work".

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 13 Dec 2009 01:19

karan_mc wrote:Just got my copy of vayu Aerospace , according to it four Tejas aircraft's will be visiting Goa to carry out Sea trials and for remaining points ,that includes PV-1/2/3 and LSP-2, so four aircraft's were in goa for currently done sea trials . PV-3 and LSP-2 carried out weapon trials at jamnagar with various stores configurations as well as air to ground trials on various modes of weapons delivery

Karan, would it be possible to scan the article if it has more details ? or is it just a snippet where you've already given us the main points ?

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 13 Dec 2009 01:26

Surya wrote:yawnn all these celebrated Air marshals

What they did they do when they were in the chair?

Why did they not scream bloody murder then?? worried about their pensions???

like Barbora - they could have made a public announcement if they felt things were that badly off.

all now smugly want to describe the problems when they are outside. its worthless now.

i agree..most never think far into the future anyway.
apparently it was ACM Idris Hassan Latif who has to be credited for giving a lot of support to the LCA and getting the project started from the IAF's end..customer support is key to the success of any program. that is a fact that will not change whether it is military or civilian projects. if you give very lackdaisical support and only overview the program once in a blue moon, its your fault as a customer when the product doesn't look like what you'd dreamt of and never really properly communicated.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 13 Dec 2009 03:16

if the European engine maker offers 100% transfer of technology, the price of its bid would shoot up; "Then its bid would not be competitive."

Its not fair to compare EF200 price with F414 when F price is not with the 100% ToT (which btw, will never happen from khan country).

We need to compare both these engines at 100% ToT offer prices.

A Sharma · Post by **A Sharma** » 13 Dec 2009 03:23

Shape Memory Alloys

Currently, the technology for the manufacture of Ni-Ti-Fe alloys and heat shrinkable sleeves are under transfer to Foundry & Forge Division of HAL, Bengaluru, where a plant dedicated to this purpose is being set up. When operational, this plant will be the only one in the country and amongst a few worldwide that manufacture shape memory alloys and heat shrinkable fasteners. Other components currently under development for application in LCA include heat shrinkable hydraulic coupling and thermally actuated valves.

Neshant · Post by **Neshant** » 13 Dec 2009 06:59

{deleted useless

}

Willy · Post by **Willy** » 13 Dec 2009 14:32

Cant the kaveri with its current thrust be used in an AJT?

Neerajsoman · Post by **Neerajsoman** » 13 Dec 2009 17:03

Willy wrote:Cant the kaveri with its current thrust be used in an AJT?

You can't exactly shove any engine into any airframe. The issue with the Kaveri is that it produces too little thrust for a powerplant its size. You'll just get a barrel-like, heavy midget aircraft with poor acceleration if you put the Kaveri into the AJT.

natarajanrams · Post by **natarajanrams** » 13 Dec 2009 17:56

Neerajsoman wrote:
Willy wrote:Cant the kaveri with its current thrust be used in an AJT?

You can't exactly shove any engine into any airframe. The issue with the Kaveri is that it produces too little thrust for a powerplant its size. You'll just get a barrel-like, heavy midget aircraft with poor acceleration if you put the Kaveri into the AJT.

I'm really amazed by the number of Arm chair pundits who are ready to ridicule our scientists. Fact is that fantastic work has been done by our Scientists with very low budgets. Check the following stats.

Kaveri Engine weights 1050 kgms and gives 81KN thrust in afterburner and 52KN without afterburner at the current stage. Thrust to weight ratio is 7.8:1 True it produces lower thrust of 81 KN compared to the 85 KN of the F404 Engine currently powering the LCA but Kaveri can easily be used to reengine a lot of MiG 21s to

Conversely Jaguar has the Adour Engine which has a maximum thrust of 37.5 KN. Jaguar uses two of these engines to power it. Each Adour Engine weighs about 809 Kgms while the Kaveri weighs 1050 Kgm.

Look at this:

Kaveri Engine Length 137.4 Inches
Adour Engine Length: 114 Inches

2 feet increase in length only..

Kaveri Engine Dia: 38.8 inches
Adour Engine Dia: 22.3 inches

Weight:
Kaveri: 1100 Kgm
Adour: 809 Kgm

Thurst:

Kaveri: 18210 lb afterburner/11687lb without afterburner
Adour: 8430lbs AB/6000lbs dry

Adour engine has been used on both Jaguar and T-45 Goshawk Trainer and Hawk Trainer.

If you look at the current Engine that powers the MiG 21 Bison it carries the Tumanskiy R25-300 Engine 40.21 kN (9,040 lbf) thrust dry, 69.62 kN (15,650 lbf) with afterburner. Remember that this powers the backbone of the IAF today..

Specifications (R-25-300)
General characteristics

* Type: Afterburning turbojet
* Length: 4,615 mm (181.7 in)
* Diameter: 1,191 mm (46.9 in)
* Dry weight: 1,212 kg (2,670 lb)

Performance

* Maximum Thrust:
o 55 kN (12,370 lb)[1] military power
o 68.5 kN (15,400 lbf) with afterburner

Compare this to the Kaveri which is far superior to the MiG 21 Engine in all respects and now you tell us that any aircraft that uses Kaveri Engine is like a barrel. And the various gurus here have no shame to tell us that only foreign goodies will work..Do people here represent foreign vendors..

Kaveri should be able to easily power MiG 21s and MiG 29s in IAF even at its current state. The specified goals are not what is stated above and what is above is what has already been achieved.

The post has been edited as instructed.

Best,

Ramaswami

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 13 Dec 2009 18:13

Neerajsoman wrote:
Willy wrote:Cant the kaveri with its current thrust be used in an AJT?

You can't exactly shove any engine into any airframe. The issue with the Kaveri is that it produces too little thrust for a powerplant its size. You'll just get a barrel-like, heavy midget aircraft with poor acceleration if you put the Kaveri into the AJT.

on the contrary kaveri is overpowered for AJT. please check the specs of the various AJT engines. it's much too large and powerful for AJT duties.

===========
@ natarajan, kaveri is yet to reach its target specs although it is still much larger and powerful for what an AJT needs.

comments like

With due respect, I think people who deride our achievements are the biggest enemies of the country. Frankly they should be lined up and put up before a firing squad.

are entirely uncalled for. I suggest you edit them out yourself if you don't want to be warned.

others, kindly do not respond to the flaming portions of the above post.

Rishirishi · Post by **Rishirishi** » 13 Dec 2009 18:39

I kind of agree. The demands are simply unrealistic both for the LCA and Kavei. But they are partly to blame for this them selfs, for creating the hype.

I think the focus should be find areas were Indian products can play a role. Even if the LCA is not going to a a Gripen or Eurofighter, it could fill many other roles.
Like second line defence, recon or anti ship.

They could be used as a packedge together with more capable aircrafts.

Neerajsoman · Post by **Neerajsoman** » 13 Dec 2009 18:49

Rahul M wrote:
Neerajsoman wrote: You can't exactly shove any engine into any airframe. The issue with the Kaveri is that it produces too little thrust for a powerplant its size. You'll just get a barrel-like, heavy midget aircraft with poor acceleration if you put the Kaveri into the AJT.
on the contrary kaveri is overpowered for AJT. please check the specs of the various AJT engines. it's much too large and powerful for AJT duties.

Agree. I was attempting to demonstrate the visual spectacle of a massive turbofan sicking out of an airframe too small by half.

It would still create acceleration issues, by the way, as the weight of the engine is still currently far in excess of its achieved thrust. It will still be a year or so before the engine gets even close to its designed thrust. Furthermore, the spooling time is too long for pursuit or even to take off in a hurry. The Kaveri had (has?) a tendency to throw turbine blades when spooled up to max thrust at the rate the IAF requires.

I guess this should be in the GTRE/Kaveri thread anyway. Sorry.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 13 Dec 2009 19:08

BLISK and SC technologies are a must for Kaveri Mk2.

Neerajsoman · Post by **Neerajsoman** » 13 Dec 2009 19:12

SaiK wrote:BLISK and SC technologies are a must for Kaveri Mk2.

Whoa there, cowboy. Let's get the Kaveri Mk.1 to the standard we want first.

Then we can try to emulate GE, Pratt & Whitney all we want for the next thirty years after that...

Yagnasri · Post by **Yagnasri** » 13 Dec 2009 20:02

One thought. We do have lot of importent places like Gujarath with lot of economically importent place. Mumbai oil rigs whole of north east, Andaman Nikobar Islands and so on wherein we may need a point defence fighter. Why not produce a good no of mk1 type of LCA and use them for that purpose. Don't you think that way we can free other front like fighter like Mig 29 for most importent tasks.

Frankly when we do not have any fighters even a AtoA version of the LCA can be put to good use. What do gurus say.

Neerajsoman · Post by **Neerajsoman** » 13 Dec 2009 22:23

Narayana Rao wrote:One thought. We do have lot of importent places like Gujarath with lot of economically importent place. Mumbai oil rigs whole of north east, Andaman Nikobar Islands and so on wherein we may need a point defence fighter. Why not produce a good no of mk1 type of LCA and use them for that purpose. Don't you think that way we can free other front like fighter like Mig 29 for most importent tasks.

Frankly when we do not have any fighters even a AtoA version of the LCA can be put to good use. What do gurus say.

We're facing a shortage of pilots in India. Do you really think we have the people and money to maintain a two-tier airforce? If we did, we would already have started something like the US Air National Guard using old aircraft. Oh, wait, our Air Force flies old aircraft already.

Our doctrine calls for the establishment and maintenance of air superiority. Out point defense fighters are really just shorter-range fighter-bombers placed nearer to their objectives than our "front-line" aircraft further south. pure interceptors died after the US withdrew the Delta Dart in the early 80's. A western sector air war is supposed to take place over Pakistani airspace anyway, not ours.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 13 Dec 2009 23:26

natarajanrams wrote:
I'm really amazed by the number of Arm chair pundits who are ready to ridicule our scientists. Fact is that fantastic work has been done by our Scientists with very low budgets. ....................Ramaswami

Please pardon my ignorance about matters related to jet engines.....but what is the point of comparing the performace of Kaveri with Adour or R-25?Those engines were designed as per the parameters defined for the jets in question and have served their purpose....what has the thrust of Kaveri@52KN got to do with thrust of R-25-300@40.21KN?That engine was made cople of decades ago before we started to think about Kaveri and has done a fantastic job of what it was supposed to do i.e. bring the MiG-21 up and fast to high altitude where it could intercept the USAF bomber flotilla.

The argument you present doesn't make sense..at least to me.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 13 Dec 2009 23:31

but what is the point of comparing the performace of Kaveri with Adour or R-25?

IMHO, none.

Katare · Post by **Katare** » 14 Dec 2009 00:21

natarajanrams wrote:
I'm really amazed by the number of Arm chair pundits who are ready to ridicule our scientists. Fact is that fantastic work has been done by our Scientists with very low budgets. Check the following stats.

Kaveri Engine weights 1050 kgms and gives 81KN thrust in afterburner and 52KN without afterburner at the current stage. Thrust to weight ratio is 7.8:1 True it produces lower thrust of 81 KN compared to the 85 KN of the F404 Engine currently powering the LCA but Kaveri can easily be used to reengine a lot of MiG 21s to
Conversely Jaguar has the Adour Engine which has a maximum thrust of 37.5 KN. Jaguar uses two of these engines to power it. Each Adour Engine weighs about 809 Kgms while the Kaveri weighs 1050 Kgm.
Best,

Ramaswami

Only if GTRE has delivered the bolded part we wouldn't be going around looking for new engine. The news is that Kaveri is only producing 65KN not 81 that it was suppose too. 65kN is not enough for even the original LCA which needed 81kN, the current Mk1 requires 90+kN that is out of kaveri's reach without a foreign partner.

Kailash · Post by **Kailash** » 14 Dec 2009 12:27

It is hard fact that mk-2 is still a paper plane. It is not wise to assume that mk-2 engine integration and testing will not hit any roadblocks - technical/political/contractual. In terms of timely completion of testing and productionizing, the mk-2 is just imaginary plane.

And we can not afford enough people to integrate the Kaveri-as-is-now and the new engine (that will be in selection for another 5 years) to the LCA airframe. What is better is to concentrate on one of these two efforts.

Steps in mk-2 dvlp - can someone validate?

1. Design freeze (including airframe and engine specific mods)
2. Selection of new engines
3. All other component upgrades, AESA radar etc available
4. Mating the engine to airframe
5. Testing & certification - airframe engines, radar et al

Not sure if point 1 comes before/after point 2. Points 4 & 5 depends on consultancy or the lack of it. Radar is a total unknown right now. And for doing all this on the mk-1 is taking so many years more. Why will mk-2 be any different?

How bad is the idea of making more mk-1 and upgrading the first 40 with AESA etc when they become available? even a Kaveri mated to an LCA as is will be a winner over flying a foreign engine, dont know when.

And hope they dont unearth some corruption cases on this engines sales.

Jamal K. Malik · Post by **Jamal K. Malik** » 14 Dec 2009 14:32

LCA Tejas

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 14 Dec 2009 18:39

Shiv and I know who they are,the "celebrated" AMs,they're both very highly respected and for very good reasons too.The problem with the LCA project was that the babus never wanted an LCA "supremo",that is one overall head for the project responsible for its success,a man who would deliver and who had the power to take hard decisions.They deliberately sabotaged three selections for the post which took several years,each time sending the decision higher up the ladder even unto the cabinet! The gent I'm referring to repeatedly said that the project would fail if the right engine was not chosen early on (shades of the HF-24,lesson not learnt still) and was sceptical about Kaveri.He was proven right.The attitude behind the Kaveri fiasco was exactly like that of the failed Trishul missile,all talk,tall claims and no performance.In fact,the gent who I've quoted openly questioned the attitude of the GOI/MOD including Kalam as to their (earlier) lacklustre support for the programme which also kept the IAF mostly in the dark.There is little accountability as I've said before in our defence establishments.

What is happening now,the welcome thrust to the programme and roping in the IAF,should've happened a decade ago .As some have suggested-about the engine,look at the Chinese example,how they've either reverse engineered and (non licenced) produced their own version or bought it outright from Russia as with the J-10.We are now about to select a new engine and the faster that decision is taken,the chances of success of Mk-2 increase.The LCA was envisaged in the '80s.I distinctly remember reading about how Rajiv approved the project after a detailed presentation and two decades later we are still not there completely,both in perfecting the design and setting up production facilities for the same.The latter is what I can't understand.The technologies like composites,avionics,etc.,were achieved a long time ago.It is only the engine's performance that is the bugbear,therefore it is mystifying as to what is preventing HAL from acheiving a production rate of the "world's smallest multi-role light aircraft" of more than 8 (max 12) per year? Such a dismal rate will not suffice for our ambitious indigensiation targets.As for UAVs and UCAVs,the flavour of the age,almost every country has now designed and put into production their own designs, including revealed at Dubai,Abu Dhabi's secretive defence industry's own MALE with an endurance of more than the Predator.We've been seeing at every air show for a decade plus Nishant and little else.

vina · Post by **vina** » 14 Dec 2009 18:49

Ah Philip -- Relax.,

Just got the latest issue of Vayu by mail today and it had a piece about the LCA. In fact the "Good News" is already here, but DDM didnt know how to report it.

The Vayu said that by the "middle december" a test team of 4 aircraft PV1, PV2, PV3 and LSP2 would be based out of Dabolim and in an intensive exercise open out the full envelope as per the IOC standard .

And of course we had a report from DDM about 1350Km/hr and " ver y successful test campaign" , fastest flight and everything. and there were whines about mach 1.1 onree

, then I wrote in Pingrezi, and Pingrezi got banned..

. But we missed the following BIIIIIG Picture

Elephant in the Room - The full IOC standard flight envelope has been opened out and qualified

Also the Vayu report spoke about the weapons trials in Jamnagar and opening out envelope with full range of weapons and delivery. That too we saw the news on that.

Bottomline - Dont worry, Have Curry! The IOC standard envelope , both in weapons delivery and flight envelope is done

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 14 Dec 2009 19:00

Well that's good news indeed,meaning that the first sqd. will arrive as stated by the end of 2010.Two squadrons of LCA MK-1, used purely for the AD role could very well replace a couple of the MIG-21 sqds to be retired next year.Now for HAL to ramp up production....!

Asit P · Post by **Asit P** » 14 Dec 2009 19:06

Katare wrote:Only if GTRE has delivered the bolded part we wouldn't be going around looking for new engine. The news is that Kaveri is only producing 65KN not 81 that it was suppose too. 65kN is not enough for even the original LCA which needed 81kN, the current Mk1 requires 90+kN that is out of kaveri's reach without a foreign partner.

I am little confused here. One of the articles of Shukla jee, published in September, 2009 mentions that the afterburner thrust provided by Kaveri is only 65 KN. Whereas this dossier of DRDO published in October, 2009 states that Kaveri gives a thrust of 81 KN !!

ankit-s · Post by **ankit-s** » 14 Dec 2009 20:21

Asit P wrote:
Katare wrote:Only if GTRE has delivered the bolded part we wouldn't be going around looking for new engine. The news is that Kaveri is only producing 65KN not 81 that it was suppose too. 65kN is not enough for even the original LCA which needed 81kN, the current Mk1 requires 90+kN that is out of kaveri's reach without a foreign partner.
I am little confused here. One of the articles of Shukla jee, published in September, 2009 mentions that the afterburner thrust provided by Kaveri is only 65 KN. Whereas this dossier of DRDO published in October, 2009 states that Kaveri gives a thrust of 81 KN !!

Full afterburner:18,210 lbf (81.0 kN) [Goal: 20,200 lbf (90.0 kN)]

vina · Post by **vina** » 14 Dec 2009 20:54

Philip wrote:Two squadrons of LCA MK-1, used purely for the AD role could very well replace a couple of the MIG-21 sqds to be retired next year.Now for HAL to ramp up production....!

Well, it is going to be lot more than a pure AD version. What you will be getting is a pretty good multi role capability with a lot of A2G weapons including precision strike capability using a LDP fielded. Think of it. Every one else fields a basic AD version with A2A capabilities only. Others field radars with pure A2A first and then get A2G via software/firmware other upgrades. We reject the MMR when the couldnt show maturity with A2G modes.

We dont do anything in half measures. We leap like Hanuman across the seas right to the finish..

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 14 Dec 2009 21:15

Great news Vina! Now if you can spur HAL to make 50 LCAs a year (yes I know IAF ordered onree 20), that would be gr8.

sumshyam · Post by **sumshyam** » 14 Dec 2009 21:45

Vivek K wrote:if you can spur HAL to make 50 LCAs a year, that would be gr8.

well...i remember...something....when India was planning its growth to cross 8 % or something....it was called "Mungeri Lal ke hasin sapne"...I don't have words for your wish Vivek...I just dream....if it ever come true...!

RKumar · Post by **RKumar** » 14 Dec 2009 21:48

vina wrote:Just got the latest issue of Vayu by mail today and it had a piece about the LCA.

Could you please put the article contents/scanned one ...

beside that it is really good news

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 14 Dec 2009 22:03

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NEWS/news ... wsid=12079

I only hope that the new Kaveri with snecma's core can at least over thrust both GE F414 max and EJ200 max thrusts.. Else, we are keeping this IAF option open for opting either of the firangi engines for future squadrons, while the french enjoy the $2b core inputs.

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 14 Dec 2009 22:04

HAL to make 50 LCAs a year,

That's fewer than 5 per month. Once into mass production, there is no reason why a fighter plane should be harder to build than, say, an Ambassador Mark 10 car, with a modern plant and modern technicians.

Katare · Post by **Katare** » 14 Dec 2009 23:00

Asit P wrote:
Katare wrote:Only if GTRE has delivered the bolded part we wouldn't be going around looking for new engine. The news is that Kaveri is only producing 65KN not 81 that it was suppose too. 65kN is not enough for even the original LCA which needed 81kN, the current Mk1 requires 90+kN that is out of kaveri's reach without a foreign partner.
I am little confused here. One of the articles of Shukla jee, published in September, 2009 mentions that the afterburner thrust provided by Kaveri is only 65 KN. Whereas this dossier of DRDO published in October, 2009 states that Kaveri gives a thrust of 81 KN !!

Let me try one more time.......

Design goal given to GTRE - 81kN (GE404 and Kaveri of 1980s)
GTRE delivered in 2009 - 65kN
LCA now needs - 90kN (Ge 414/EJ200)
New GTRE-Snecma promis - 90kN (in four years)

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 14 Dec 2009 23:09

And while GE or EJ expands to 100+kN, while Snecma-Kaveri per 2009 agreement can only do a max 90kN.