LCA news and discussion

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
rajeshks
BRFite
Posts: 174
Joined: 29 Dec 2007 22:43

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby rajeshks » 12 Oct 2009 12:24

Kailash wrote:The option should have been make and induct Mk-I in numbers, perfect it and take that learning to Mk-II. When mk-II production lines starts, sell the second hand mk1s to some Kazhakistan, Indonesia or new African friends - establishing supply chains, international customers etc


Simply India dont have the resources for this, not even for the last part.
This would have been possible if we are talking about a Maruti Car. But for a fighter plane i really doubt.

nrshah
BRFite
Posts: 578
Joined: 10 Feb 2009 16:36

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby nrshah » 12 Oct 2009 18:39

rajeshks wrote:Simply India dont have the resources for this, not even for the last part.
This would have been possible if we are talking about a Maruti Car. But for a fighter plane i really doubt.


What resource you feel we don't have?

If it is monetary, we have enough funds. We are spending 12 Bn USD for MMRCA. There is no reason why we cannot provide additional 3 Bn USD. Also a large part of 3 Bn USD will be funded thru savings resulted from retirement of Mig 21 which otherwise will continue to operate. The savings are in form decremental maintenance cost (mig 21 being very older, it is obvious it will have higher cost), High rate of sortie availability, Lesser no of aircrafts required than Mig 21 for same mission, Lower accidents and resulting cost, life of our pilots which is priceless considering we have shortage of them even if human factor is ignored, amortization (benefit/Royalty) that it should be credited with for inputs provided to improvise Mk2 / MCA and others.

-Nitin

rajeshks
BRFite
Posts: 174
Joined: 29 Dec 2007 22:43

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby rajeshks » 12 Oct 2009 19:47

nrshah wrote:
rajeshks wrote:Simply India dont have the resources for this, not even for the last part.
This would have been possible if we are talking about a Maruti Car. But for a fighter plane i really doubt.


What resource you feel we don't have?

If it is monetary, we have enough funds. We are spending 12 Bn USD for MMRCA. There is no reason why we cannot provide additional 3 Bn USD. Also a large part of 3 Bn USD will be funded thru savings resulted from retirement of Mig 21 which otherwise will continue to operate. The savings are in form decremental maintenance cost (mig 21 being very older, it is obvious it will have higher cost), High rate of sortie availability, Lesser no of aircrafts required than Mig 21 for same mission, Lower accidents and resulting cost, life of our pilots which is priceless considering we have shortage of them even if human factor is ignored, amortization (benefit/Royalty) that it should be credited with for inputs provided to improvise Mk2 / MCA and others.

-Nitin


Not money but infrastructure, man power, skills and political/diplomatic push. It will take its own time to develop all these evenif we want to and by that time mk2 will be ready. Infact Money is also an issue.

prabir
BRFite
Posts: 150
Joined: 27 Aug 2008 03:22

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby prabir » 12 Oct 2009 22:38

Army and Airforce are being scrutinized for the level of imports. People did force the Army to accept Arjun. I think, things are changing now. With private sector participation (L&T, Mahindra and Tata), it should further improve.

LCA project is not going to be repeat of Ajeet / Marut story.

prabhug
BRFite
Posts: 174
Joined: 05 Dec 2008 14:31

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby prabhug » 14 Oct 2009 11:05

Hi
Any news on the new Engine, I suppose the the time given to the manufacturers are over(Assuming oct 12) ?


Cheers

Prabhu.G

KrishG
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 1290
Joined: 25 Nov 2008 20:43
Location: Land of Trala-la

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby KrishG » 14 Oct 2009 23:41

Eurojet proposes thrust-vectoring upgrade for Typhoon (same as proposed for LCA)

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2009/10/14/333449/eurojet-proposes-thrust-vectoring-upgrade-for-typhoon.html

Equipping the twin-engined Typhoon's EJ200s with thrust vectoring nozzles (TVN) could reduce fuel burn on a typical mission by up to 5%, while increasing available thrust in supersonic cruise by up to 7%, the engine consortium says.

KrishG
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 1290
Joined: 25 Nov 2008 20:43
Location: Land of Trala-la

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby KrishG » 15 Oct 2009 00:10

Finally got my reply from Eurojet! :D :D :D

Question ------

Hello, I'm XXXXX from XXXXXXX. I wanted to know the nominal service-life of EJ200. Some sources state it as 2000 hrs but is this the service life of only the hot parts of engine ??

For example, the GE F414 has 2000 hrs service life for the hot parts of the engine and a 4000 hrs life expectancy of other parts of the engine.

I believe that the stated 2000 hrs service life of EJ200 is only for the hot section of the engine and the overall service life would be closer to that of F414. Am I correct ?

I am asking this for general research on which engine would suit the Indian LCA better. I hope you will reply fittingly. Thank you and Good luck for the Indian deal !


Reply from Eurojet -----

Hi XXXXXX

The overall structural life of the EJ 200 engine is 6000 hrs.Design life of hot section is 2000hrs and cold section (compressors is 4000 hrs all assuming operation of the enfgine in line with the designed strategical missions.
As the EJ 200 life is calculated on usage life of all parts will be in line with the operation and could therefor beyond the stated figures.
Hope this satisfies your question.


Well, isn't the service life of hot parts of F414 also 2000 hrs while the service life of other parts is 6000 hrs as compared to 4000 hrs of EJ200!

Conclusion- Contrary to previous posts F414 ,RD-93MK and EJ200 have similar service life of around 2000 hrs for hot parts and 4000 hrs for the rest of the engine for the latter two and 6000 hrs for F414.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5348
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby Kartik » 15 Oct 2009 00:14

nrshah wrote:This is not desirable. They should kick start production of LCA using F 404 IN in interceptor role, atleast till our honeymoon with unkil lasts. Then we are already working (buying) new 95-100 Kn engine and then Kaveri is not dumped. One day or other, believe me or not, it will fly one of the IAF's most potent aircraft.

Why these guys fail to understand that no product will mature unless it is put to operational use. All specs, design etc are ok but only operational use will tell how effective it is besides weeding out discrepancies.

We would have produced at the max 80 LCA mk 1 by 2014 assuming 15 PA. Considering a cost of 150 crore (which is for NLCA), the total cost is 3Bn USD. I dont think even if we have to keep those 80 - 100 odd MK1 till retirement, it is an issue... Rather it is cost effective solution to increase the no of aircraft where these will complement more potent MKI / MMRCA / PAK FA / MCA. And as some of my friend quoted, that for a fairly long foreseeable future we will see our adversaries not having 4/4.5 gen aircraft(TSP buying over 150 JF 17), LCA will be more than enough for them.

-Nitin


I have read enough of this garbage on BRF now that the LCA must enter production NOW. it CANNOT ! it will not till it achieves a certain stage of certification, and that is the IOC and FOC stage-an aircraft that flies in the Indian skies in a production form has to be certified by the DGCA or the CEMILAC, based on whether its civvie or military.

certification is not a piddly business ok ? it involves thousands of man-hours of putting together all the required Stress notes, getting them audited, showing conformity with whatever FAR regulation they are to show conformity to-and much more importantly, it requires that the fighter have been tested at ALL of the extreme envelope points and demonstrated. when its well known that the Tejas has yet to be tested to its full g-limits and the highest possible AoA, why are you talking about production of xyz fighters by xyz date ?

there is no way at all to circumvent this process, and there is no way it can enter squadron service before that, so no point in yelling that do this, do that, introduce it with g-limits and so on and so forth. for every one idea of this kind on an aviation forum, there are 10 better ideas on the ground. but this is a very tedious, serious business and {{COMPLAINING}} regularly on this forum about how nobody is doing anything is really getting boring now..it appears that {{SOME}} people on BRF feel that they're smarter than professionals who're responsible for aviation safety, even though they've not the slightest clue how things work. while I understand that you care about the numbers in the IAF, there is a process that has to be followed, and there are no two ways about that.
Last edited by Jagan on 15 Oct 2009 04:04, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: cleaned up before it goes downhill

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5348
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby Kartik » 15 Oct 2009 00:26

Only posting this here because the EJ200 is under consideration for the Tejas.

Eurofighter and engine supplier Eurojet are stepping up their efforts to interest Typhoon customer nations in a thrust-vectoring upgrade that promises to bring substantial operational benefits and pay for itself through lifecycle cost reductions.

Equipping the twin-engined Typhoon's EJ200s with thrust vectoring nozzles (TVN) could reduce fuel burn on a typical mission by up to 5%, while increasing available thrust in supersonic cruise by up to 7%, the engine consortium says.

Eurojet partner ITP benchtested a TVN several years ago, and EADS earlier this year equipped its Typhoon cockpit simulator to emulate the performance enhancements offered by the technology.

The industrial partners are now looking for funding to launch a flight-demonstrator programme.

Thrust vectoring could provide a virtual control surface when coupled with the Typhoon's flight-control system, improving survivability, manoeuvrability and the aircraft's ability to carry an asymmetric weapons load. It also reduces trim drag and therefore fuel consumption by "unloading" aerodynamic control surfaces.

"Most operationally significant is the speed that it gives you in supercruise, because obviously the pilots are very keen on low observability at high speed," says Salvador Costa Krämer, Eurofighter product manager for Tranche 3 production, Meteor integration and new business. "Seven per cent more thrust in supercruise is quite a remarkable achievement," he adds.

Eurojet technical director Matt Price says that while thrust vectoring promises operational advantages, "we have to look at lifecycle costs as well. The business that we're in is that we have to hit both those things together."

Thrust vectoring has the potential to extend engine life by reducing operating temperatures at a given power setting. It could also be used to reduce take-off and landing distances and approach speed.

"We know the benefit is there," says Price. "In terms of route to market we need to be able to quantify that and present it in the right way to the customer."

He says that after flying the modified EADS simulator, "some of the pilots have been quite astonished at what the aircraft can do".

The TVN could be retofitted to the existing EJ200 without the need for structural changes to the engine or airframe, says Eurojet.


article

Sriman
BRFite
Posts: 1858
Joined: 02 Mar 2009 11:38
Location: Committee for the Promotion of Vice and the Prevention of Virtue

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby Sriman » 15 Oct 2009 01:37

veerav wrote:The point here is that can we push the IOC and FOC dates with an expectation that LCA initally runs on Ge 404? If the uncertainitiy of engine is taken out of the equation, what else is preventing to expand the testign envelop at higher pace and acheive the IOC early.

Engine competition is for Mk2. LCA Mk1 IOC and FOC dates have been set with the expectation that the first 2 squadrons will run on GE404.

Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2488
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby Vivek K » 15 Oct 2009 02:11

Kartik, I work with the Civil Aviation industry and interact with folks that deal with FARs. Some companies prefer to relocate to canada to get certification because of a shorter process. Are those products/aircraft unsafe compared to FAA certified products?

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36416
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby SaiK » 15 Oct 2009 02:41

flight test measures for fighter a/cs must be different compared to civilian certifications, is my assumption. for example, spin recovery, weapons delivery and stores, mission computing and profiles, etc.

ss_roy
BRFite
Posts: 286
Joined: 15 Nov 2008 21:48

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby ss_roy » 15 Oct 2009 03:01

The real question is:

Is the LCA better than the Mig-21, it was supposed to replace?

Given that we still have Mig-21s, would the LCA Mk-I not be a improvement over the status quo?

Raveen
BRFite
Posts: 835
Joined: 18 Jun 2008 00:51
Location: 1/2 way between the gutter and the stars
Contact:

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby Raveen » 15 Oct 2009 03:05

ss_roy wrote:The real question is:

Is the LCA better than the Mig-21, it was supposed to replace?

Given that we still have Mig-21s, would the LCA Mk-I not be a improvement over the status quo?


It will be...provided it (Tejas) is certified as safe enough to fly aka IOC

ss_roy
BRFite
Posts: 286
Joined: 15 Nov 2008 21:48

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby ss_roy » 15 Oct 2009 03:14

As long as it does not crash as frequently as the Mig-21, we should be OK.

It will be...provided it (Tejas) is certified as safe enough to fly aka IOC

Anujan
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7008
Joined: 27 May 2007 03:55

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby Anujan » 15 Oct 2009 03:21

ss_roy wrote:The real question is:

Is the LCA better than the Mig-21, it was supposed to replace?

Given that we still have Mig-21s, would the LCA Mk-I not be a improvement over the status quo?


ss_roy wrote:As long as it does not crash as frequently as the Mig-21, we should be OK.


I hope the LCA is as good as the Hawker Hunter. I dont know what the composites, quadruple FBW, and the delta wings buys over the excellent maneuverability of the Folland Gnat

Raveen
BRFite
Posts: 835
Joined: 18 Jun 2008 00:51
Location: 1/2 way between the gutter and the stars
Contact:

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby Raveen » 15 Oct 2009 03:31

ss_roy wrote:As long as it does not crash as frequently as the Mig-21, we should be OK.

It will be...provided it (Tejas) is certified as safe enough to fly aka IOC


Well that is exactly what the IOC and FOC are meant to determine and establish

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5348
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby Kartik » 15 Oct 2009 04:11

Vivek K wrote:Kartik, I work with the Civil Aviation industry and interact with folks that deal with FARs. Some companies prefer to relocate to canada to get certification because of a shorter process. Are those products/aircraft unsafe compared to FAA certified products?


Relocate from the US to Canada ? that would not allow them to be able to fly within the US without getting a FAA certification. I don't know how thorough the process is in Canada, but in general, FAA certification is a very tedious process, and even the European Standards are quite similar in detail.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5348
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby Kartik » 15 Oct 2009 04:57

to just give an idea of how every part/system on the aircraft will need to be certified, please read the article below

article link

Our Regional Bureau / Chennai August 26, 2005

Rane Brake Linings (RBL) has been awarded with the type certificate for Kiran MK I aircraft brake pads from Centre for Military Airworthiness and Certification (CEMILAC).
The company aims to use the approval as the platform to look for business opportunities in the commercial aviation sector.

The certificate was awarded to RBL for successfully developing high energy disc brake pads for the main wheel brakes of the aircraft.

Designed and manufactured by Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL), the Kiran MK I aircraft is the workhorse jet trainer of the Indian Air Force (IAF) and Indian Navy (Aviation). IAF, IN and HAL have been giving high priority for the development of indigineous brake pads which will be cost-effective.

“RBL, in its maiden effort has developed these brake pads which have been qualified in all the performance and field tests. Our brake pads withstood a total wear of 1.2 mm in 75 landings against a total permissible 4 mm,” said P S Rao, president, RBL, in a press conference. The field trials took place at IAF bases in Bidar (Karnataka) and Hyderabad, he added.


Rane Brake Linings, which has a turnover of about Rs 175 crore, has already commenced production and has supplied over 24,000 brake pads till date. RBL, which already is dabbling in the automobile sector, also plans to expand and invest in aviation sector and "defence forces supplies will be our top priority," added Rao.


now this needs to be done not just for the parts and systems on board the aircraft, but also for the suppliers. that can be seen here where it states
"The approval is subject to the following conditions:
i) The design approval means that capability/expertise is available for undertaking the above mentioned scope of activities within the firm. However, necessary provisional clearance is to be obtained from the concerned RCMA depending on the aircraft systems or Type Approval from CEMILAC, for each products designed and developed on a case to case basis, for its use"

more can be read on the link given above. It clearly states that this certificate means that the firm can undertake the required design activities and it has the expertise for that. However, for whatever part it designs to be used on an aircraft, provisional clearance (time-bound) is given, or else Type Approval from CEMILAC is required. So whichever private firm may be a supplier to the LCA will need to be doing all these activities simultaneously. type approval for critical components like the brake (mentioned in the earlier post) will require xyz number of flight tests with demonstrated performance within set tolerances. this cannot be circumvented, or else you will only get provisional clearance, which cannot be used for the production to churn out fighters.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5348
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby Kartik » 15 Oct 2009 05:24

and here is very detailed pdf on what Aircraft certification means and Table 1 gives a list of what all needs to be done for ensuring airworthiness requirements and objectives. that will give you an idea of the breadth and scope of the activities involved in getting the required airworthiness certifications from CEMILAC.

link to pdf

Kersi D
BRFite
Posts: 1383
Joined: 20 Sep 2000 11:31

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby Kersi D » 15 Oct 2009 11:04

rajeshks wrote:
Rishirishi wrote:I have said it in the past and will say it again.

The Indian PSU's have a fundamental flaw in the management philosphy. They are more concerned with keeping people happy then producing results. They discourage risktaking, and encourage status quo.

ITI, Air India, Ashoka Hotels, BHEL, ONGC, Indian Oil etc are all underpreformers. Hence it is not surprising that DRDO, HAL, etc fail to deliver.


I would like to put it in a different way... Indian PSUs work differently compared to western counterparts and are more conservative than their european counterparts. That culture saved them on many occasions and on many occasions it was disastrous too. There is no meaning in blindly blaming Indian PSUs or trying to change it to another western MNC. MNCs can take risks, talk about efficiency and dynamics, show rapid growth and also can shut shop one fine morning. Think about IOC. ONGC, DRDO, SBI etc closing down… scary right ??

Remember the single biggest thing that saved India from the current recession is SBI, not any of the private companies known for their efficiency. Everywhere else banks collapsed pushing economies to rock bottom while SBI stood like a rock. Of course this is my personal opinion, others may differ. I showed my gratitude by opening an account and deposited some money, a small thanks from an ordinary Indian.

Coming back to LCA, ADA & DRDO & HAL work under lot of constraints. LCA is just one among many projects they execute. Even though we don’t a world fighter ready now, we all know that it will happen in the near future. That itself is a good thing. The probability of LCA being a success is very high. So instead of blaming HAL, forgive them for the time being and support them during tough times. I am sure few of our members belong to those companies. How do they feel if a forum like BR starts supporting them, congratulating them for their good work? I am sure they will feel good and motivated.



The Indian PSU's have a fundamental flaw in the management philosphy. They are more concerned with keeping people happy then producing results.

That is because even if they run into a loss, WHO CARES ?

And who are they keeping happy ? Only Their Employees.

The customer can go to hell, or to a MNC !!!!!

Example our Great Airlines. Every employee ( and union ) has been pampered and the airlines is in a shit state. I recollect the good old days when IA was the only airline flying in the domestic sector. SHEER MONOPOLY, one may say.

And it was still running in a loss !!! How ? Can our great economist Dr Manmohan Singh explain this exquisite phenomena ?

Take our telephones. Today MTNL is much more "customer friendly" or I should say less "customer hostile" than it was say 10 - 12 years ago. After losing a large part of their market.

Indian PSU banks too have definitely becoem more efficient after teh foreign and Indian private banaks have entered the fray

K

rakall
BRFite
Posts: 798
Joined: 10 May 2005 10:26

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby rakall » 15 Oct 2009 11:39

Flight test update summary

Meanwhile in the last 5weeks LCA has notchedup 37 testflights ~ one per day.. Not bad at all..
But it is not so good because only 3 of the 5 airframes (assuming TD1 & TD2 grounded) are flying.. PV2 & LSP1 have not flown at all in the last 5weeks - hopefully something good is going on with them in the hangar.

In the last 5weeks -- PV1 undertook ONLY 4 sorties, PV3 -18 & LSP2 - 15.

Interestingly PV3 has been spending the last week or so in Jamnagar... I think some weapon drops are going on -- hopefully some LGB's are getting wasted..

Kailash
BRFite
Posts: 1062
Joined: 07 Dec 2008 02:32

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby Kailash » 15 Oct 2009 11:43

As long as it does not crash as frequently as the Mig-21, we should be OK.


The point here is that can we push the IOC and FOC dates with an expectation that LCA initally runs on Ge 404? If the uncertainitiy of engine is taken out of the equation, what else is preventing to expand the testign envelop at higher pace and acheive the IOC early.


Kartik wrote:certification is not a piddly business ok ? it involves thousands of man-hours of putting together all the required Stress notes, getting them audited, showing conformity with whatever FAR regulation they are to show conformity to-and much more importantly, it requires that the fighter have been tested at ALL of the extreme envelope points and demonstrated. when its well known that the Tejas has yet to be tested to its full g-limits and the highest possible AoA, why are you talking about production of xyz fighters by xyz date ?


@Karthik - It is naive to ask for series production of a fighter which has not even got an IOC/FOC. All the arguments are because of the frustration level - due to the delays, the way the program has been managed etc. Obviously some of them are not realistic. The following questions have been discussed a thousand times over on these forums

Didn't DRDO/ADA know the complexity and amount of work to be done to begin with?
Could there have been an increase to the number of LSP crafts to accelerate testing when things started slowing down?
Is there some things that can be done in parallel (by allotting more resources, men) - acceleration of the Naval and trainer variants - certification of the trainer separately?
Revisiting the certification process for IOC/FOC and see if any part of it unnecessary/overkill?
Could they have asked for help sooner (Pokhran sanctions notwithstanding)?

On a different line of argument, there is a huge export market out there. Not everyone has as stringent norms as IAF. Pakistanis and Chinese can market the JF-17 (a full generation behind our LCA), when the world doesn't even know all the details about their development and testing program. I think DRDO has to ask the basic question if the LCA Mk-II timelines and quality will realistically meet IAF needs (delays and compromises are simply not acceptable). Else the RM must intervene and force IAF to accept it as is.

If neither of that is going to happen, it will be better to decouple the light fighter program from IAF requirements and produce and market it for others. At the expense (of the pride) of India having an indigenous light fighter serving in its air force, we can at least save the LCA development program.

Igorr
BRFite
Posts: 621
Joined: 01 Feb 2005 18:13
Contact:

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby Igorr » 15 Oct 2009 18:40

Kailash wrote:If neither of that is going to happen, it will be better to decouple the light fighter program from IAF requirements and produce and market it for others. At the expense (of the pride) of India having an indigenous light fighter serving in its air force, we can at least save the LCA development program.
Good point IMHO. Other countries, US & Russia and now China always tried do the same (F-5, Krivak-II etc, FC-1). Export success can also help to domestically as well, reduce price for IAF too.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36416
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby SaiK » 15 Oct 2009 20:12

migs too.. but i doubt, we can fight migs, f16s and gripen in the open market.. besides the cost factor., they all have little bit extra years of experience and products to win deals., plus the political scratch backing terms ($ is mighter than rouble or rupee for now).

if LCA can't be found with IAF, kiss it good bye for all practicle purposes.

Yagnasri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9872
Joined: 29 May 2007 18:03

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby Yagnasri » 15 Oct 2009 20:45

Kartik wrote:
nrshah wrote:This is not desirable. They should kick start production of LCA using F 404 IN in interceptor role, atleast till our honeymoon with unkil lasts. Then we are already working (buying) new 95-100 Kn engine and then Kaveri is not dumped. One day or other, believe me or not, it will fly one of the IAF's most potent aircraft.

Why these guys fail to understand that no product will mature unless it is put to operational use. All specs, design etc are ok but only operational use will tell how effective it is besides weeding out discrepancies.

We would have produced at the max 80 LCA mk 1 by 2014 assuming 15 PA. Considering a cost of 150 crore (which is for NLCA), the total cost is 3Bn USD. I dont think even if we have to keep those 80 - 100 odd MK1 till retirement, it is an issue... Rather it is cost effective solution to increase the no of aircraft where these will complement more potent MKI / MMRCA / PAK FA / MCA. And as some of my friend quoted, that for a fairly long foreseeable future we will see our adversaries not having 4/4.5 gen aircraft(TSP buying over 150 JF 17), LCA will be more than enough for them.

-Nitin


I have read enough of this garbage on BRF now that the LCA must enter production NOW. it CANNOT ! it will not till it achieves a certain stage of certification, and that is the IOC and FOC stage-an aircraft that flies in the Indian skies in a production form has to be certified by the DGCA or the CEMILAC, based on whether its civvie or military.

certification is not a piddly business ok ? it involves thousands of man-hours of putting together all the required Stress notes, getting them audited, showing conformity with whatever FAR regulation they are to show conformity to-and much more importantly, it requires that the fighter have been tested at ALL of the extreme envelope points and demonstrated. when its well known that the Tejas has yet to be tested to its full g-limits and the highest possible AoA, why are you talking about production of xyz fighters by xyz date ?

there is no way at all to circumvent this process, and there is no way it can enter squadron service before that, so no point in yelling that do this, do that, introduce it with g-limits and so on and so forth. for every one idea of this kind on an aviation forum, there are 10 better ideas on the ground. but this is a very tedious, serious business and {{COMPLAINING}} regularly on this forum about how nobody is doing anything is really getting boring now..it appears that {{SOME}} people on BRF feel that they're smarter than professionals who're responsible for aviation safety, even though they've not the slightest clue how things work. while I understand that you care about the numbers in the IAF, there is a process that has to be followed, and there are no two ways about that.


Karthiji

No one is syaing that IAF to sacrifice the safety. Let them do everything properly. But let them at least commit themself to the project. At present we all see IAF is not at all committed to the project. Now they are saying they want Mk2 and once it comes they will say something else. That is the main problem. We can not have 32/33 sqds for a long time and expect to defend the nation.

k prasad
BRFite
Posts: 800
Joined: 21 Oct 2007 17:38
Location: Somewhere over the Rainbow
Contact:

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby k prasad » 15 Oct 2009 20:58

Kartik wrote:
Vivek K wrote:Kartik, I work with the Civil Aviation industry and interact with folks that deal with FARs. Some companies prefer to relocate to canada to get certification because of a shorter process. Are those products/aircraft unsafe compared to FAA certified products?


Relocate from the US to Canada ? that would not allow them to be able to fly within the US without getting a FAA certification. I don't know how thorough the process is in Canada, but in general, FAA certification is a very tedious process, and even the European Standards are quite similar in detail.


Great arguments on both sides, but in the end, whats the point of either?

The reason we're testing LCA is not only to get it flight-worthy but also to figure out what it can do, what it can't do, what are its limits, and importantly, what can be improved. Apart from this, there is the fact that it is after all, an advanced FIGHTER aircraft, not some piddly (in comparison) civilian jet that goes only to Mach 0.8 and isn't designed for barrel rolls.

Still, If we can find anyone in US or Canada who is willing and capable enough to certify the Tejas, why not. However, given that our CEMILAC is also learning the certification process with the LCA program (before someone jumps, read the AI thread for what Tamilmani said - no one is giving them the expertise), and no one is helping out, I wish these talent scouts good luck. Additionally, even if they do find someone willing to certify, are these guys willing to share the info? Are they willing to help us improve our systems. And most critically, do we really want to throw open our systems to their prying eyes?

Its easy to jump with impatience and say "Since LCA is already flying, put it in service". This, in the opinion of any sane person, is madness (I can say this with certainty, since I asked the CEMILAC director this very same question in a more tactful way - he read through it at once and laughed, while explaining why).

LCA testing is not just about sub-systems testing and testing at various conditions, but also, testing it safely, choosing how to check the FCS codes and increase the envelope and developing testing regimes for this (this isn't an easy part at all), and also, figuring out the test vectors and data and how that will affect the Mk2 and upgrade development. Plus, there is the user too. All of these are critical, and secret to boot - no foreign nation will give us this knowhow (not even the Ruskies, who routinely forget to give their testing manuals for the Russian aircraft we buy).

P.S. IAF has put a very senior officer (3 star i think) on the LCA test team. Lets not jump and say they don't have interest. There are genuine concerns on both sides, and its a question of how this perception gap is bridged. The fact that they haven't rejected the LCA outright is support enough, considering their previous decisions.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5348
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby Kartik » 15 Oct 2009 22:53

Kailash wrote:@Karthik - It is naive to ask for series production of a fighter which has not even got an IOC/FOC. All the arguments are because of the frustration level - due to the delays, the way the program has been managed etc. Obviously some of them are not realistic. The following questions have been discussed a thousand times over on these forums

a small complaint-its Kartik, not Karthik. we have another poster on this forum by that name. I understand that people are getting frustrated and that is leading to suggestions on how to somehow shorten the timespan to induct the Tejas Mk.1. What people are not thinking about is that it is exactly to do the above that EADS has been brought in as a consultant. and anyway, if you compare the first flight date of the JAS-39 Gripen to the date it entered squadron service, its not so far behind.

Didn't DRDO/ADA know the complexity and amount of work to be done to begin with?
Could there have been an increase to the number of LSP crafts to accelerate testing when things started slowing down?
Is there some things that can be done in parallel (by allotting more resources, men) - acceleration of the Naval and trainer variants - certification of the trainer separately?
Revisiting the certification process for IOC/FOC and see if any part of it unnecessary/overkill?
Could they have asked for help sooner (Pokhran sanctions notwithstanding)?


they certainly have at all times been under-estimating the magnitude of the workload and I don't think they ever really planned with a proper buffer for unanticipated delays. which is why public pronouncement of dates that are never met and that has only led to further frustration. what is obvious is that the fact that it’s a first time for such a large scale project has been a factor, but there has also been a very academic exercise going on- its certainly not driven by the urge to get the product to market the earliest, which is a factor that must be addressed for such large scale projects in the future. there is no doubt that having PSUs being the sole responsible entity for defence manufacturing in India is hurting indigenisation efforts and involving private sector enterprises like L&T or the Tatas is necessary if only to bring in a partner who has a big stake in the product getting to market early.
anyway, increasing the number of LSPs will mean they'll need more manpower from the IAF's end to man NFTC. more test pilots, more flight engineers, and more groups of managers, engineers and technicians to process the data and information gleaned from each test flight. see, each TP on a sortie will be tasked to test some particular maneuver, some particular variable- he'll do that, and then could give some inputs, which need to be incorporated, which would probably mean, aircraft on the ground till the inputs are incorporated. then when its ready, its flown and the others are brought up to that common spec. so while having more LSPs will definitely help, more resources will have to be made available to make use of the extra aircraft and their test data. then again, in some cases, it may not work- for e.g. we had an issue at work for an a/c close to flight test- a panel broke because the technician did not fully bolt it but clamped its edges and went to a break- the panel that broke is not an easily made item, so they simply took the panel from another test aircraft and put it on this one, while the other doesn't have it now. It'll have to wait till the panel is built by the supplier (could take a month or so) and sent to the factory for installation. so, even with 2 aircraft, only 1 can fly. so additional LSPs may not necessarily translate into a compressed schedule- the adage of having 9 mothers not meaning that a baby can be born in 1 month is true here.

On a different line of argument, there is a huge export market out there. Not everyone has as stringent norms as IAF. Pakistanis and Chinese can market the JF-17 (a full generation behind our LCA), when the world doesn't even know all the details about their development and testing program. I think DRDO has to ask the basic question if the LCA Mk-II timelines and quality will realistically meet IAF needs (delays and compromises are simply not acceptable). Else the RM must intervene and force IAF to accept it as is.


I agree that there is an export market out there, but the domestic market is the first and foremost concern. exports can wait and anyway, unless the product shows itself to be successful in the home market, it won't sell- Dhruv took a while to get orders, and only because the IAF and IA have large orders for it, its been shown to be a maneuverable helicopter (through Sarang) and even then without FAA certification its not likely to get any orders from North America. AFAIK, they're currently working on getting European cert so that it can be sold to EU nations.
however, its true that not all markets require stringent certification norms to be followed. I don't really know how Chinese fighters are certified, but it seems that the only orders they can get are from nations that do not have tight regulations to follow (I may be wrong and the Chinese certification regulations may be as good as those of the Russians).
If neither of that is going to happen, it will be better to decouple the light fighter program from IAF requirements and produce and market it for others. At the expense (of the pride) of India having an indigenous light fighter serving in its air force, we can at least save the LCA development program.

that is the least likely scenario. no one will put their money or their pilots or the Air Force's capability on the line if the IAF and India itself won't commit to it in large numbers. I can't think of any fighter program, except the Gnat, where the nation that built the fighter didn't induct it and someone else did. and anyway, they won't buy it unless its as such, a fighter ready for operations- I mean it could be that its not multi-role (Typhoon jumps to my mind, with Austria buying it when it had no A2G capability to speak of), but they won't buy it if its not been tested at 9/-3.5 Gs (the design limit load factors, with the ultimate being 12Gs for the airframe), or at its max AoA..how do you write its flight manuals (for the huge number of variables for a fighter- STR, ITR, min. landing speed with different stores, etc.) if you don't know how far it can safely go ? how can you prepare those charts that a pilot memorises if no one has really tested it that far ? even if you do prepare all the Structural Repair Manuals and the Damage allowables, you need it to be very well supported on ground during operations. no one else can do it better than the IAF, when it'll get acquainted with the Tejas in an operational role during the phase between IOC and FOC. that is the experience that any other export customer will want the product to have- the experience of being operated by another large AF, with in-service data.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5348
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby Kartik » 15 Oct 2009 23:15

Narayana Rao wrote:Karthiji

No one is syaing that IAF to sacrifice the safety. Let them do everything properly. But let them at least commit themself to the project. At present we all see IAF is not at all committed to the project. Now they are saying they want Mk2 and once it comes they will say something else. That is the main problem. We can not have 32/33 sqds for a long time and expect to defend the nation.


yaar, my name's Kartik and I'm not a "ji". I'm too young for that.

I don't think that the IAF is not committed to the Tejas. ACM Major on a few occasions stated that the IAF planned to have at least 5 squadrons of LCA. if it suits the IAF and they are happy with it, they'll order more of it. IAF has 20 Tejas Mk.1 on order and are planning on an order for some trainers as well, to keep the line with the F-404 IN20 running. In the meantime, ADA and HAL have to finish the Mk.2 development by 2013-14 and they cannot miss that date under any circumstances. that is what is expected of them and its doable.

Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2488
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby Vivek K » 15 Oct 2009 23:25

We are going in circles. People have been banned for criticising LCA delays and then those that defended it, got tired or saying the same thing over and over again and left. The saga continues. Notice however, no one is asking for the LCA to be discontinued. Every one wants it to be a success - that is a comment on the success of the program and its PR.

Why are we are not able to churn out the PVs and LSPs in quick order?We are talking about an aircraft that has gone supersonic (upto M1.8? or M1.6), has fired dumb missile, has dropped bombs with accuracy, is integrated with litening all weather targeting pod, has demonstrated ability to withstand extreme heat (Nagpur?) and cold (Leh), FCL for clean config were reportedly mature several years back, has achieve AOA of 22 degrees (?).....etc. It isn't as if the first prototype has just rolled off the assembly lines. For success an element of risk taking is essential. And the risks are considerably minimized now since the aircraft has matured and has a better flight safety record than the Mig-21s. Touch Wood!

Playing safe with CYA (cover your a$$ attitude) will not get the LCA anywhere. If we are serious then the 8 intitial LSPs should be in flight next year.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36416
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby SaiK » 16 Oct 2009 01:36

Vivek, its time to ban people who dont say anything about LCA now.. all lurkers be ware!. :twisted:

a_kumar
BRFite
Posts: 481
Joined: 18 Jun 2008 23:53
Location: what about it?

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby a_kumar » 16 Oct 2009 13:05


RKumar
BRFite
Posts: 1289
Joined: 26 Jul 2009 12:29
Location: Evolution is invention, explosion is destruction.

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby RKumar » 16 Oct 2009 14:27




Worth waiting for 6 weeks :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :lol: :lol: Well done HAL, ADE, DRDO, IAF!!!

rakall
BRFite
Posts: 798
Joined: 10 May 2005 10:26

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby rakall » 16 Oct 2009 14:43

RKumar wrote:



Worth waiting for 6 weeks :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :lol: :lol: Well done HAL, ADE, DRDO, IAF!!!



Good to see a topgun Su30MKI pilot flying the LCA.. :D :D
BTW - the photos are not from Jamnagar.. Looks like the photos were taken at HAL Airport, before the LCA's flew to Jamnagar..

After going thorugh the flight test updates, I had predicted this yesterday 8) 8) refer below my post Yesterday..


rakall wrote:Flight test update summary

Meanwhile in the last 5weeks LCA has notchedup 37 testflights ~ one per day.. Not bad at all..
But it is not so good because only 3 of the 5 airframes (assuming TD1 & TD2 grounded) are flying.. PV2 & LSP1 have not flown at all in the last 5weeks - hopefully something good is going on with them in the hangar.

In the last 5weeks -- PV1 undertook ONLY 4 sorties, PV3 -18 & LSP2 - 15.

Interestingly PV3 has been spending the last week or so in Jamnagar... I think some weapon drops are going on -- hopefully some LGB's are getting wasted..



Some notes from press release:

- 5 week deployment at jamnagar.. the first long deployment away from home.. so lot of maintainaince etc would have been looked at..

- The trials entailed flight envelope expansion in various stores configurations, as well as air-to-ground weapon delivery trials in different modes of weapon delivery.

- "The aircraft has successfully demonstrated its ability to tackle targets which are designated visually by the pilot. After this phase, the Tejas will be able to take on targets whose parameters in terms of location and altitude are fed to the on-board navigation and attack computer. The target does not even have to be visible to the pilot at the point of delivery."

RKumar
BRFite
Posts: 1289
Joined: 26 Jul 2009 12:29
Location: Evolution is invention, explosion is destruction.

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby RKumar » 16 Oct 2009 17:18

^^^^ Agreed rakall. What you hinted, I took it as a guess. This news is confirmed.

Now I take this as a confirmation ;), which is a very very good news.
rakall wrote:topgun Su30MKI pilot flying the LCA


Another question
rakall wrote:- The trials entailed flight envelope expansion in various stores configurations, as well as air-to-ground weapon delivery trials in different modes of weapon delivery.


What about air to air test, are those complete??? As per my understanding, first must to have role is A2A. What is the status?

Srivastav
BRFite
Posts: 142
Joined: 24 Jan 2009 17:23
Location: where the polar bears live

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby Srivastav » 16 Oct 2009 17:30

A fair number of Air to ground munition tests can still be done without a functioning radar. Whereas for the majority of A2A tests youll need a functioning radar.

RKumar
BRFite
Posts: 1289
Joined: 26 Jul 2009 12:29
Location: Evolution is invention, explosion is destruction.

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby RKumar » 16 Oct 2009 17:37

Srivastav wrote:Air to ground munition tests can still be done without a functioning radar. Whereas for the majority of A2A tests youll need a functioning radar.


This makes sense and explains, why IAF can't induct these planes at this moment beside IOC. Thank you.

Sorry another question...
rakall wrote:- "After this phase, the Tejas will be able to take on targets whose parameters in terms of location and altitude are fed to the on-board navigation and attack computer. The target does not even have to be visible to the pilot at the point of delivery."


Does it mean for next tests,
will use GPS/navigation system + some control system which calculates base on the target location, altitude of the target, altitude of the plane, speed of the plane, angle to the traget. And release the bum at exact position and time without pilot intervention. Sounds COOOL.

And after that A2A tests.

Srivastav
BRFite
Posts: 142
Joined: 24 Jan 2009 17:23
Location: where the polar bears live

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby Srivastav » 16 Oct 2009 18:12

"After this phase, the Tejas will be able to take on targets whose parameters in terms of location and altitude are fed to the on-board navigation and attack computer. The target does not even have to be visible to the pilot at the point of delivery."

What i understood from the above paragraph is that after the jamnagar tests are done tejas will be able to do the abve stated things.
On a different note i dont think ive yet seen a LCA pic with litening pod. Now that would be an awesome sight for a jingo's eyes.
Also cant wait for the gun tests.

RKumar
BRFite
Posts: 1289
Joined: 26 Jul 2009 12:29
Location: Evolution is invention, explosion is destruction.

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby RKumar » 16 Oct 2009 19:26

Srivastav wrote:
What i understood from the above paragraph is that after the jamnagar tests are done tejas will be able to do the abve stated things.
On a different note i dont think ive yet seen a LCA pic with litening pod. Now that would be an awesome sight for a jingo's eyes.
Also cant wait for the gun tests.



Nope, although wish it is true... but reality is this
According to a DRDO statement, "The aircraft has successfully demonstrated its ability to tackle targets which are designated visually by the pilot. After this phase, the Tejas will be able to take on targets whose parameters in terms of location and altitude are fed to the on-board navigation and attack computer. The target does not even have to be visible to the pilot at the point of delivery."

sanjaychoudhry
BRFite
Posts: 756
Joined: 13 Jul 2007 00:39
Location: La La Land

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby sanjaychoudhry » 16 Oct 2009 20:23

Tejas completes test flight in Saurashtra region

The Indian Light Combat Aircraft (LCA), ‘Tejas’ continued its quest for achieving Initial Operational Capability (IOC) by the end of 2010. To achieve this goal, a pair of Tejas single seat fighters supported by a multi-disciplinary trial team, operated from an Indian Air Force airbase in the South Western Air Command area of responsibility for five weeks.

The prototype of the Light Combat Aircraft `Tejas’ at an Air Force base under the Western Air Command.

This was the first time that the Tejas aircraft have operated away from home base of Bangalore for so long.

Two prototypes took part in the trials, the Prototype Vehicle-3 (PV3) and Limited Series Production-2 (LSP-2). The trials entailed flight envelope expansion in various configurations, as well as Air to Ground weapon delivery trials in different modes of weapon delivery.

The aircraft successfully demonstrated its ability to tackle targets which are designated visually by the pilot. After this phase, the Tejas will be able to take on targets whose parameters in terms of location and altitude are fed to the on-board navigation and attack computer. The target does not even have to be visible to the pilot at the point of delivery, according to the Defence Research Development Organisation (DRDO).

The flight trials were conducted by the flight test crew of the National Flight Test Centre (NFTC), who deployed test pilots, flight test engineers and instrumentation specialists for the task.

The support provided by the personnel of Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL)- the manufacturers of the aircraft, ensured that this indigenous fighter aircraft was able to take to the skies regularly, said DRDO.

The Tejas team included specialist groups from Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA), Aeronautical Development Establishment (ADE), National Aerospace Laboratories (NAL), Central for Military Air Worthiness and Certification (CEMILAC) and DG-AQA.

The Indian Air Force teams working at ADA and the Air Force base where the trials were conducted have contributed significantly for the success of the trial.

With this milestone achieved, the entire Tejas team is upbeat and the Tejas is one step closer to induction into the Indian Air Force, the DRDO said in a note.

http://news.in.msn.com/national/article ... 353&page=2

IAF Conducts Multi-Disciplinary Trial of LCA

Moving closer to achieving Initial Operational Capability configuration for the Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) by end of 2010, the Air Force conducted five-week multi-disciplinary trials of a pair of indigenous fighters at its Jamnagar air base.

"The trials entailed flight envelope expansion in various stores configurations, as well as air-to-ground weapon delivery trials in different modes of weapon delivery," a DRDO official said here today.

The LCA successfully demonstrated its ability to tackle targets designated visually by the pilot, officials added.

After this phase, officials said that the LCA will be enabled by its on-board navigation and attack computers to take on targets, which are not visible to the pilot.

The five-week trials were conducted by the flight test crew of the National Flight Test Centre (NFTC) including their test pilots, flight test engineers and instrumentation specialists.

"This was the first time that the Tejas aircraft have operated away from home base for so long," officials said.

LCA is expected to be inducted into the IAF in initial operational capability (IOC) by December 2010. Last year, Defence Minister A K Antony had said that the IAF will induct around seven squadrons of the aircraft in its fleet.

Developing the aircraft since 1982, the DRDO is expected to hand over the first squadron of the LCA in the IOC configuration to the IAF by 2010-end.

A total of seven LCA squadrons will be inducted in the IAF. The first two squadrons will be in the IOC configuration whereas the rest five will be the LCA Mark II, which will be an upgraded version of the aircraft.

The first two squadrons will be equipped with the GE-404 engines and the remaining five will have either the GE-414 or the Eurojet 200 engines. DRDO is also in talks with various aircraft manufacturers to help it in expanding the flight envelope of the aircraft.


http://news.outlookindia.com/item.aspx?667883


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 41 guests