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.
Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4228
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby Cain Marko » 05 Aug 2009 06:05

Dunno if this was posted earlier, but fwiw:

# Final Operational Clearance for LCA Tejas, set by Empowered Committee chaired by Air Chief as Dec 2012. Snecma to help in Kaveri engine 1 day ago


From Suman Sharma (of MiG-35 and chip on shoulder fame in BR), who also promises to expose the ATV and quite literally (photos no less).

CM

Added l8r: I get a feeling we are going to see some good stuff with the Tejas pretty soon (all LSPs together perhaps or fully functioning).

enqyoob
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2658
Joined: 06 Jul 2008 20:25

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby enqyoob » 05 Aug 2009 07:03

This is the best discussion I have been in, on desi dephenj. because no one here wants to see the LCA or Indian engine programs fail.

Enqyoob had it wrong. It was not that no one expected the LCA to fly (though many did), but absolutely no one expected GTRE to succeed.


I would like to believe that, but ..GTRE's "success" is still at a level that should have been reached in, say, 1992: "Can we build a very run-of-the-mill leaky turbojet, just to show that we can run a fan at a different RPM and match the turbine to the fan/compressor?"

No BLISK, no SingleCrystal, no shock-in-rotor transonic compressor (why else are the stage pressure ratios so small?)

Trouble is, this is 23 years since 1986. The argument that others took 20 years does not hold - because (a) that happened in the past, and now we have email and SMS, hey? No need to repeat ALL their mistakes.. (b) those people, in 20 years, reached the then-state-of-the-art.

GTRE in 23 years, has reached the state of the art of 40 years ago. Why does this cause jubilation as in the famous Aerospace Engineer's Poem:
The Optimist fell ten storeys
At each window bar
He called out to his friends
ALL RIGHT SO FAR!!!


And again, at the risk of having someone get mad enough to develop a mijjile and send it at me, GTRE is the organization charged by the Constitutional mandate to advance engine technology in India. Not ADA, not NAL, not the too-sheltered DMBA or whatever, not HAL. Its GTRE, the organization, not GTRE the individuals, certainly not the PRESENT occupants of GTRE.

But its GTRE. They didn't do what they were supposed to do. The Directors of GTRE, through the years, should have done their yelling, going all the way to public complaint, if the resources allotted to GTRE were grossly and ludicrously inadequate for the job that they were PUBLICLY taking on.

This is something I've never understood (among many many other things, as Prasadji correctly point out..)

The building looked nice, the garden was well-kept. The glass case with the Advanced Axial Compressor Engine looked awesome. The offices were large and very peaceful (few people inside). So why is this organization so dissed?

Maybe this should be the focus of examination. WHY has engine technology ALWAYS been given short shrift in the Indian defence establishment? Is there a more useful answer than
(a) Sanctions
(b) Baksheesh??

I had never heard that the single crystal technology was offered by the Russians AND INDIA DID NOT BUY IT!!!! That's the sort of decision that merits a CBI investigation, though stupidity is epidemic in Babudom when it comes to technical decisions. It sounds way too much like someone was making very sure that India would have to buy thousands of engines from phoren.

As for indigenous development, I hope they haven't given up, in fact it's never too late to start. There must be far better lab facilities today than there were in 1986 in Indian universities, or it must be possible to hook up with some other nation or company to get this - apparently HONDA has it. What's the delay then?

Also, vina, is there something in the laws of physics that SINGLE CRYSTAL is the only way to go? As I understand, the point is to have something that takes sharp cyclic stresses and shock loads, without cracking at very high centrifugal stress and temperature.

Can carbon-carbon composites achieve the same effect? Or some other exotic desi alloy used in making lotas, say? Hindalium Pressure Cooker?

Why is stage pressure ratio on the compressors so low? What inhibits going to transonic stages with ratio of 2 or 2.2?

John Snow
BRFite
Posts: 1941
Joined: 03 Feb 2006 00:44

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby John Snow » 05 Aug 2009 07:58

N guru, I asked the same question, why not CC blades or Ceramic blades?
Vina garu gave a reply basically talking about stresses and thermal gradient IIRC

negi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13105
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Ban se dar nahin lagta , chootiyon se lagta hai .

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby negi » 05 Aug 2009 08:21

This is the best discussion I have been in, on desi dephenj. because no one here wants to see the LCA or Indian engine programs fail.

I will speak for myself here; I don't do this kind of a thing for a living and hence wont pretend to understand or identify with the problem at hand . Having said that one point we tend to forget is that unlike GTRE both the IGMDP and even the ISRO programme had no 'backup' or 'alternatives' i.e. no one was/is gonna sell us a missile in the class of Agni series nor would someone be generous enough to gift us a DELTA-IV or a Proton rocket.

Perhaps the known fact that India could still do with imported engines is what changed the outlook of MOD and the GOI towards GT engine development this obviously might have reflected in the funding for the GTRE vis a vis say IGMDP or even ISRO programme ; and in absence of Govt interest and obviously no one to ask about 'accountability' it is but obvious folks at GTRE might have dropped their guard and not pursued their goals with as much zeal as some other programmes where we were pushed into a corner.

Launch of ATV is yet another event which re-enforces my opinion ; having said that since all I have done is 'speculation' I might be completely wrong . :oops:

That is why Jingo in me is hoping that GTRE get its act together and Kaveri takes to air in say next couple of years.

Raj Malhotra
BRFite
Posts: 997
Joined: 26 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby Raj Malhotra » 05 Aug 2009 08:26

Kaveri suffers from 3 problems:-


1. Babu does not understand the immense importance of Kaveri in military and Indian economy.

2. Babu does not give money for Labs

3. There is no charismatic genius to lead the programme

John Snow
BRFite
Posts: 1941
Joined: 03 Feb 2006 00:44

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby John Snow » 05 Aug 2009 08:46

With all due respect ISRO is (was) two decades behind schedule with what was promised in 1970s. Especially Geo Stationary lift capabilities. Just FYI

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54179
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby ramana » 05 Aug 2009 09:04

Yes its in the laws of metallurgy that single crystals develop the highest stress margins as there are no intergranular stress factors. So thats the holy grail of the gas turbine blade technology.

Most exotic high temp resistant metals develop oxides that deposit on the grain boundaries and are stress risers. In addition there is N2 pickup which embrittles the product.

Sridhar
BRFite
Posts: 838
Joined: 01 Jan 2001 12:31

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby Sridhar » 05 Aug 2009 09:53

Spingaru,

Point taken about ISRO, esp when it came to cryogenic engines. But at least they learnt from their mistakes. And you see determination to overcome setbacks and get the job done. There is an external peer review process for all projects in ISRO which is missing in DRDO. It does not eliminate all fiascos but reduces their chances significantly.

BTW ISRO's original timeline for the GSLV was 1995. It was 6 years late not two decades late. Quite a costly mistake but not that huge in the big scheme of things

putnanja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4441
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby putnanja » 05 Aug 2009 10:25

HAL had been license building both aircraft and helicopter engines for decades and they had the environment too. Why was the Kaveri handed off to GTRE? Wouldn't it have been better to have it executed by HAL which had people with hands-on engine experience ( even though it was limited)?

vina
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6046
Joined: 11 May 2005 06:56
Location: Doing Nijikaran, Udharikaran and Baazarikaran to Commies and Assorted Leftists

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby vina » 05 Aug 2009 10:36

I had never heard that the single crystal technology was offered by the Russians AND INDIA DID NOT BUY IT!!!! That's the sort of decision that merits a CBI investigation, though stupidity is epidemic in Babudom when it comes to technical decisions. It sounds way too much like someone was making very sure that India would have to buy thousands of engines from phoren.


What will such a CBI investigation find other than the fact that Babus are friggin pin head monkeys with inability to look beyond their noses.

This was discussed /posted at BR earlier and I was aghast when I heard it. I held my horses, because I gave the benefit of doubt because I inferred that DMRL has come up with the materials and we dont need the Russians.

See, Google is your freind. Read this Rant from Mr Mohanty , the former CMD of HAL on SU 30 and single crystal.

Now it is public knowledge that we are materials nood. If the above is true , we can't be material nood, can we ?

My guess is this is what happened. Single crystal was an OPTION in the deal, which HAL chose not to exercise. See the logic here.

Babu Pinhead -- Accountant Saar, What is this option for the single crystal thing and why do the Russians want $1b (my guess) for it ?

Accountant -- Dunno what it is saar!. The Russians anyway are willing to supply it at good rates. If I do my math right and not pay the Russians the $1b and buy it from them for $50k per engine (say), we will save $XXXXXb over the life cycle of the program and the cost will come down by $xM per plane and our profits will be $YYB over the life of the program higher saar!.

Babu Pinhead -- Sabaash!. Let us not exercise the option. HAL will come smelling of roses, I will get triple promotion, we will become a super duper RUR /DUR/BUR ratna . You Accountant Saar, I will make sure you get good remarks in your "Confidential Service file" and recommend you for an out of turn promotion.

If there as Strategist /Strategic Planner around, he would have he would have burst out and said, you friggin Pinheads, are you crazy ?. Cant you see the larger picture. Ok, someone has to bear the cost. Since you pin heads aren't willing to think strategically and take a hit in your bottomline and margins to get your hands on something worth it's weight in gold, in the larger interest, I will give you s*ithead the $1b, go exercise the option.

Problem is where are the Strategic Planners/Strategists/ Big Picture thinkers in the system ? The dont exist. If the do, show me that person here and I promise it is a MoD IAS babu, . Now IAS babu is genetically a PinHead who pushed files all his life right so effectively there is none.

And that is the problem. I always maintained that fundamentally the problem with India R&D is structural. We need to fix it and get DRDO back into laser sharp focus on really top 10 identified strategic technologies which we ABSOLUTELY must have and put all efforts behind it.

Efforts like building missiles, tanks etc are now best left to the private sector or even the DPSUs(who are guaranteed to fail btw , but you should give them a chance I think) and move out of that. The weapons systems building was the bloat that followed the "commanding heights/socialist pattern /govt owned" rubbish. Let us clear those fundamental cobwebs and get focus back then things will start working. If we keep reinforcing the failures and do some cosmetic wishy washy feel good stuff without fundamental changes and paper over the faults, this is the way things are going to continue to be. Let us face it. This is the absolute best the current system as it is structurally can produce. Unless you change it, you will get no better.

Sorry about the rant (taking the YumbeeYea hat off, I do this thing of funding strategic initiatives for a living and picking and choosing bets. that is part of my day job. When I see what is going on with the Babu pin heads, it makes me fly off the handle)

John Snow
BRFite
Posts: 1941
Joined: 03 Feb 2006 00:44

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby John Snow » 05 Aug 2009 10:57

I agree with 400% with vina garu's observation.
I have walked in the shop floors of HAL (hyd & Koraput) BHEL (Hyd) Midhani, DMRL, ECIL, NFC, OFP Medak, CRS( Renigunta), Wheel & Axel Plant (yelhanka) OFP Ambajari, Ferro Alloys, Heavywater (manuguru) outskirts of ISRO ( for Forlifts only, ie Vehicle maint dept) DGNP Vizag ( by the way the submarine building project commenced in 1969 when my father was working there, I was in middle school), BDL to name a few.

The babu thinking is exactly what Vina says.
About ISRO Sridhar garu If there is way to access August 1970 issue of Science Today ( of TOI publication) the whole issue was dedicated to India and Space with articles by HP mama, Vikram Sarabhai, Vasant Gowarikar the stalwarts of Space research in India. In that the goals of ISRO were stated as Launch Vehicle for Geo Stat by the end &0s or early 1980s.

When I left the country, my folks sold all my copies of ST from 1967 to 1987 to radhiwala , including my Slide rule german make Aristo electro, mini drafter drawing board etc etc :((

Raj Malhotra
BRFite
Posts: 997
Joined: 26 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby Raj Malhotra » 05 Aug 2009 13:13

ISRO has a PSLV which is being used extensively, which engine of GTRE is under production?

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby Singha » 05 Aug 2009 15:51

Mohanty sir seems to say we acquired the tech. so if we are not
making it in koraput, it maybe we have the full TOT but did not buy
the machinery and infra needed to actually manufacture it.

"As HAL will do 80 per cent of the manufacturing, it will acquire new technologies like the directionally solidified blades, which will give us the technology for the future engines. Similarly, from the Sukhoi (Su-30 fighter deal) we acquired the single crystal blade technology, which will be the basis for all future turbine blades. This way, we get to master these technologies and meet our own requirements and exports, which is the thrust at HAL," Mr Mohanty said.


All is not lost. either buy the gear and setup local manufacture
of AL31 blades using the stored TOT , or
if we did not buy it then no reason why it should be closed now,
we can buy it again after paying the price (300% escalation probably)

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

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby Kailash » 05 Aug 2009 16:58

narayanan wrote:Also, vina, is there something in the laws of physics that SINGLE CRYSTAL is the only way to go? As I understand, the point is to have something that takes sharp cyclic stresses and shock loads, without cracking at very high centrifugal stress and temperature.

Can carbon-carbon composites achieve the same effect?


GE/Snecma has used composites to build entire engines, although not productionized yet. Part of the article

The fan blades are made of a composite material – resin molded over a woven-fiber base – with a titanium leading edge. Combined with a composite fan case, they will reduce the weight of each engine by 500 pounds. Officials at Cincinnati-based CFM said a complete development engine is scheduled to be built by 2012. It could be Federal Aviation Administration certified by 2016 if they know what plane it’s going on, they said this week.


Btw, IAF was a proven engine. When we mix "tried and tested" with "composites", it is still a few years away.

Raj Malhotra
BRFite
Posts: 997
Joined: 26 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby Raj Malhotra » 05 Aug 2009 17:42

ISRO got very minimal support foreign support for its rocket programme and compare this with massive no of foreign engines assembled in India and huge amount of foreign hand holding done for GTRE which led to ZERO result.

Mihaylo
BRFite
Posts: 762
Joined: 09 Nov 2007 21:10

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby Mihaylo » 05 Aug 2009 17:42

Sanku wrote:In early 90s at GTRE it was well know (first hand info) that the main and pretty much the only problem was metallurgy.


It is a shame that modern India has been reduced to this when ancient India were the pioneers in metallurgy
--Copper swords in 2300 BC
--Iron workings as early as 1800 BC
--Wootz Steel 300 BC
--Seemless Celestial globe in the 16th century
--World's first iron pillar during Chandragupta's reign
--First iron cased and metal cylinder rockets were developed by Tipu Sultan

..And am sure there are more examples like the ones above.

:(

-M

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby shiv » 05 Aug 2009 17:52

Rockets are inherently easier to make because they are "fire and forget"

Having said that early aero engines in the pioneering nations wer unreliable and many planes crashed. We don't want to do that - and are stuck in a loop.

WRONG THREAD!

geeth
BRFite
Posts: 1195
Joined: 22 Aug 1999 11:31
Location: India

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby geeth » 05 Aug 2009 17:57

>>>ISRO got very minimal support foreign support for its rocket programme and compare this with massive no of foreign engines assembled in India and

The 'Vikas' Rocket Motor is actually a French Liquid Engine. All these years, ISRO had used it in different configurations, and now only they have gone into serious research for a new Liquid Engine.

>>>huge amount of foreign hand holding done for GTRE which led to ZERO result.

any examples of this 'huge amount of foreign hand holding' ?

YES, GTRE people are a bunch of clowns...but we deserve it!

Raj Malhotra
BRFite
Posts: 997
Joined: 26 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby Raj Malhotra » 05 Aug 2009 19:10

A few ISRO scientists were given an opportunity to work on French liquid engine programme and they were able to reverse engineer it and they did the same for Cryo engine.

What has GTRE developed which is working? GTRE had hand holding by US labs in eighties and then Snecma. May i know how many liquid fueled and cryo engines were being made in India (unlike HAL assembling engines in India) prior to ISRO manufacturing them?

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54179
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby ramana » 05 Aug 2009 20:07

That Mohanty interview was from 2003 about the TOT from BAE for the Hawk. Has that TOT happened at all?

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16518
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby NRao » 05 Aug 2009 20:13

Raj Malhotra wrote:ISRO got very minimal support foreign support for its rocket programme and compare this with massive no of foreign engines assembled in India and huge amount of foreign hand holding done for GTRE which led to ZERO result.


So ...................

Funding is not THAT much of an issue?
Solving technical problems has a higher place than talking and playing tennis?
Management is solid and enthu to solve problems?
Techies equally serious to resolve issues?

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16518
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby NRao » 05 Aug 2009 20:17

Instead of poking into the past, is it possible to list all core techs (that an engines NEEDS) that are totally Indian? Open source ONLY.

And, by extension, what core techs does India need to build (get, steal, beg, borrow, whatever)?

Possible?

Raj Malhotra
BRFite
Posts: 997
Joined: 26 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby Raj Malhotra » 05 Aug 2009 20:24

The biggest problem is that indian Babu does not understand the tremendous importance of turbine engine tech in the economy of a nation.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16518
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby NRao » 05 Aug 2009 20:45

I feel that they ALL understand it very, very well. They just do not care or have a reason to care. Thus the value of Kargils.

Indian decision makers seem to need an outside force to move them and even then there is no real urgency in matters, until the next outside force to force a move - again.

Raja Bose
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19478
Joined: 18 Oct 2005 01:38

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby Raja Bose » 05 Aug 2009 21:12

vina wrote:Problem is where are the Strategic Planners/Strategists/ Big Picture thinkers in the system ? The dont exist. If the do, show me that person here and I promise it is a MoD IAS babu, . Now IAS babu is genetically a PinHead who pushed files all his life right so effectively there is none.


Don't forget the influence from those who are officially outside the Govt. but have a greater say than any MoD babu. In this case, unsubstantiated rumours (I dont have panwallahs :(( ) are that the same arms dealer (and ex-neighbour of mine) who played havoc with the SU-30 deal for years was also involved in causing this fiasco (he is one of the fellows you will have seen on the Tehelka sting videos - he was eating moolis with a fork :mrgreen: ) So its not all pin-headedness but rather pin-headedness of some exploited to the fullest by others.

John Snow
BRFite
Posts: 1941
Joined: 03 Feb 2006 00:44

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby John Snow » 05 Aug 2009 21:34

In any armament purchases there are lot of players with vested interest. Name a single deal in any country including Khan land where bribes were not involved, lobbying is not involved and favors not bestowed or exchanged ( from Black water to upgraded versions of KC130 tankers recently).

But in case of India and most developing world, the intent is to sabotage. It is easy in India because the most of the manufacturing in Public Sector (GOI, labs, undertakings, OFP, PSU etc) are headed by political appointees and the usual lethargy results in zero performance or innovations.

There is no need for UAV to be made with Israeli collobaration
There is no need to import small arms and ammunition
There is no need to import Artillery guns
There is no need to import body bags ( During Kargil)
There is no need to buy T-90s (if our chaps in Avadi did their home work)
There is no need to buy engines and suspension systems for Arjun (if our chaps had done some R&D)
There is no need to buy entire submarines (only some furnishings like ethan allen classs)

yes armed forces can not wait for eternity to get something that works into their hands.

POC and Crucible demos dont make a real thing which our labs are good at, but in production they dont scale up.

I really dont understand why it took so long for a nano to emerge....

Tanaji
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3277
Joined: 21 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby Tanaji » 05 Aug 2009 21:38

Where did all the posts go? I see only 1 page for this thread?

John Snow
BRFite
Posts: 1941
Joined: 03 Feb 2006 00:44

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby John Snow » 05 Aug 2009 22:06

Took to flight may be?

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11204
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby Gagan » 05 Aug 2009 22:10

Why blame GTRE alone. Was GTRE given a mission to develop an engine all these years other than for the LCA or the Marut? What aircraft would they have developed engines for? License produced aircraft don't have it in their contracts to deviate form the laid design.

But GTRE should have taken the initiative to keep abreast of technology all these years, the babus should have given GTRE the money and should have kept it on its toes to keep developing. Every new aircraft that HAL licence produces, should have had its engines researched into by GTRE and a superior engine based on that engine developed in house. This initiative should have come from the babus and GTRE.

However India also had to deal with technology denial, because the injuns didn't have money, and the goras didn't feel it prudent to give the injuns the latest. Case in point, although single crystal blade tech (which BRF seems to be endlessly debating as the holy grail for so many years - See although I not even an engineer, even I know that there is a 'single crystal blade' thing that every one wants, and india doesn't have it), has been around for like 3 decades, the first time that India got a fighter with this was the MKI.

What about other cutting edge techs. Engine coatings, jet pumps, spray nozzles, engine sealings etc? I hope GTRE is not one generation behind in all these areas.

Sridhar
BRFite
Posts: 838
Joined: 01 Jan 2001 12:31

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby Sridhar » 05 Aug 2009 22:11

Spingaru,

The Science Today article is one thing. However, when the satellite launch vehicles project was formally defined, the estimated time for the first GSLV launch was set at 1995. The actual launch was in 2001. Not too bad given the set of events surrounding the Russian cryogenic deal.

This is getting OT but my main point is that the lack of good management practices has led to this failure. DRDL was in a similar moribund state until Kalam took the ISRO practices and culture with him. ISRO is not without it's failures, but within GOI it currently sets the gold standard in terms of how to manag large and complex R&D projects. Hence my repeated references to it.
Last edited by Sridhar on 05 Aug 2009 22:17, edited 1 time in total.

John Snow
BRFite
Posts: 1941
Joined: 03 Feb 2006 00:44

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby John Snow » 05 Aug 2009 22:14

Sridhar garu
In deference to your knowledge, I stand corrected.
I am admonished, with all humility I take back what I said.
I mean it and there are no qualms about it.
Regards

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11204
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby Gagan » 05 Aug 2009 22:15

John Snow wrote:There is no need for UAV to be made with Israeli collobaration
There is no need to import small arms and ammunition
There is no need to import Artillery guns
There is no need to buy T-90s
There is no need to buy engines and suspension systems for Arjun (if our chaps had done some R&D)
There is no need to buy entire submarines (only some furnishings like ethan allen classs)

Yes there is a need to import. But not in numbers like 1500 T-90s, OK buy 300 T-90s and send like 5 of them to Avadi, to squeeze out what little needs to be squeezed out, and put it into arjun. Same goes for everything else. Co develop, or install imported parts which are not available in house, and reverse engineer the tech.

RKumar
BRFite
Posts: 1176
Joined: 26 Jul 2009 12:29
Location: Evolution is invention, explosion is destruction.

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby RKumar » 06 Aug 2009 01:36

We are not doing that bad with LCA and Kaveri but we can do better ... who are still not convenience ... some facts ... lets compare….

Eurofighter Typhoon development history
The UK had identified a requirement for a new fighter as early as 1971 …. As a result the Panavia partners (BAe, MBB and Aeritalia) launched the Agile Combat Aircraft (ACA) programme in April 1982 ……. In 1983 the UK, France, Germany, Italy and Spain launched the Future European Fighter Aircraft (FEFA) programme…. The EAP first flew on 6 August 1986 ….The aircraft was known as Eurofighter EFA from the late 1980s until it was renamed EF 2000 in 1992….. And entered service in 2003 (Tranche 1 basic version)
21 years even after they have previous knowledge, no Technology transfer issues

F/A-18 Hornet
Northrop YF-17, main design elements date to early 1965, from the internal Northrop project N-300. The N-300 was itself derived from the F-5E an existing plane … The first prototype (tail number 72-1569) was rolled out at Hawthorne on 4 April 1974 and was cancelled on 9 June, 1974. Reborn under F/A-18 Hornet on with first flight 18 November 1978……. Please note there were many redesigns and the first production F/A-18A flew on 12 April 1980 ….. entered operational service on 7 January 1983.
15 years of development when they have already engines and design improved from working plane F-5E

Dassault Rafale
In the mid-1970s, both the French Air Force (Armée de l'Air) and Navy (Aéronavale) had a requirement (the Navy's being rather more pressing) to find a new generation of fighter (principally to replace AdlA SEPECAT Jaguars and Aéronavale F-8 Crusaders), In 1983, France awarded Dassault a contract for two Avion de Combat eXpérimental (ACX) demonstrators……first flight on 4 July 1986 and Introduced on 4 December 2000
17 years of development when they have already engines and design improved from working plane Jaguar.

HAL Tejas
The LCA programme was launched in 1983…. ADA established in 1984 …. Project definition (PD) commenced in October 1987 and was completed in September 1988 … Phase 1 started (in 1990, but full-scale funding was not authorized until April 1993) would focus on “proof of concept”.. only after successful testing of the TD aircraft would the Indian government give its full support to the LCA design. …. TD-1 First flight 4 January 2001 and induction in 2012
Should I start from 1983 or 1993 without labs, funds???? That I leave to individual interpretation… I will project both
1) 29 yrs*
2) 19 yrs*
* with problems… u name it and we have

kaangeya
BRFite
Posts: 139
Joined: 03 Mar 2008 02:34

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby kaangeya » 06 Aug 2009 01:48

I am puzzled that the CAG that throws around accusations wildly making dubious cost-benefit calculations, has never once reported on GTRE. The CAG deludedly believes that make or buy or buy or buy is a choice wrt whole aircraft carriers - because they are stacked on shelves waiting for a buyer - but has no idea about GTRE.

Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2579
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby Katare » 06 Aug 2009 08:13

Raj Malhotra wrote:Kaveri suffers from 3 problems:-


1. Babu does not understand the immense importance of Kaveri in military and Indian economy.

2. Babu does not give money for Labs

3. There is no charismatic genius to lead the programme


Raj,

That's unfair and is not supported by facts....

Babu's do understand it's importance and they did approve it knowing very well how ill equipped DRDO/India was for this project.

GTRE has never run out of funds, infact funds have never been an issue for any of the DRDO programs. What DRDO asks it gets once its projects are sanctioned. Infacts babus have funded upto 10-15 x cost escalation with decades long delays without question

krishnan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7342
Joined: 07 Oct 2005 12:58
Location: 13° 04' N , 80° 17' E

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby krishnan » 06 Aug 2009 10:52

As per a member of LCA orkut group, LSP-4 is going through ground/initial testing and has almost completed the same.

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

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby rakall » 06 Aug 2009 11:06

krishnan wrote:As per a member of LCA orkut group, LSP-4 is going through ground/initial testing and has almost completed the same.


What about LSP-3?
any posts on orkut why there were very few flight tests last month?

krishnan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7342
Joined: 07 Oct 2005 12:58
Location: 13° 04' N , 80° 17' E

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby krishnan » 06 Aug 2009 11:14

Nothing related to that. Seems like lot of work going on. Lets keep our fingers crossed and hope for the best

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4228
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby Cain Marko » 06 Aug 2009 11:19

krishnan wrote:Nothing related to that. Seems like lot of work going on. Lets keep our fingers crossed and hope for the best


Whoa! Didn't expect my "feelings" to be corroborated that quick :twisted: Yup, the IAF knows that the MRCA saga could take forever, the LCA is probly their best bet cause they have the most control over it. JMT

CM.

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

Re: LCA news and discussion

Postby sanjaychoudhry » 06 Aug 2009 23:39

Lifafa article by a mercenary reporter of a shady paper (qualifications in Indian journalism don't get any better than that). Notice the negative tone in the entire article about Indian R&D efforts. You can almost hear the writer whisper in every para: "Buy more, buy more from the Goras. Don't try to develop anything yourself. Why so much pain? Just keep signing cheques to Boeing and Lockheed, and take life easy."

Tejas LCA needs foreign implants

India’s quest to develop its own multi-role supersonic fighter, the Tejas Light Combat Aircraft (LCA), continues to falter even after 25 years.

This comes after the indigenous Kaveri engine failed to pass muster even after two decades of development at a cost of Rs 2,839 crore,

Sounding the death knell for Kaveri, IAF has shot down the offer of Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) to co-develop and co-produce the "90kN thrust class of upgraded Kaveri engine"

IAF, incidentally, has ordered only 20 Tejas till now, apprehensive as it is of its capabilities.

Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd, Aeronautical Development Agency and DRDO have, of course, faced a lot of flak for the huge delays.

Initiated as far back as 1983 at a cost of Rs 560 crore to replace aging MiG-21 s, the LCA project costs have now jumped to Rs 5,489 crore.


http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/qui ... 858895.cms


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 22 guests